Because Boeing were on such a good streak already…

  • Augustiner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    119
    ·
    1 year ago

    Working for Boeings PR department must be absolute madness right now… imagine having to somehow excuse all those fuck ups and every week there is a new one

    • Blueoaky@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      The company is still worth over 100 billions. They do something right.

      Otherwise I agree with you. It’s almost hilarious to see fail after fail (as long as you are not in the plane).

      • Augustiner@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What they do right is having a duopoly with Airbus, and great military contracts. So investors know that even if things are shit rn, they will probably get better again.

        Furthermore, while I agree that Boeing probably will not go bankrupt over this, the valuation sometimes is not a great indicator of what’s going on internally. Enron was worth over 60 billion. Half a year later they were at zero. Now I’m not saying Boeing is nearly that bad, but they are in some trouble for sure.

      • Shadywack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Google’s worth billions, and they can go probably about 6 years doing nothing right before that changes. It took Yahoo! a while, you’ll catch on.

  • iamjackflack@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    How is this Boeings issue? This is a maintenance problem with the airline. Tires get replaced by maintenance staff. That plane isn’t brand new.

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, if proper maintenance was done and the part still failed due to a design or quality issue that was improperly QC’d (missed, skipped, etc) then yeah it could be Boeings fault.

      They’re getting extra scrutiny right now because of all the incidents recently, and all the anecdotal stories of former employees talking about how a bunch of suits are destroying it from the inside to make a quick buck.

      And frankly, they fucking deserve it.

    • Smoogs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Careful. Boeing already tried the “but it’s not our job” excuse on a few major incidences with an executive now locked behind bars after pushing bribes to cover it up . They’d be best backing off on taking an attitude about where to assign blame. They got a lot of red spots that will never come out.

    • Copernican@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I remember watching this PBS Frontline segment on plane maintenance 10 years or so ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw0b020OFj4

      I imagine we still have those problems and the recent news of counterfeit parts entering the market is scary.

      Good thing these recent incidents ended up with no serious injuries or death. Perhaps this timing is good in some really weird way as the Supreme Court starts considering powers of regulatory agencies and concerns around government funding to highlight the importance and need for this government role.

    • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think the first two repliers have never heard of Ockham’s razor. I mean a micro meteorite could have struck some part of the wheel and knocked it off too, but probably not. Though that would be boeing’s fault to, because they didn’t make it micro meteorite tolerant.

      • Nelots@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, no, no, no, it’s being towed BEYOND the environment. It’s not in the environment.

        • thenextguy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          There’s nothing out there. There’s nothing but leaves and grass and rocks.

          And?

          And a tire.

        • eskimofry@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No, no, no, no, it’s being towed BEYOND the environment. It’s not in the environment.

          Real life wall clip hack, any% boeing speedrun, impossible?

          Edit: Quoted the wrong comment

          • wikibot@lemmy.worldB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Here’s the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment:

            The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) is a flight stabilizing feature developed by Boeing that became notorious for its role in two fatal accidents of the 737 MAX, which killed all 346 passengers and crew among both flights. Systems similar to the Boeing 737 MCAS were previously included on the Boeing 707 and Boeing KC-46, a 767 variant. On the 737 MAX, MCAS was intended to mimic the flight behavior of the previous generation of the series, the Boeing 737 NG. During MAX flight tests, Boeing discovered that the position and larger size of the engines tended to push the nose up during certain maneuvers. Engineers decided to use MCAS to counter that tendency, since major structural redesign would have been prohibitively expensive and time-consuming.

            to opt out, pm me ‘optout’. article | about

      • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes but probably management saw that as a problem limiting the future wheel assembly purchases. I mean you can land without the wheel right?

  • aesthelete@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Maybe Delta should’ve gotten the input of the focus group from I Think You Should Leave when trying to determine what they should do with their maintenance dollars.

  • pachrist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    On some Boeing aircraft, the nose wheel will actually come off when the autopilot system overcompensates during takeoff and crashes the plane straight into the ground. There were aome small news stories about it a few years back.

    • SevenProvinces@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s even known that the nose itself can come off if the autopilot overcompensates while in flight and crashes the plane into the ground.

      • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Are you sure? This makes it sound like every time the plane crashes into the ground because of autopilot overcompensation, its a good bet to assume the nose itself has already come off.

  • Shadywack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The old saying, “If it ain’t Boeing, I ain’t going”, it just needs slightly tweaked to be accurate today XD

    • derf82@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      In fairness, the 757 was designed when Boeing was still engineering focused and is one of the best commercial aircraft ever produced. This airframe, N672DL, is 32 years old, so it was almost certainly an issue with Delta’s maintenance. It was also quickly repaired and returned to service the next day.

      No one was criticizing Airbus when one of their aircraft was found the other day missing fasteners before a flight: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/nyc-bound-flight-canceled-passenger-31941807.amp

      • Shadywack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        All kidding aside, the passenger experience is a lot better anyway. Overhead storage bins on the newer airbus planes is a hell of a lot better, not to mention the infotainment systems that airlines seem to opt for. The way they integrate and function vs the Boeing dreamliners is a pretty stark contrast.

        • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I dunno, the 777ER is a great long distance plane, but the A320 is also a good experience. I really think Boeing fucked up with keeping that old workhorse the 737 around at the behest of pilots and customers. Especially since the 777 is (knocking on wood) as safe as it gets, no hull losses from internal factors as of today.

          Boeing’s mismanagement is not just a 737 problem: It’s a USA problem, they are the ones that make our jets, missiles, and manage our first strike capacity. These are things that much like our planes, cannot fail. EVER.

  • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    I feel uncomfortable as a taxpayer having inadvertently supported Boeing and they are literally falling apart.

    You think Airbus is gonna expand its capacity to build even more planes?

    • Synapse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      According the Airbus themselves, they finished 2023 with a backlog of 8598 orders, and they delivered 735 planes that same year. They are occupied for years ahead and it’s probably not so simple to increase production.

      Edit: the source: Orders and deliveries / airbus.com

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    is this a new plane or is delta shirking on maintenance (delta’s fleet is one of the oldest)

    • AirlineF0od@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is an older plane. The last 757 was produced around 2004, so they’re 20 years old now. That said, I absolutely love this airframe there an absolute pleasure to fly. The Delta configuration has bathrooms in three spots on the plane. I’m fairly certain the fuselage is a little bit wider than a 737 so you get a little bit more room in the aisle AND there’s more exit row seating. The 757 has an interesting wing design to improve efficiency. It’s like partially super critical or something. Maybe somebody else can add on to that.

      I remember flying the 757 a from Seattle to Detroit during covid and it was basically completely empty. It’s a bummer were going to see them start going away.