Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
It's best to acknowledge the facts as they are presented and then go from there instead of trying to shoehorn your own narrative into the situation with ungrounded hypotheticals.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
737Max: Boy sitting in row 26 had his t-shirt sucked off him while his mother was holding on to him - Alaska Airlines flight B39M
- Thread starter sono
- Start date
It's best to acknowledge the facts as they are presented and then go from there instead of trying to shoehorn your own narrative into the situation with ungrounded hypotheticals.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
I wonder if the issue due to bad maintenance by the airline.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
The plane was practically brand new, and this is just a plug where another optional emergency exit can be optioned...not sure how much maintenance a stationary part bolted to the plane needs in the first months of service.
Not defending Boeing but calling the Max planes death traps is completely ignorant and stupid. The original fiasco with the Max planes was due to the pilots themselves trying to fight and overcorrect the system (which while originally flawed, was not the actual cause of the accidents), it was largely pilot error. This situation is like what, one out of millions and millions of Max flights going on since their introduction?
This is a fucked up situation but let's not say straight up stupid shit.
diffusionx
Gold Member
That's actually categorically false, as even Boeing says their shitty, made on the cheap, single sensor, MCAS played a major role in the accidents, do you work as a Boeing lobbyist or something?
Boeing's focus on financial engineering over, you know, actual engineering is well known and it's been the case for decades. I would say it's only a matter of time before their shittiness causes planes to fall out of the sky, but, well, we're past that point.
M1chl
Currently Gif and Meme Champion
I mean, it has probably more accidents per flighthour than most other types, so...no mention the quality control, recalls and so on.
The Cockatrice
Gold Member
Diversity is more important than your safety. Click, theres a whole insane thread about it.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
Product safety is literally priority one on the list lmfao. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not some proponent of DEI fanaticism, but it hasn’t supplanted product safety
Again not defending Boeing but I already said that the sensor played a role but it was also a component of the two pilots not understanding the system correctly. This isn't even coming from me, this is something coming from close friends who actually work in the industry. But seeming as how you are being hysterical and just pulling shill-cards out I'm not expecting a rational conversation. So continue believing what you want to believe.
List of accidents and incidents involving the Boeing 737 - Wikipedia
... There's four incidents across multiple different models. That's it. The original 737 was arguably more temperamental than the new one. Two of which had no fatalities.
Previous models had more problems on a yearly basis with things like metal fatigue when they were allegedly "less cheaply made".
Last edited:
HoodWinked
Member
was seriously considering buying Spirit cause had a feeling it was more of Boeing's fault. Now looks like they're admitting it was theirs.
‘Every detail matters’: Boeing CEO admits mistake as investigators probe midair panel blowout
The Federal Aviation Administration grounded the 737 Max 9s less than a day after the incident on Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 so the jets could be inspected.
www.cnbc.com
The Cockatrice
Gold Member
You havent read the whole twitter thread have you?
Chittagong
Gold Member
You really need to watch at least one YouTube documentary or read one article in addition to speaking with your friends. The feature was undisclosed to the airlines and the pilots to avoid a training cost of 1MUSD per livery. So they had no idea why the plane would be nosediving and how to resolve it. There was an obscure mention in the iPad manual about it but once your nose is pointing down there is rarely time to start swiping your iPad to figure out how to resolve something you were not told could happen. It was fucked up greed.
Boeing 737 MAX groundings - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Unknown Soldier
Member
In most other industries you can think of, what Boeing got away with would have been prosecuted with criminal charges. But because Boeing is Too Big to Fail™ and they are so critical to the US Government as a defense contractor, they basically got away with a slap on the wrist.You really need to watch at least one YouTube documentary or read one article in addition to speaking with your friends. The feature was undisclosed to the airlines and the pilots to avoid a training cost of 1MUSD per livery. So they had no idea why the plane would be nosediving and how to resolve it. There was an obscure mention in the iPad manual about it but once your nose is pointing down there is rarely time to start swiping your iPad to figure out how to resolve something you were not told could happen. It was fucked up greed.
Boeing 737 MAX groundings - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Also, this documentary should be required viewing before anyone pretends they know what they are talking about
Downfall: The Case Against Boeing - Wikipedia
crazepharmacist
Member
Sure, it may not be relevant to the discussion at hand but let’s not pretend, no one wants a diversity hire as a pilot.
Last edited:
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
I don't care if pilots are diversity hires, as long as they are competent and qualified for the job. If you are referencing a case where underqualified pilots are hired at the expense of qualifications in order to fulfill diversity quotas, I don't see how that is relevant to this case seeing as it looks like Boeing's problem is not due to diversity hires, but due to maximizing profit by skimping on safety standards and best practices. If you have reports of Boeing utilizing underqualified diversity hires, then that's a relevant point, but absent that, it's "ungrounded hypotheticals" and pushing your own preconceived notions.
