6 ms·

I hope one day engineering students will study the MAX 7 and learn from the Boeing culture that has killed at least 346 people so far. So many issues (and relat

by janice1999 3y ago

I hope one day engineering students will study the MAX 7 and learn from the Boeing culture that has killed at least 346 people so far. So many issues (and related cover-ups) stem from the massive compromises made so Boeing could quickly launch a flawed modified plane instead of a new design because Airbus scared their management.

pengaru 3y ago
Same, and I wonder if it'll share a chapter with Tesla's prematurely shipped autonomous features, related deaths, and the dishonest messaging surrounding it. Considering the MCAS[0] failures were largely software defects in an autonomous system, seems plausible to me... [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuvering_Characteristics_Augmentation_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuvering_Characteristics_Au...
- brandonagr2 3y ago
  What are you talking about, Tesla doesn't ship any autonomous features. Driver assist features do not make a car autonomous. Tesla has always plainly said you must monitor the car at all times autopilot is engaged, the exact same way that turning on cruise control in any other car doesn't make the car autonomous even though the car is managing the speed.
  - pengaru 3y ago
    > What are you talking about, Tesla doesn't ship any autonomous features. Driver assist features do not make a car autonomous. Tesla has always plainly said you must monitor the car at all times autopilot is engaged, the exact same way that turning on cruise control in any other car doesn't make the car autonomous even though the car is managing the speed. What are you talking about? What Tesla markets and sells falls into SAE Autonomous Ground Vehicle classifications, just not level 5. Nothing I wrote spoke to anything Tesla sells being L5 (or any particular level at all). Edit: On the topic of MCAS, it strikes me as a system akin to around an SAE L2/L3, overriding pilot inputs to prevent a perceived crash/stall risk. This AIUI is well within the autonomy space Teslas operate...
  - VintageCool 3y ago
    Quite right old chap! Surely no reasonable consumer would interpret terms like "Autopilot" or "Full Self Driving" to mean that the car autonomously drives itself!
    - twaw 3y ago
      You can lookup "autopilot" definition in a dictionary
- sebzim4500 3y ago
  In the case of Tesla they make the argument that the safety features have saved far more than they have injured/killed. Inexplicably, there is no federal agency that actually checks these things. In this case I don't see how you could make the same argument, clearly the new planes were not safer than the old ones or they wouldn't have been grounded.
  - tw04 3y ago
    Based on my experience with Tesla’s autonomous driving software, there is no planet on which that’s true. It is quite literally worse than anyone I can imagine driving unless they’re high, drunk, texting, and doing 30+mph over the speed limit. I’ve come across an unfortunate number of drunk drivers in my time on this earth driving and I can say I’ve never once seen or heard of a drunk slamming on their brakes at 70mph because of a tree shadow across the road. I’ve personally experienced and seen someone else’s Tesla do it on multiple occasions. I can anticipate and avoid a drunk driver in many situations. I’d never expect that behavior out of any human driver.
    - spookie 3y ago
      And yet one sees people talking the fearure up all day on the internet, as if it's safer than human drivers. When I see such comments, I seriously question if they've ever driven a car and came across a Tesla in "self-driving" mode. Just to add to the conversation a bit more: Humans give away their intentions in more ways than turn signals, as a human you subconsciously know what the other is trying to do, just by watching. It's difficult to explain, and you gotta have driven a car to understand. These self-driving vehicles aren't even close to mimicking that aspect. Leading us, humans on the road, a bit more clueless on what's going on.
    - oska 3y ago
      > I’d never expect that behavior out of any human driver. People will slam on the brakes when they see an animal run out on the road. It's generally considered better driving practice to not do that, as you risk rear end collisions, but that behaviour from humans does exist.
CoastalCoder 3y ago
> I hope one day engineering students will study the MAX 7 and learn from the Boeing culture that has killed at least 346 people so far. I fear that wouldn't matter, because they could end up working (indirectly) for stockholders that find that dollar-to-lives tradeoff desireable.
- medler 3y ago
  The idea of the ethics training is that you as an engineer don’t do the unethical work, even if stockholders want it
consumer451 3y ago
