this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
278 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

59534 readers
3195 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
278
Boeing 737 Max planes are grounded after a hole blew in one mid-flight (www.theverge.com)
submitted 10 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
36 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Boeing 737 Max planes are grounded after a hole blew in one mid-flight::The FAA ordered that 171 Boeing 737 Max 9 planes be inspected before they can return to service following the explosive decompression of an Alaska Airlines flight.

all 37 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Deebster@programming.dev 106 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Their fixes don't seem to have altered the fundamental problems with the Boeing 737 Max:

  • the new engines are too big for the frame, so they've had to move them up and forward, which makes the plane pitch up at high thrust (which is what the now infamous MCAS attempted to mask with software)
  • Boeing self-certified it as safe, claiming that it was a small, incremental change and so didn't need testing or additional pilot training
  • Boeing rushed out an unsafe design because they were scared of losing money to Airbus's A320neo

I have to fly several times a year and try to choose Airbus over Boeing whenever possible, and I flat out refuse to fly on the 737 Max. This news certainly doesn't make me feel like I was overreacting.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 72 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Boeing killed ~~over 600~~ 346 people after continuously lying to regulators and airlines around the world for like 2+ years. Most of the senior leadership and upper management — everyone who knew about the fraud and deception — should be serving life sentences. Instead they suffered minor financial damages and the CEO got a golden handshake.

Just another reminder that we all live in capitalist kleptocracies masquerading as democracies.

[–] poopkins@lemmy.world 28 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I find it difficult to know if my flight will avoid 737 Max, so I've been avoiding airlines that have them in their fleet. Unfortunately, British Airways recently rebooked me onto an Alaska Airlines, and sure enough, it was a Max 8. Sometimes you just can't win.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Well, lucky for you, Alaska grounded their 737 MAX fleet a few days ago, so you won’t be flying on them if your trip is anytime soon.

Edit: I didn’t realize they were getting them back into service so quickly… oops 😬

Edit 2: bon chance mon ami

[–] poopkins@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

It was reported earlier today that 18 were already back in service after completing inspections, and the remaining inspections would be completed in the coming days.

[–] ridethisbike@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

They only grounded their max-9's. The others are still in operation.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago

Most of Canada's airlines' domestic commuter fleet use 737 Max 8s. The best option would be to pick Porter Airlines if you were deadset on not getting 737s.

[–] Tosti@feddit.nl 58 points 10 months ago (2 children)

They really screwed the pooch with the 737 max9.. it's like the gift that keeps on giving.

I think internal documents and communication should be seized and a federal criminal investigation is in order.. someone must have actively fucked with this.

Embrear and Airbus are uncorking the champagne now probably.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 19 points 10 months ago (2 children)

someone must have actively fucked with this.

Hanlon's Razor says otherwise. I'm going to guess this was because of cut corners. Not someone trying to sabotage an entire line of aircraft.

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 36 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think he means an executive was actively cutting corners.

[–] Tosti@feddit.nl 18 points 10 months ago (2 children)

This is indeed what I meant. I don't think that someone was actively trying to make the plane unsafe, but in the eternal quest for more profit engineers, best practices and safety reports where ignored to make the plane as cheap as possible, resulting in the current ~~flying~~ grounded deathtrap.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago

Okay yeah. In that case I agree. I think that still falls more on the side of stupidity than malice, but the line between the two gets blurry when greed is involved

[–] fastandcurious@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If being stupid means killing almost 400 people and endangering thousands, I think it is fair to say that it is not any better than being malicious, also it would be stupid if they didn’t realize the potential flaws, but the fact is they overlooked it, which is not malice, fair enough, but it is definitely a terrible thing to do, far worse than being ‘stupid’

[–] Tosti@feddit.nl 3 points 10 months ago

Absolutely. Hence my original call for a criminal investigation to see if they indeed accepted the risks knowingly as then they should be held accountable.

Like I think all upper management of big oil that knew what they where doing to the planet should be tried in the Hague for Crimes against humanity. I don't care if they are old and long retired, concentration camp guards are also still tried after all these years.

[–] Patches@sh.itjust.works 16 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Hot take: if cutting corners to an entire line of aircraft and sabotaging an entire line of aircraft produce the same results then they deserve the same punishment.

The world would be a lot better place if we let the penny pinchers be at fault for the dangerous situations they keep causing.