Last edited:
Embearded
Member
You and your friend are repeating the Boeing propaganda.
The pilots of Lion 610 were never informed about MCAS. Basically with the exception of Boeing test pilots, no other pilot in the world knew that a SW would take control of the horizontal stabilizer.
An internal official Boeing report said that the pilots who were facing MCAS malfunction had 10 seconds to react before it became fatal.
How do you expect 2 pilots who are getting multiple malfunctions at the same time, react correct to a situation when they don't even know the existence of the system it is triggering it?
After Lion crash Boeing issues guidelines to the pilots for such a case and they hear for the first time about MCAS.
Ethiopian 302 happens and the pilots response is correct, we know it from the black box.
They cut off the power to the trim so now MCAS cannot control the horizontal stabilizer because it doesn't get any electricity.
The pilots have to manually move the stabilizer at a correct position but plane speed is too high and it's like trying to move tons of cement with 1 hand.
It was Boeing from the beginning, they are the only ones to blame. Having a friend in the industry doesn't say shit, sorry.
We have the documents, their internal documents, that prove their intention to hide critical information to pilots.
crazepharmacist
Member
They’re going to hire someone who scored worse an academic tests, fewer flight hours, and whatever other metrics they use to rate pilots because of the color of their skin. That’s what a diversity hire is. Yes, they will meet the basic minimum requirement to fly a commercial airline but they won’t be the best person for the job. That’s scary and I don’t want to fly on an airline that doesn’t consider safety to be paramount.
Last edited:
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Then we're working on different definitions. A qualified candidate is a qualified candidate. Do you have evidence or reasonable cause to suspect that qualifications were lowered in this case? If not it's just baseless speculation. Try to focus on the actual documented problems, not imagined ones that trigger your suspicions.
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
Chittagong
Gold Member
Insane Metal
Member
Thanks for posting this. Watched it yesterday and it's really good.
Chittagong
Gold Member
Unknown Soldier
Member
LOL it lasted all of a day
There are lot of web sites which track aviation data tho, just put your airline and flight number into Google and it pops right out what plane flies on that route
Last edited:
Heimdall_Xtreme
Hermen Hulst Fanclub's #1 Member
An Alaska Airlines Boeing 737-9 MAX, registration N704AL performing flight AS-1282 from Portland,OR to Ontario,CA (USA) with 171 passengers and 6 crew, was climbing out of Portland's runway 28L when one of the cabin windows/emergency exits and its holding panel as well as parts of one un-occupied seat (seat row 26) separated from the aircraft, the passenger oxygen masks were released. The crew donned their oxygen masks, stopped the climb at about 16,000 feet, declared emergency reporting depressurization of the aircraft in a very noisy transmission, initiated an emergency descent to 10,000 feet and returned to Portland for a safe landing on runway 28L about 20 minutes after departure. No injuries are being reported. An emergency exit and whole panel at the left hand side of the aircraft was missing.
The NTSB have opened an investigation into the occurrence.
Passengers reported a boy sitting in row 26 had his t-shirt sucked off him while his mother was holding on to him to prevent him being sucked out, too. Several phones were sucked out as well.
Further information:
The FAA have already issued an emergency AD:
I wouldn't even get on that airline for free.
jufonuk
not tag worthy
Cockpit window crack forces ANA Boeing flight in Japan to turn back
The domestic flight in Japan landed safely after the crack appeared, the airline says.
www.bbc.com
"These things do happen, it's impossible to quantify how frequently".Cockpit window crack forces ANA Boeing flight in Japan to turn back
The domestic flight in Japan landed safely after the crack appeared, the airline says.
…? Doesn’t seem very impossible at all to calculate the failure rate of a part if failures are reported.
TheHighFlyingBirds
Member
Just checked our flights for summer hols to Ibiza, boeing 737 max 8. Think I'll not mention this to the wifey, as she already hates flying.
M1chl
Currently Gif and Meme Champion
My favorite moment of the show is that forgotten ladder inside Vertical Stabilizer in 787 on its first flight, truly unbeatable. If that shit would fell, or got stuck in that vertical flap, it would be truly interesting first flight.In most other industries you can think of, what Boeing got away with would have been prosecuted with criminal charges. But because Boeing is Too Big to Fail™ and they are so critical to the US Government as a defense contractor, they basically got away with a slap on the wrist.
Also, this documentary should be required viewing before anyone pretends they know what they are talking about
Downfall: The Case Against Boeing - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Last edited:
jufonuk
not tag worthy
Ryanair? More chance of them demanding my you pay to sit together and then interrupting you in the cabin to sell random tat
MikeM
Gold Member
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
I think that could be interpreted as far as anomalous events are concerned…you can certainly test for a failure rate given a number of use cycles within normal expected parameters, but when an entire flock of Canadian geese are ingested into the engines or smack into the windshield…kinda hard to say what’s gonna happen.