> I hope one day engineering students will study the MAX 7 and learn from the Boeing culture that has killed at least 346 people so far I would hope that is also taught in management schools, as they appear to be the ones making these decisions.
- hughesjj 3y ago
  Which is why we can't let Boeing get away with this anti social behavior, lest the lesson they learn be 'oh no one cares and there's no consequences '
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 3y ago
    [dead]
  - quickthrower2 3y ago
    Don’t let the people working at boeing responsible for these decisions get away with it.
- quickthrower2 3y ago
  Just don’t think the distant echos of an ethics class will win vs. threat of getting fired for not maximising profit.
- dschiavu 3y ago
  The same MBA-ization of Boeing has been happening in other companies as well, including in the IT sector. Seriously, how can we allow non-engineers to lead aerospace or tech companies at all?
kevin_b_er 3y ago
This needs to be in *management* ethics. It was the *management* that ignored warnings. The "compromises" were demanded by *management*. Boeing is not an engineering culture, it is an MBA culture. This is the result. It is clear, by deadly example, that Boeing *management* is not capable of running a company that produces a safe plane. It is, after all, difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. All the engineering ethics in the world does nothing against the greed of Boeing's management.
- janice1999 3y ago
  Agreed. I only mention engineering students as my only experience with ethics classes are in that domain. However it's still a good example for engineers, particularly how the design failures resulted in deaths, the role of whistleblowers and how disastrous self-certification can be.
  - paledot 3y ago
    I would be utterly shocked if any MBA program in the world had a mandatory ethics component, for all that an unethical MBA is in a position to kill many more people than an unethical engineer.
    - dbattaglia 3y ago
      I wouldn’t be surprised if they had some ethics classes. I doubt any class is going to have instill ethics in someone who has none.
- numpad0 3y ago
  I've seen fiduciary duty to shareholders in publicly traded companies and how it force managers to chase unsustainable immediate gains repeated as cliche, template, criticisms in this types of topics. Privately owned companies of course aren't much different OTOH, so personally it feels to me that incentive design that rewards ethical corporate behaviors is an open question passed from the modern era to the post-modern world(or is that one label behind this one? I'm totally out of my depth).
nimbius 3y ago
Its not Airbus. The Chinese Comac C919 and Sukhoi SJ100 are the two main aircraft placing enormous pressure on Boeing internationally. FAA approval is a slam-dunk for them in foreign markets as it renews confidence in the brand and allows them to compete against newcomers that are arguably just as good or better than the max series of widebodies and come in at a fraction of the cost. Boeing management --and their flat-out inability to out-innovate the competition at cost-- are the real reason behind the push to certify at all cost.
- throwup238 3y ago
  From Wikipedia: Comac C919 - First flight: 2017, introduced 2023, number built: 10 (3 in service?) Sukhoi Superjet 100 - First flight: 2008, introduced 2011, number built: 229 Boeing 737 MAX - First flight: 2016, introduced 2017, number built: 1,376 Airbus A320 NEO - First flight: 2014, introduced 2016, number built: 3,092 They're not even in the same ballpark. It'll take Comac decades to make those inroads and Sukhoi is done for.
  - oska 3y ago
    Why do you think the Sukhoi is 'done for' ?
    - consp 3y ago
      Impossibility to get parts legally due to sanctions.
      - oska 3y ago
        My understanding is that they have developed an import substitution plan for the jet and are resolved to keep producing it. [1] For instance, they are substituting the original SaM-146 engines with fully domestically produced PD-8 engines and I understand they are already, or close to testing the first prototype with the new engines (they already tested an earlier prototype with other import substitutions but which still had the old engines). [2] [1] https://asiatimes.com/2023/09/russia-defies-sanctions-with-homemade-sukhoi-superjet/ https://asiatimes.com/2023/09/russia-defies-sanctions-with-h... [2] https://tass.com/economy/1699907 https://tass.com/economy/1699907

pengaru 3y ago

Same, and I wonder if it'll share a chapter with Tesla's prematurely shipped autonomous features, related deaths, and the dishonest messaging surrounding it. Considering the MCAS[0] failures were largely software defects in an autonomous system, seems plausible to me... [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuvering_Characteristics_Augmentation_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuvering_Characteristics_Au...

