I don't know that I agree with the thrust of this writer's argument, because I don't think that whether or not it's a more dangerous year on average is the issue. The fact that Boeing's planes are so shoddily built that it has the potential for things to get much worse is much higher than it used to be. The implication seems to be that we shouldn't be concerned about the issues with the 737 MAX because this is an average year for accidents.
this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
34 points (82.7% liked)
News
36891 readers
2723 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
aside from recently, when was the last time an airplane's door plug was ripped from the fuselage?
Like the premise is that on average things aren't any worse. But there's mechanical issues... and then there's "Supposedly-permanently-installed-panels" getting ripped off the side of the plane. or like the MCAS system and the headaches that caused.
This is definitely a case of selective statistics.
It's also the nature of the problems. It's one thing for something to fail due to difficult to detect material defects or weird freak mechanical stresses. It's entirely a different matter for things to fail because of just blatantly shoddy work or because the entire design is fundamentally broken. The kinds of failures Boeing has been experiencing are very much the latter not the former. They're the sort of things that shouldn't ever happen and yet they seem to have become the new normal for Boeing.
Whatever your opinion on the subject is, I thought this was pretty incredible for aviation in general:
That’s a safety record of about one or two passenger fatalities per light-year traveled.
The metric to measure the distance is a bit weird. Revenue passenger miles. Does that mean a 1000 miles flight with 200 people is 200,000 miles in this unit? Because that is already like a light second
It really is an astounding safety record compared to ground transport of all kinds. Literally every American can name several personal acquaintances who died or were severely injured in car crashes, but nobody thinks twice about automotive travel.
tl;dr, no:
Are more planes having incidents than ever before? Or are we just hearing about more incidents? It’s mostly the latter.
It's the hot news thing, so any minor incident gets published to capitalize on those sweet, sweet ad impressions.
Or it's the effort of a PR firm trying to redirect attention away from Boeing's abysmal quality control and management blundering.
It's not really minor when Boeing has to just admit they don't have records on important manufacturing processes.