Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Engadget)   Boeing to start tests of the 737MAX's upgraded crash feature tomorrow   (engadget.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Aircraft, Airline, aircraft crew, BBC News sources, Air safety, MCAS anti-stall technology, Flight, Air travel  
•       •       •

354 clicks; posted to Business » on 28 Jun 2020 at 9:50 PM (2 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



20 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-06-28 10:02:26 PM  
If they can just get it in the air it's guaranteed to land.
 
2020-06-28 10:15:58 PM  
Can we still use the old crash positions?:
66.media.tumblr.comView Full Size
 
2020-06-28 11:00:27 PM  
I know it's a question of bazillions of dollars and that half of humans are absolute morons, but do they honestly still think they'll convince anyone to fly in those things?
 
2020-06-28 11:31:18 PM  

quo vadimus: I know it's a question of bazillions of dollars and that half of humans are absolute morons, but do they honestly still think they'll convince anyone to fly in those things?


People will. Not everyone, but plenty will. After a time, more and more will until this is mostly an afterthought, until god forbid, something else happens.
 
2020-06-29 12:00:54 AM  

quo vadimus: I know it's a question of bazillions of dollars and that half of humans are absolute morons, but do they honestly still think they'll convince anyone to fly in those things?


The original 737s had a rudder problem that resulted in several crashes.  Still the most popular passenger jet series ever.

That said, great timing here Boeing!  Your #1 moneymaker will be ready just in time for the near total collapse of air travel, failure of multiple airlines and glut of lightly used airplanes on the market.

You folks really can't do anything right, can you?
 
2020-06-29 12:44:00 AM  

FarkingSmurf: If they can just get it in the air it's guaranteed to land.


Takeoff is optional.
Crashing is mandatory.

/Eight inches from bottle to throttle.
//But I didn't have the salmon mousse
///--------
 
2020-06-29 1:04:47 AM  

Glockenspiel Hero: near total collapse of air travel


In the US maybe.

/meanwhile the rest of the world is mostly going back to semi-normal since they actually have healthcare systems and all.
 
2020-06-29 6:30:42 AM  
Who would have thought that the cycle of predatory capitalism would culminate in an aircraft where you have to pay extra for a "hey look the aircraft is trying to crash itself" indicator?

Fark you, Boeing. You had all of the resources and expertise to design and build a safe plane but you tried to take the cheapest way out. This isn't the 1950s anymore. We have over six decades of experience with jet aircraft.
 
2020-06-29 7:24:10 AM  
I know this country would never put safety over profit-seeking, so this idea isn't going to happen at all, but I'm guessing designs would be a lot more safety-focused if getting a design approved required C-level executives and engineers to participate in the flight tests. You'd have so many redundant fail-safes that the planes would crash upward in the event of a farkup.
 
2020-06-29 9:23:56 AM  

Glockenspiel Hero: That said, great timing here Boeing!  Your #1 moneymaker will be ready just in time for the near total collapse of air travel, failure of multiple airlines and glut of lightly used airplanes on the market.

You folks really can't do anything right, can you?


Perhaps they did. The coronavirus has called timeout on all new jet acquisitions, right when everybody in their right minds were going to buy a bunch of A320neo's. By the time airlines will able to restart the refresh of their fleets, they might just go back to Boeing's "upgraded" aluminum tube instead.
 
2020-06-29 9:33:43 AM  
If it's fixed then sure, I'd fly on it. It's still safer than driving
 
2020-06-29 10:12:56 AM  

Glockenspiel Hero: You folks really can't do anything right, can you?


Boeing has really farked up a lot of stuff in the prior 15-20 years (it's really MD management doing the farking up), but the timing of things is largely out of their control.

Boeing had better scrap the idea of that NMA/797 currently going through a program review and revive the 787-3 to take the place. That would be cheaper and faster to get to market.

Airbus blew through billions of euros on the A380, so they aren't immune from poor decisions.
 