brandonagr2 3y ago
What are you talking about, Tesla doesn't ship any autonomous features. Driver assist features do not make a car autonomous. Tesla has always plainly said you must monitor the car at all times autopilot is engaged, the exact same way that turning on cruise control in any other car doesn't make the car autonomous even though the car is managing the speed.
- pengaru 3y ago
  > What are you talking about, Tesla doesn't ship any autonomous features. Driver assist features do not make a car autonomous. Tesla has always plainly said you must monitor the car at all times autopilot is engaged, the exact same way that turning on cruise control in any other car doesn't make the car autonomous even though the car is managing the speed. What are you talking about? What Tesla markets and sells falls into SAE Autonomous Ground Vehicle classifications, just not level 5. Nothing I wrote spoke to anything Tesla sells being L5 (or any particular level at all). Edit: On the topic of MCAS, it strikes me as a system akin to around an SAE L2/L3, overriding pilot inputs to prevent a perceived crash/stall risk. This AIUI is well within the autonomy space Teslas operate...
- VintageCool 3y ago
  Quite right old chap! Surely no reasonable consumer would interpret terms like "Autopilot" or "Full Self Driving" to mean that the car autonomously drives itself!
  - twaw 3y ago
    You can lookup "autopilot" definition in a dictionary
sebzim4500 3y ago
In the case of Tesla they make the argument that the safety features have saved far more than they have injured/killed. Inexplicably, there is no federal agency that actually checks these things. In this case I don't see how you could make the same argument, clearly the new planes were not safer than the old ones or they wouldn't have been grounded.
- tw04 3y ago
  Based on my experience with Tesla’s autonomous driving software, there is no planet on which that’s true. It is quite literally worse than anyone I can imagine driving unless they’re high, drunk, texting, and doing 30+mph over the speed limit. I’ve come across an unfortunate number of drunk drivers in my time on this earth driving and I can say I’ve never once seen or heard of a drunk slamming on their brakes at 70mph because of a tree shadow across the road. I’ve personally experienced and seen someone else’s Tesla do it on multiple occasions. I can anticipate and avoid a drunk driver in many situations. I’d never expect that behavior out of any human driver.
  - spookie 3y ago
    And yet one sees people talking the fearure up all day on the internet, as if it's safer than human drivers. When I see such comments, I seriously question if they've ever driven a car and came across a Tesla in "self-driving" mode. Just to add to the conversation a bit more: Humans give away their intentions in more ways than turn signals, as a human you subconsciously know what the other is trying to do, just by watching. It's difficult to explain, and you gotta have driven a car to understand. These self-driving vehicles aren't even close to mimicking that aspect. Leading us, humans on the road, a bit more clueless on what's going on.
  - oska 3y ago
    > I’d never expect that behavior out of any human driver. People will slam on the brakes when they see an animal run out on the road. It's generally considered better driving practice to not do that, as you risk rear end collisions, but that behaviour from humans does exist.

