Understanding The 737 Problem

monkeymania's picture

The real reason Boeing's new plane crashed twice

In just 6 minutes, full understanding of the engine problem that has resulted in crashes of the 737.

5
Average: 5 (3 votes)

Comments

boldfart's picture

Passengers sacrificed in the name of profit!  That has never happened before?

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

I always am suspicious of "the real reason" videos.

 

I just wonder why they would not change the landing gear design so that the plane is a little hgher off the ground, surely that would have solved the issue without any further changes necessary, especially not a software fiddling with controls.

+1
-3
-1
Vote comment up/down
monkeymania's picture

Simple. Money. Costs less to make a software change than a complete redesign of the landing gear, thereby making more money for the company and stockholders. Five years from now, when Boeing looks at their balance sheet, they will likely see that a few crashes and a few hundred deaths-even with all the bad publicity-was economically a better way to go than losing millions redesigning landing gear for hundreds of planes AND adding new engines.

+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
tumbi's picture
Beta Tester
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid's picture

There's a former CDC doctor who only communicates by lawyer now who indicates a similar calculation may be have been made for certain vaccines - except for that case add "public good" to the equation and it gets even more complicated.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
backdraft's picture
Beta Tester

If their MAX fleet is grounded for who know how long, I doubt this will be profitable for them.  They dun fucked up

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

no it's been incredibly profitable for them. ceo was on a base salary of $1.7m but took home $30m after bonuses received from delivering a profit of over $100bn. even if he leaves now he's massively more ahead than he would be if he'd taken the responsible route.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
pharb's picture

I think you are replying at cross purposes to backdraft, who is looking forward, while you are looking at the past.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
robbby1234's picture

Just make new landing gear?! Honest question: how old are you?

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

Well, they had to redesign the engine support and introduce a bodged software solution. That was obviously cheaper. From an engineering point of view the landing gear as such would possibly be available in house, off shelf with little modification. The biggest issue, and possibly showstopper, would be re-designing the larger housing and getting it through approval.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

not just the redesigning, it's all the testing. it's the same reason planes are always built with the same "tube with wings attached" design even though others are much more efficient, because they have data for that design and so never need to start fresh.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

OK, did not know that.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

This video gives some interesting background info, it's debatable what "the real" reason is. The government allowing Boeing to certify their own safety process is what's being reported in a lot of other media as the reason why these planes nosedive.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid's picture

MCRASH system. I have warned of this before. Destroy all robots. No one thinks tech writers are important until the flight training manual crashes the plane. In the end though seems clear that capitalism is to blame. Thank you Vox.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

yeah the problem with robots is they can't tell when their sensors are feeding faulty information. there's no machine equivalent of "wait a minute, that can't be right."

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
monkeymania's picture

Just the beginning.

giphy-3

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
backdraft's picture
Beta Tester

I don't know how it's even possible that these systems don't have double or triple redundancy built in them. As far as I know the autopilot has it, so why would it be so hard to implement it into this? If the data from two sensors are different, it switches off the autopilot and hands it over to the pilots. 

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
monkeymania's picture

But dat cost mo money doe!

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down