2020-06-29 11:12:53 AM  

quo vadimus: I know it's a question of bazillions of dollars and that half of humans are absolute morons, but do they honestly still think they'll convince anyone to fly in those things?


A year after it is certified for flight nobody will even think about it.

There's plenty of designs that had more crashes due to design or construction issues that went on to serve for a long time and ended up with reputations for reliability and safety. Did Boeing screw up in a big way? Hell yes. Will people care that much once travel starts taking off again? No. Because things will be fixed.

I remember the post-9/11 situation. Air travel took a long time to get back to previous levels. It did. It will come back, probably faster than it did then, and when people get on a 737 Max they're more likely to be thinking "Ah, this is nice and clean" than they'll be thinking anything else. If they even notice.
 
2020-06-29 12:53:59 PM  

quo vadimus: I know it's a question of bazillions of dollars and that half of humans are absolute morons, but do they honestly still think they'll convince anyone to fly in those things?


Rename them?
 
2020-06-29 2:25:28 PM  

akula: quo vadimus: I know it's a question of bazillions of dollars and that half of humans are absolute morons, but do they honestly still think they'll convince anyone to fly in those things?

A year after it is certified for flight nobody will even think about it.

There's plenty of designs that had more crashes due to design or construction issues that went on to serve for a long time and ended up with reputations for reliability and safety. Did Boeing screw up in a big way? Hell yes. Will people care that much once travel starts taking off again? No. Because things will be fixed.

I remember the post-9/11 situation. Air travel took a long time to get back to previous levels. It did. It will come back, probably faster than it did then, and when people get on a 737 Max they're more likely to be thinking "Ah, this is nice and clean" than they'll be thinking anything else. If they even notice.



The public came back because it wasn't Boeing's fault.

9/11 would have been different if, despite all actions by the pilots, the airplanes had flown into the buildings by themselves.
 
2020-06-29 3:36:42 PM  
Just in time for pandemic based travel demand bottoming out.
 
2020-06-29 9:23:12 PM  

studebaker hoch: The public came back because it wasn't Boeing's fault.

9/11 would have been different if, despite all actions by the pilots, the airplanes had flown into the buildings by themselves.


No.

They came back because people want to travel. In the wake of 9/11, businesses slashed travel budgets and the economic downturn in the wake slowed interest in recreational travel.

It took time, but it came back because people want to go from A to B. Demand will be there.

In the wake of Corona people will decide to fly again. The air travel will return. And people won't worry about what plane is flying the route. There's no shortage of planes that had issues that served long lives after those issues were addressed. The Max will be just fine.
 
2020-06-29 11:33:57 PM  

akula: studebaker hoch: The public came back because it wasn't Boeing's fault.

9/11 would have been different if, despite all actions by the pilots, the airplanes had flown into the buildings by themselves.

No.

They came back because people want to travel. In the wake of 9/11, businesses slashed travel budgets and the economic downturn in the wake slowed interest in recreational travel.

It took time, but it came back because people want to go from A to B. Demand will be there.

In the wake of Corona people will decide to fly again. The air travel will return. And people won't worry about what plane is flying the route. There's no shortage of planes that had issues that served long lives after those issues were addressed. The Max will be just fine.



Yes.
 
2020-06-30 3:03:20 AM  

Nullav: I know this country would never put safety over profit-seeking, so this idea isn't going to happen at all, but I'm guessing designs would be a lot more safety-focused if getting a design approved required C-level executives and engineers to participate in the flight tests. You'd have so many redundant fail-safes that the planes would crash upward in the event of a farkup.


They do.
 
2020-06-30 12:40:45 PM  

studebaker hoch: Yes.


I disagree.

The Fark mob loves to take the doom and gloom route on things, but this one isn't going to go like that. Things only very rarely do. It's never as good as some say, it's never as bad as others claim it will be.
 
Displayed 20 of 20 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.