Slayer-33
Liverpool-2
Unknown Soldier
Member
Boeing’s Legacy Vanished Into Thin Air. Saving It Will Take Years
After a Boeing 737 Max 9 narrowly escaped catastrophe, the US company must regain trust that it can still build reliable aircraft.
www.bloomberg.com
Great article on Bloomberg, you'll need to
the 
TheHighFlyingBirds
Member
Think its safer flying on the plane than cancelling the holiday, wifey would chop my balls off, as we've not been away for a few years.I'd cancel that
TUI. Will never fly with ryanair.
jufonuk
not tag worthy
They are a good company TUI. Never flown them. For me ryan offer the cheapest option so I fly them. Headphones in just chill in the plane lol.
crazepharmacist
Member
I don’t fly often. When you buy tickets, does it tell you what model plane you will be flying on?
Would like to know so I can actively avoid the max planes
Would like to know so I can actively avoid the max planes
Happosai
Hold onto your panties
This one may help those with the history going back to the Max 8.Boeing’s Legacy Vanished Into Thin Air. Saving It Will Take Years
After a Boeing 737 Max 9 narrowly escaped catastrophe, the US company must regain trust that it can still build reliable aircraft.
Great article on Bloomberg, you'll need to
‘This Has Been Going on for Years.’ Inside Boeing’s Manufacturing Mess.
Outsourcing worried engineers and sparked battles over quality before a door plug blew out on an Alaska Airlines plane midflight.
www.wsj.com
Haven't read this in awhile but when they grounded the first time (after the two fatal incidents due to MCAS); they publicized all of the engineering mistakes for a commercial aircraft in the Boeing Max 8/9. They examined everything from rear stabilizer bolts to the awful mounting order of the engines to the wings. The best possible future would be to recall all of these jets, scrap them and build a fleet of reliable commuter jets. They'd need a fresh start meaning...fire those engineers and rearrange C-suite to prevent orders like this from ever happening again. Have the new engineers spend 6-months studying up and down the work behind the 787 Dreamliner. Start there. All that scrapped supply from the Max? More than enough for the prototype but literally starting from scratch.
Daneel Elijah
Member
You can look at the company to see what planes they have. And the name of the flight will allow you to see what plane will be used in sites like flightaware.
Happosai
Hold onto your panties
I've noticed they tend to stick with regional flight paths. E.g. -- LAX to DFW. Just my speculation but with such short commuting...you'd think they were concerned to push the Max to go the distance. Like I said in my above post...grounding simply isn't enough. Full recall of every Max, scrap them, get rid of every Boeing Max engineer / re-hire Dreamliner engineers and use what they can to build a prototype with the 787 in mind. It'd be a huge price to pay but there are investors, a board and reputation on the line right now. Then again, none of this will likely happen as most big businesses like this hate admitting when they screw up on a colossal scale.
Daneel Elijah
Member
I don't want to make a new thread so I will just post this here. IF anybody want to do it please do.
www.washingtontimes.com
It seems that the plane landed safely.
WATCH: Cargo plane makes emergency landing in Miami, flames seen coming from Boeing 747
A witness saw sparks shooting from a cargo plane as it made an emergency landing at Miami International Airport shortly after takeoff.
www.washingtontimes.com
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
There seem to be two concurrent issues, one is the 737 Max plane is a piece of shit and the other is that maintenance is slipping. The 2nd problem is more likely a result of the actual airlines skimping on maintenance (possibly in violation of the law) andd the FAA not being able to properly regulate this for whatever reason, or worse looking the other way like some third world country (actually the third world countries might be doing a better job at this point). And I think the 2nd problem is actually far worse because it could affect literally every single plane in every single fleet.
Last edited:
Cyberpunkd
Gold Member
Yes, it does. However I don’t think anything forces a company to change the plane if they want to.
Also, Airbus FTW lel
Cyberpunkd
Gold Member
Not really, since you can have a plane designed so well that even if shit hits the fan it should still save the passengers.
Ikutachi
Member
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
I always think it's funny when people see regulators as just dead weight, an economic drag, or red tape when they...literally keep people alive. And my entire career is basically arguing with regulators, but I know they serve a purpose even if they can be a bit aggravating to deal with.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
It reminds me of that time Dave Rubin was on Joe Rogan's show and was arguing that less building regulation would be best and the market would balance itself out, and Joe was just like, are you serious right now?
The thing with regulations is that they need to be clear, direct, easy to interpret and implement, and not require stifling levels of documentation, auditing, and oversight such that the barrier to entry is overwhelming and the cost to do business crushes competition. When 3 inspectors can look over the same project and arrive at 5 different conclusions as to deficits and failure to meet standards, it's frustrating for all of us.
I work in an immensely regulated field so am well aware of the benefits and downsides to all of this, its hard to really balance it.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked