Whistleblower 'would not' put family on Boeing 787 jet
Whistleblower 'would not' put family on Boeing 787 jet
www.bbc.com
Boeing whistleblower airs concerns on 787
76 comments
-
Having the public lose trust in the safety of flying is absolutely not something you want to happen. This could have devastating effects and I think enough is enough and the government needs to step in and take over running the airlines. It's too important to leave gold hoarding dragons in charge of it.
-
Boeing is the only company actually trying to reach their net zero target. Once no Boeing plane are flying anymore that's it, no more CO2 emissions
-
Silver lining: less flights booked means less emissions for the environment.
-
Iirc the increase in people driving instead of flying due to 911, lead to more accidents and deaths. :(
-
I think the problem is that this will likely lead to more driving instead of flying.
-
Maybe even a return to train travel.
-
That’s not a silver lining at all. Jets are actually very fuel efficient compared to driving when they’re full of passengers.
One less plane in the air could potentially mean 300+ more cars on the road. Not a great outcome.
-
Gold lining: Never go home for Holidays
Platinum Lining: Work from Home is even more commonplace, and no more random flights to the office, or on-site.
-
-
Having the public lose trust in the safety of flying is something I absolutely want to happen. This will have devastating effects on carbon emissions, and push more people (and governments) towards trains.
-
Devastating is a bit of an exaggeration with it being responsible for a whooping 3% (at most) of emissions and arguably helping raise the albedo a bit with their contrails.
So it would help a bit, it wouldn't be a game changer though (except if you live near an airport, sound is another pollution that's often ignored).
-
I would rather we start using blimos what can we do towards that
-
I mean, I don’t think that’s the way to go about it. Trains don’t take me to my family across the planet in 11 hours. I’d prefer to feel secure when flying there.
-
-
Why promote flying? Why not invest heavily in really fast ground transportation? Let's build a bullet train between major hubs so people have a choice. If there's a serious competitor to flying, Boeing will have to improve or they'll lose a ton of business.
If the government takes over airlines or airplane manufacturing, we'll just end up with lots of cronyism.
I say start with LA to SF and LA to LV. The current infra there sucks, and there's a lot of worthwhile stops along the way. Then perhaps upgrade NYC to DC and related lines. It'll be incredibly expensive to roll out, but should be very cheap to run and maintain.
-
The government has already stepped in several times. If you’re in the mood to get mad, read up on the results of these interventions. Basically, Boeing was almost forced to deal with actual oversight, but was able to convince the government at the last minute that they could handle the oversight themselves internally (thanks to the wonderful process of lobbying of course)
-
The above comment means to nationalize the industry I think. That's what it sounds like to me, and I agree it'd be a good step. In addition to safety, it'd stop them from their bullshit price gouging.
-
-
It's not about trust in flying it's about trust in Boeing. Slight difference.
-
so, it's about trust in half of flying
-
Boeing was being brash until they got caught with their pants down.
You know for sure that shit happens at other manufacturers but they kept it low, and they probably are tightening their QA to not fall to scrutiny.
I hope that this will trigger heavy scrutiny from the different bodies across the world to make sure that this shit doesn't happen anymore, but that hope is naive.
-
-
Boeing isn't an airline...
-
The government already heavily subsidizes the "struggling" industry (that somehow still makes outrageous profits). The government really should exercise more control over the industry, given that they (we) pay a very high annual price for it to exist.
-
They used to... one of carters biggest blunders.
-
-
Come on, it only effects like 1/4 of the economy.
-
- Normal people work on planes
- Government takes over
- Government hires contractors
- Contractors are normal people
- Profit
-
Welcome to this Boeing 737, thanks to government regulations each seat is fitted with a cop that will feel you up through the flight. If you don't put your phone in airplane mode he or she will shoot you in the back 10 times only. 7 crashes per year is the legal limit and we already had 6 so you are all lucky!
-
-
"If it's Boing, I'm not going"
-
Boing
When the plugdoor hinge consultant is asked how to spell Boeing
-
Took the "open-door policy" too literally.
-
-
"Boing" is the sound the door makes when hitting the ground.
-
-
I'm just waiting for the warcries of WWIII so I can buy Boeing stock as it bottoms out before daddy Warbucks saves them, and hopefully me! 🤞
-
Boeing's hitman:
-
I've had a lot of trouble searching for a concrete answer to this, but does anyone know what percentage of commercial jets in the US are made by Boeing? I know it's a duopoly between them and Airbus, but to what extent is Boeing's domination?
-
Unsubstantiated guess, but based on a cursory search for flights on Delta, it seems like 90% are Boeing.
-
2 years old, but should be somewhat indicative. A lot of em seem to be 50/50 Airbus/Boeing (except Southwest, yikes), but anecdotally I’ve flown 4 times and it’s always been a Boeing.
edit: hey don’t downvote the guy I’m replying to. if you follow the steps he did you’ll come to the same conclusion. despite the makeup of their fleet, the majority of flights being offered (at least within the US) are on boeings.
-
-
-
We've got a turd in the punch bowl
76 comments