Hacker News Reader

The whole incident was because of 0.2mm offset in a machined part! And the company that made the part ignored the quality compliance process was not fired. I wonder why - did Airbus think it’s their failure not to verify that the subcontractor adhered to procedures?

View on HN

This feels more like engine manufacturer QC rather than anything Airbus.

Because also, from Wikipedia: On 22 June 2011, Qantas announced that it had agreed to a compensation of AUD$95 million (£62 million/US$100 million) from Rolls-Royce. - skipping Airbus entirely.

The whole business of airliners engines is fascinating in its own.

AIUI when you're buying a plane from Airbus, it's possible/frequent to own the _airframe_; but not the engines — the engines are often _leased_ (sometimes directly from RR/GE); I've even heard of cases where each engine will be owned by a different entity!

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/12528/jet-engin...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com