5 ms·

Airbus selling point: The side doesn't fall out

TacticalCoder 3y ago
I don't disagree with that but Airbus planes have also had their fair shares of issues: from frozen sensors sending planes into both the Atlantic and the Mediterannean see to a repeated behavior of apparently loving to land with the front gear's wheel rotated 90 degrees (why oh why!? At this point I think they'll have to reinforce the arm holding the wheel so that it can better deal with landing at 90 degrees). Are Boeing planes really that much more dangerous than Airbus ones?
- iamthirsty 3y ago
  Technically, yes[0]. And aviation, especially in the U.S., is very much tied to politics, which cares not as much about what might happen, but what did. — [0]: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10130490 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10130490
- geodel 3y ago
  > Are Boeing planes really that much more dangerous than Airbus ones? With the attention span of last few weeks it is indeed the case. Besides the serious one you recounted. I find this [1] funny: https://www.businessinsider.com/airbus-changing-a350-aircraft-design-amid-dispute-qatar-2023-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/airbus-changing-a350-aircraf...
  - philistine 3y ago
    For the airlines it's not about safety it's about reliable flight hours. Boeing right now have to ground their planes way more haphazardly than Airbus. The issues mentioned here about Airbus are manageable, they're not unforeseen parts falling off the plane suddenly.
- simion314 3y ago
  The other problem with Boeing and FAA in USA is that we seen how they cover their mistakes, how they try to patch over flaws etc. FAA should today randomly pick new Beoings and do a full inspection and not wait for incidents to happen in USA and posted on internet before pretending to care.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    Isn’t that what they just did? Only instead of picking a random new plane, they forced 100% of the newest plane to be inspected.
    - simion314 3y ago
      They checked only the door plug thing, they should check everything in a few random planes.
      - rob74 3y ago
        Yeah, with the loose bolts discovered in several planes after the door plug incident, and the recent Boeing advisory about possible loose bolts in the rudder control system, I imagine airline maintenance staff will start wondering what other screws may be loose in their planes...
- sofixa 3y ago
  > from frozen sensors sending planes into both the Atlantic and the Mediterannean It wasn't the sensors doing that, it was pilots misunderstanding what the frozen sensors are telling them, and what the plane is telling them. That's why the UX has been improved on that, and there's even an estimated airspeed via GPS now to give some indication to the pilots with the best available information. Overall, I think this is a false equivalence and bad form of whataboutism. Boeing are caught, again, with shoddy manufacturing and design practices, and people harp on "But Airbus aren't better!". Even if they weren't, and they are better, why does it matter? Boeing have issues, those need to be fixed. If Airbus had issues, those have to be fixed too. And Airbus have been working on theirs (like the A350 paint problems or the UX that could be improved when sensors are out) which are, again, much less critical than Boeing's planes flying themselves into the ground or with parts flying off.
- haliskerbas 3y ago
  Anyone have flight numbers for these incidents?
  - jarcoal 3y ago
    Air France 447 is a famous one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447
- jabiko 3y ago
  Here is an interesting article by Airbus regarding the 90 degree nose wheel landings: https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/landing-with-nosewheels-at-90-degrees/ https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/landing-with-nosewheels-at-90...
  - amluto 3y ago
    Reading that, I see more references to inappropriate resets than seems reasonable. It seems to be that Airbus could benefit from a more systematic way to manage what happens when a system is reset and to address the factors that give the crew incentives to reset systems when not authorized by the instructions from Airbus. This sounds complex, but possibly quite worthwhile.
  - Gravityloss 3y ago
    > The investigations identified the root causes, which were different for each event. Mitigating actions were developed and deployed accordingly. This is a nice document. Analogies in software operations world!
- kergonath 3y ago
  > Are Boeing planes really that much more dangerous than Airbus ones? You don’t need to speculate about what could happen, you have statistics about what did happen. Yes, they are. Not by much in absolute terms (thank goodness) but in relative terms, significantly.
  - rootusrootus 3y ago
    > significantly You must be comparing two specific airframes.
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  > Are Boeing planes really that much more dangerous than Airbus ones? The 737NG is the safest airliner ever produced. Boeing is having a rough patch, but anyone counting them out is foolish. They've had rough patches before.
iamtheworstdev 3y ago
Is that very typical?
- DaiPlusPlus 3y ago
  Well, there are a lot of these 737s going around the world all the time, and very seldom does anything like this happen… I just don’t want people thinking that Boeing airplanes aren’t safe.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    This is misleading as not all of those 737s are MAX version of them.
    - DaiPlusPlus 3y ago
      (My comment was a reference to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM )
  - edgyquant 3y ago
    Well for the past few years Boeing has basically been in the news multiple times a year over something going wrong so you can’t blame people for thinking they aren’t safe
datadrivenangel 3y ago
Also government subsidies that make the airplanes ~20-30% cheaper. Which to be fair Boeing almost has as well, but for Boeing it's mostly military contracts that subsidize the development of new airplanes that then get reused as civilian aircraft.
- gaadd33 3y ago
  What recent Boeing planes were originally developed for the military and reused as civilian aircraft? It seems like recent designs (eg the 787) are developed entirely from the needs of airlines.
- trynumber9 3y ago
  Except Boeing's flawed execution turned their normal 'safe' government contracts into a disaster. They claim to have lost $7B on that KC-46 refueler contract already. So they managed to fumble that into a negative subsidy. Boeing looks like a grossly mismanaged company now.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
cfn 3y ago
I suspect this a reference to this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM&t=4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM&t=4s
- deskamess 3y ago
  Yes!

