4 ms·

Boeing CEO refuses to admit 737 MAX 8 is flawed

26 points by linsomniac 8y ago

itsaidpens 8y ago
Anyone have any idea if a MAX10 is materially different than a MAX8? I did some research and found that it only appears to be nominally longer? [1] 1. https://www.boeing.com/commercial/737max10/index.page https://www.boeing.com/commercial/737max10/index.page
- azza2110 8y ago
  The issue with the MAX8 is that it is fundamentally imbalanced. The larger heavier engines are tacked on to an airframe similar to the existing 737, constantly causing the plane to tip forwards, such that repeated tiny changes are required to maintain level flight. It is these tiny changes that are automated by software and can cause a crash when fed faulty sensor data. The MAX10 is a significantly longer aircraft. The forwards rotation of the larger heavier engines is better balanced by the forces imparted by the tail acting over a longer lever arm, so the problematic sensor-driven software-controlled tiny changes aren't required.
Causality1 8y ago
>“It’s not correct to attribute that to any single item.” What a lying sack of shit. A single failed sensor caused the plane's automatic systems to nosedive it into the ground.
rapsey 8y ago
Well obviously. A CEO admitting such a fault would be a CEO committing career suicide and would cost the company many billions. Public discourse such as it is means never showing volnurability because you will get slaughtered.
writepub 8y ago
The admission would tank Boeing stock, and invite a barrage of lawsuits. This is a delicate line to tow, that of providing for tens of thousands of employees, versus providing closure to loved ones of the dead.
- seoirsewalker 8y ago
  First and foremost he is serving the company shareholders. The other concerns are secondary.
paxys 8y ago
Well "do not admit fault" is basic advice that is printed on every auto insurance card and something that any lawyer will tell you for free. Do they really except the CEO of a large multinational company to just randomly say "yeah, it was totally our fault, sue us"?
dang 8y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19782673 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19782673
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
godson_drafty 8y ago
Muillenberg's assurances that they will fix everything on their own are not very convincing. The existence of such a terrible design -- a single sensor that has complete control over the horizontal stabilizer -- points to one or more teams or management chains within Boeing that are turning out shoddy work. They have undoubtedly turned out other shoddy work, and will likely continue to produce more shoddy work that will kill more people. An outside team needs to be brought in to investigate engineering and management. Immunity against lawsuits and job losses need to be assured, but we need to discover exactly what led to this so more terrible engineering ideas don't find their way into the next crop of airliners that we will be trusting our lives to.

26 points by linsomniac 8y ago

Anyone have any idea if a MAX10 is materially different than a MAX8? I did some research and found that it only appears to be nominally longer? [1] 1. https://www.boeing.com/commercial/737max10/index.page https://www.boeing.com/commercial/737max10/index.page

azza2110 8y ago
The issue with the MAX8 is that it is fundamentally imbalanced. The larger heavier engines are tacked on to an airframe similar to the existing 737, constantly causing the plane to tip forwards, such that repeated tiny changes are required to maintain level flight. It is these tiny changes that are automated by software and can cause a crash when fed faulty sensor data. The MAX10 is a significantly longer aircraft. The forwards rotation of the larger heavier engines is better balanced by the forces imparted by the tail acting over a longer lever arm, so the problematic sensor-driven software-controlled tiny changes aren't required.

Causality1 8y ago

>“It’s not correct to attribute that to any single item.” What a lying sack of shit. A single failed sensor caused the plane's automatic systems to nosedive it into the ground.

rapsey 8y ago

Well obviously. A CEO admitting such a fault would be a CEO committing career suicide and would cost the company many billions. Public discourse such as it is means never showing volnurability because you will get slaughtered.

writepub 8y ago

The admission would tank Boeing stock, and invite a barrage of lawsuits. This is a delicate line to tow, that of providing for tens of thousands of employees, versus providing closure to loved ones of the dead.

seoirsewalker 8y ago
First and foremost he is serving the company shareholders. The other concerns are secondary.

paxys 8y ago

Well "do not admit fault" is basic advice that is printed on every auto insurance card and something that any lawyer will tell you for free. Do they really except the CEO of a large multinational company to just randomly say "yeah, it was totally our fault, sue us"?

dang 8y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19782673 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19782673

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

godson_drafty 8y ago

Muillenberg's assurances that they will fix everything on their own are not very convincing. The existence of such a terrible design -- a single sensor that has complete control over the horizontal stabilizer -- points to one or more teams or management chains within Boeing that are turning out shoddy work. They have undoubtedly turned out other shoddy work, and will likely continue to produce more shoddy work that will kill more people. An outside team needs to be brought in to investigate engineering and management. Immunity against lawsuits and job losses need to be assured, but we need to discover exactly what led to this so more terrible engineering ideas don't find their way into the next crop of airliners that we will be trusting our lives to.