CoastalCoder 3y ago

> I hope one day engineering students will study the MAX 7 and learn from the Boeing culture that has killed at least 346 people so far. I fear that wouldn't matter, because they could end up working (indirectly) for stockholders that find that dollar-to-lives tradeoff desireable.

medler 3y ago
The idea of the ethics training is that you as an engineer don’t do the unethical work, even if stockholders want it

consumer451 3y ago

> I hope one day engineering students will study the MAX 7 and learn from the Boeing culture that has killed at least 346 people so far I would hope that is also taught in management schools, as they appear to be the ones making these decisions.

hughesjj 3y ago
Which is why we can't let Boeing get away with this anti social behavior, lest the lesson they learn be 'oh no one cares and there's no consequences '
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 3y ago
  [dead]
- quickthrower2 3y ago
  Don’t let the people working at boeing responsible for these decisions get away with it.
quickthrower2 3y ago
Just don’t think the distant echos of an ethics class will win vs. threat of getting fired for not maximising profit.
dschiavu 3y ago
The same MBA-ization of Boeing has been happening in other companies as well, including in the IT sector. Seriously, how can we allow non-engineers to lead aerospace or tech companies at all?

kevin_b_er 3y ago

This needs to be in *management* ethics. It was the *management* that ignored warnings. The "compromises" were demanded by *management*. Boeing is not an engineering culture, it is an MBA culture. This is the result. It is clear, by deadly example, that Boeing *management* is not capable of running a company that produces a safe plane. It is, after all, difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. All the engineering ethics in the world does nothing against the greed of Boeing's management.

janice1999 3y ago
Agreed. I only mention engineering students as my only experience with ethics classes are in that domain. However it's still a good example for engineers, particularly how the design failures resulted in deaths, the role of whistleblowers and how disastrous self-certification can be.
- paledot 3y ago
  I would be utterly shocked if any MBA program in the world had a mandatory ethics component, for all that an unethical MBA is in a position to kill many more people than an unethical engineer.
  - dbattaglia 3y ago
    I wouldn’t be surprised if they had some ethics classes. I doubt any class is going to have instill ethics in someone who has none.
numpad0 3y ago
I've seen fiduciary duty to shareholders in publicly traded companies and how it force managers to chase unsustainable immediate gains repeated as cliche, template, criticisms in this types of topics. Privately owned companies of course aren't much different OTOH, so personally it feels to me that incentive design that rewards ethical corporate behaviors is an open question passed from the modern era to the post-modern world(or is that one label behind this one? I'm totally out of my depth).

nimbius 3y ago

Its not Airbus. The Chinese Comac C919 and Sukhoi SJ100 are the two main aircraft placing enormous pressure on Boeing internationally. FAA approval is a slam-dunk for them in foreign markets as it renews confidence in the brand and allows them to compete against newcomers that are arguably just as good or better than the max series of widebodies and come in at a fraction of the cost. Boeing management --and their flat-out inability to out-innovate the competition at cost-- are the real reason behind the push to certify at all cost.

throwup238 3y ago
From Wikipedia: Comac C919 - First flight: 2017, introduced 2023, number built: 10 (3 in service?) Sukhoi Superjet 100 - First flight: 2008, introduced 2011, number built: 229 Boeing 737 MAX - First flight: 2016, introduced 2017, number built: 1,376 Airbus A320 NEO - First flight: 2014, introduced 2016, number built: 3,092 They're not even in the same ballpark. It'll take Comac decades to make those inroads and Sukhoi is done for.
- oska 3y ago
  Why do you think the Sukhoi is 'done for' ?
  - consp 3y ago
    Impossibility to get parts legally due to sanctions.
    - oska 3y ago
      My understanding is that they have developed an import substitution plan for the jet and are resolved to keep producing it. [1] For instance, they are substituting the original SaM-146 engines with fully domestically produced PD-8 engines and I understand they are already, or close to testing the first prototype with the new engines (they already tested an earlier prototype with other import substitutions but which still had the old engines). [2] [1] https://asiatimes.com/2023/09/russia-defies-sanctions-with-homemade-sukhoi-superjet/ https://asiatimes.com/2023/09/russia-defies-sanctions-with-h... [2] https://tass.com/economy/1699907 https://tass.com/economy/1699907