I don't disagree with that but Airbus planes have also had their fair shares of issues: from frozen sensors sending planes into both the Atlantic and the Mediterannean see to a repeated behavior of apparently loving to land with the front gear's wheel rotated 90 degrees (why oh why!? At this point I think they'll have to reinforce the arm holding the wheel so that it can better deal with landing at 90 degrees). Are Boeing planes really that much more dangerous than Airbus ones?

iamthirsty 3y ago
Technically, yes[0]. And aviation, especially in the U.S., is very much tied to politics, which cares not as much about what might happen, but what did. — [0]: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10130490 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10130490
geodel 3y ago
> Are Boeing planes really that much more dangerous than Airbus ones? With the attention span of last few weeks it is indeed the case. Besides the serious one you recounted. I find this [1] funny: https://www.businessinsider.com/airbus-changing-a350-aircraft-design-amid-dispute-qatar-2023-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/airbus-changing-a350-aircraf...
- philistine 3y ago
  For the airlines it's not about safety it's about reliable flight hours. Boeing right now have to ground their planes way more haphazardly than Airbus. The issues mentioned here about Airbus are manageable, they're not unforeseen parts falling off the plane suddenly.
simion314 3y ago
The other problem with Boeing and FAA in USA is that we seen how they cover their mistakes, how they try to patch over flaws etc. FAA should today randomly pick new Beoings and do a full inspection and not wait for incidents to happen in USA and posted on internet before pretending to care.
- dylan604 3y ago
  Isn’t that what they just did? Only instead of picking a random new plane, they forced 100% of the newest plane to be inspected.
  - simion314 3y ago
    They checked only the door plug thing, they should check everything in a few random planes.
    - rob74 3y ago
      Yeah, with the loose bolts discovered in several planes after the door plug incident, and the recent Boeing advisory about possible loose bolts in the rudder control system, I imagine airline maintenance staff will start wondering what other screws may be loose in their planes...
sofixa 3y ago
> from frozen sensors sending planes into both the Atlantic and the Mediterannean It wasn't the sensors doing that, it was pilots misunderstanding what the frozen sensors are telling them, and what the plane is telling them. That's why the UX has been improved on that, and there's even an estimated airspeed via GPS now to give some indication to the pilots with the best available information. Overall, I think this is a false equivalence and bad form of whataboutism. Boeing are caught, again, with shoddy manufacturing and design practices, and people harp on "But Airbus aren't better!". Even if they weren't, and they are better, why does it matter? Boeing have issues, those need to be fixed. If Airbus had issues, those have to be fixed too. And Airbus have been working on theirs (like the A350 paint problems or the UX that could be improved when sensors are out) which are, again, much less critical than Boeing's planes flying themselves into the ground or with parts flying off.
haliskerbas 3y ago
Anyone have flight numbers for these incidents?
- jarcoal 3y ago
  Air France 447 is a famous one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447
jabiko 3y ago
Here is an interesting article by Airbus regarding the 90 degree nose wheel landings: https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/landing-with-nosewheels-at-90-degrees/ https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/landing-with-nosewheels-at-90...
- amluto 3y ago
  Reading that, I see more references to inappropriate resets than seems reasonable. It seems to be that Airbus could benefit from a more systematic way to manage what happens when a system is reset and to address the factors that give the crew incentives to reset systems when not authorized by the instructions from Airbus. This sounds complex, but possibly quite worthwhile.
- Gravityloss 3y ago
  > The investigations identified the root causes, which were different for each event. Mitigating actions were developed and deployed accordingly. This is a nice document. Analogies in software operations world!
kergonath 3y ago
> Are Boeing planes really that much more dangerous than Airbus ones? You don’t need to speculate about what could happen, you have statistics about what did happen. Yes, they are. Not by much in absolute terms (thank goodness) but in relative terms, significantly.
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  > significantly You must be comparing two specific airframes.
rootusrootus 3y ago
> Are Boeing planes really that much more dangerous than Airbus ones? The 737NG is the safest airliner ever produced. Boeing is having a rough patch, but anyone counting them out is foolish. They've had rough patches before.

iamtheworstdev 3y ago

Is that very typical?

DaiPlusPlus 3y ago
Well, there are a lot of these 737s going around the world all the time, and very seldom does anything like this happen… I just don’t want people thinking that Boeing airplanes aren’t safe.
- dylan604 3y ago
  This is misleading as not all of those 737s are MAX version of them.
  - DaiPlusPlus 3y ago
    (My comment was a reference to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM )
- edgyquant 3y ago
  Well for the past few years Boeing has basically been in the news multiple times a year over something going wrong so you can’t blame people for thinking they aren’t safe

datadrivenangel 3y ago

Also government subsidies that make the airplanes ~20-30% cheaper. Which to be fair Boeing almost has as well, but for Boeing it's mostly military contracts that subsidize the development of new airplanes that then get reused as civilian aircraft.

gaadd33 3y ago
What recent Boeing planes were originally developed for the military and reused as civilian aircraft? It seems like recent designs (eg the 787) are developed entirely from the needs of airlines.
trynumber9 3y ago
Except Boeing's flawed execution turned their normal 'safe' government contracts into a disaster. They claim to have lost $7B on that KC-46 refueler contract already. So they managed to fumble that into a negative subsidy. Boeing looks like a grossly mismanaged company now.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

cfn 3y ago

I suspect this a reference to this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM&t=4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM&t=4s

deskamess 3y ago
Yes!