Boeing wants FAA to exempt MAX 7 from safety rules to get it in the air

Re:Boeing wants FAA to exempt MAX 7 from safety rules to get... by gambiting on Friday January 05, 2024 @04:56PM (#38885500)

What damage can they actually suffer though? Boeing is a strategic asset of the US government, they would never allow any harm to come to it. Some heads would roll for sure, maybe even the government would step in and assume direct control of certain parts of the company, but it's not like it would go out of business, or like companies would cancel all of their orders and buy Airbuses instead - they could, but again, the US government would never allow that to happen, either through direct monetary action or promises and guarantees that whatever the worry is won't ever happen again.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Boeing wants FAA to exempt MAX 7 from safety rules to get... by tivert on Friday January 05, 2024 @05:06PM (#38885629)

> What damage can they actually suffer though? Boeing is a strategic asset of the US government, they would never allow any harm to come to it.

Boeing's staff and plant are strategic assets, its executives and shareholders aren't. The US government could totally let harm come the latter group.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Boeing wants FAA to exempt MAX 7 from safety rules to get... by p1esk on Friday January 05, 2024 @05:37PM (#38885984)

US government is much more broken than Boeing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Boeing wants FAA to exempt MAX 7 from safety rules to get... by eastbound on Friday January 05, 2024 @05:04PM (#38885608)

> What damage can they actually suffer though?

Loss of market share. As in, customers actively looking at the type of aircraft when they book a ticket. Airplanes becoming reluctant to ordering Boeing.

At this time, every $1 you invest in making it known what Boeing does since 15 years, results in $2 or $3 of loss of market share for Boeing. Absolutely the time to buy ads to promote articles about Boeing.

I would actually trust Comac more than Boeing, as Comac has something to prove, whereas Boeing has been proven to crash planes and bribe the FAA.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Boeing wants FAA to exempt MAX 7 from safety rules to get... by traverseda on Friday January 05, 2024 @09:39PM (#38887808)

Can someone make a list of unsafe Boeing planes?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Boeing wants FAA to exempt MAX 7 from safety rules to get... by nostrademons on Friday January 05, 2024 @10:58PM (#38888254)

The 737 MAX and 787 have both had significant issues. Basically it's anything introduced after the merger with McDonnell Douglass in 1997.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Boeing wants FAA to exempt MAX 7 from safety rules to get... by eastbound on Saturday January 06, 2024 @12:55AM (#38888836)

Boeing’s processes, not planes, are unsafe.

In 2013 they received frames (the circular structures that make the fuselage) which instead of being machined, has been created manually. Voids were all in the wrong place because the workers had taken the blueprints symmetrically.

Did they ditch the frames? Of course not? They remade the cuts so that it fits upside down! And soldered the I-beam parts that had been cut! Result: The circular frames, which are a critical structural component, have twice as many gaps and holes and soldered sections than the designed piece.

Bulkheads, circular frames, MCAS… It’s appalling engineering practices.

And the dinner party system with FAA, introduced by Mac Donnell’s practices when it was bought over, has to stop. They should not be friends in real life.

[ Parent | on HN ]