[–] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Man, imagine how much better the world would be if accountants would face consequences when their decision was to blame?

[–] SuddenlyBlowGreen@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Or execs.

[–] sunbeam60@feddit.dk 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I’m not sure the queue for the 319, 320 and 321 can get any longer. Airbus simply can’t ramp production and it’s not like the C919 is ready for prime time (yet).

[–] Tosti@feddit.nl 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Maybe they can rent some production space in seattle :P

[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago

It would be Alabama actually, since you know, labor protections are weak there...

[–] Toine@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

Airbus is ramping up. They have had issues with the supply chain, but they should massively increase their production this year. They are opening assembly lines everywhere.

[–] fastandcurious@lemmy.world 32 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The incident seems much more serious than an isolated case of a doorplug falling off, I wonder if they are hiding something, another design flaw maybe?

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 31 points 10 months ago (1 children)

My assumption is that the 737 Max is simply a fundamentally unsafe and unsound design.

I'm sure within 15 years they'll complete the final retrofit to make it safe and sound, and in the end, it will end up costing 300% of what a new design would have.

But, it'll actually work out for Boeing executives and shareholders, so it will be taught to future MBA student as a success story about the heroic and stoic leadership that generated record profits for the low cost of a few hundred lives.

[–] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Most of the fuselage should be insanely similar to other 737 models. I can't imagine how someone fucked up badly enough to lose a door plug,

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

That's the problem... Reusing a 50+-year-old design, with new engines and other technology that should have been used with a new fuselage design...

I don't think they'd ground the entire fleet if this was just a mechanic who made some one-off error. There's probably some human error involved, but those on the ground human errors are only catastrophic because of the design choices Boeing made.

[–] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

I mean I'd argue it's only 30 years since NG, but that's a different argument. It's not like it isn't a proven airframe that still goes through continual process improvements. They certainly could have done things differently, but way more time and cost.

I don't think they know the exact cause and they grounded them out of an excess of caution. I'm going to guess a process got bought off that wasn't complete. That's the kind of thing that's engineered to not fall off if it's properly installed.

We'll see how things pan out in the next few days.

[–] AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml 6 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I don't even think it was a door. I watched a video of it on TikTok and it looked like a regular row of seats. I think it was just a piece of the hull.

Have they stated what fell off yet? I can't imagine how scary that was.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 27 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Door plug means that it's a spot in the frame where a future door can be installed by removing the "plug". In the meantime, it just looks like a piece of the fuselage. The plug is what got ripped out midair.

[–] AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago

Oh my bad

[–] PorradaVFR@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

I heard it was one of those emergency exit panels (not a full door, nor just a passenger window) but that could be inaccurate. Either way, not a good look for Boeing.

[–] wandermind@sopuli.xyz 4 points 10 months ago

What fell off was a plug filling in an optional emergency exit location. It was a regular row of seats because the plane didn't have the optional emergency exit installed (it is only required for high density passenger cabin configurations).

[–] SirSamuel@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

Time to buy some Boeing stock, cause the US govt won't let their defense dept darling fail

[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Can someone explain to me why they just give up on this frankenjet and build off the safer (at the moment) 777?

[–] GhostTheToast@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Talk out my ass here, but I thought it was due to the economics. Companies only want to buy the 737s because it's a fairly known factor. Pilots don't need to be retrained and, at this point, can be produced cheaper and/or faster.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 7 points 10 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has ordered the “temporary grounding” of 171 Boeing 737 Max 9 airplanes this morning after a section of fuselage separated from the side of an Alaska Airlines flight on Friday, leaving a gaping hole in the plane.

The agency said in its announcement that it will send an Emergency Airworthiness Directive out soon to require an inspection of all of the grounded planes that “will take around four to eight hours per aircraft.”

Prior to the FAA’s decision, Alaska Airlines grounded its own fleet of 65 Boeing 737 Max 9 planes for inspection.

In a 2020 Senate report, the FAA was accused of helping Boeing manipulate recertification tests to get the planes back in service.

Yesterday, The Seattle Times reported that Boeing had petitioned the FAA for a safety exemption for the 737 Max 7, a smaller plane the agency hasn’t certified yet.

Update January 6th, 2024, 3:10PM ET: Added detail from a Seattle Times article about Boeing’s recent petition for a safety exemption.

The original article contains 398 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 58%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

I'm interested to learn what changes were made to the 737 max fuselage compared to earlier versions of the 737.