Hacker News Reader

Comment by karlkatzke | Hacker News Reader

"If it's boeing I ain't going"

What an unfortunate blunder by Boeing.

Until this episode I was deliberately looking for 787's and such when booking international flights, despite what I had heard about the batteries, because I thought Boeing had to be just that much better than Airbus and their unintuitive UI's that I heard crashed AF447.

And now all that good will is gone.

AF447 was a pilot error

Or...now that Boeing has clearly lost trust, how much harder will they work to earn that trust back?

0 times harder is they bankrupt themselves.

I wonder how many serious problems Airbus have that we simply don't know about because they haven't been caught.

How is this helping, even if Airbus are as bad that does not help the people that were killed, at least after the first crash Boeing should have ground the planes until the problem was completely understood and fixed (in software or other way).

I will wait for the emails and other documents to surface and see how they took the decisions after the first crash, if the engineers reported the issues but nobody listen etc.

Hopefully some lessons will be learned from thins and engineers from other companies like Airbus would speak if shortcuts that are not safe are pushed.

Well, they designed their airframe to handle the larger engines properly, rather than patching it with software. So I'm going to wager that the answer is "a lot less".

Boeing shot themselves in the foot after the awful outsourced supply chain [0] and battery problems on the 787 which meant that they had less financial resources available to go clean sheet and instead they adapted an old design.

[0] https://www.consultancy.uk/news/297/outsourcing-main-cause-f...

I call these strategies "bonuses today, bankruptcy tomorrow".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com