Another Boeing plane loses panel mid-air

[Robo Ga 15,615]

3 hours ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

This is why Wall St chuds who only care about the bottom line shouldn’t be running the world 

Exactly. This is the real world example of profits over anything

It manifests in so many ways but this is a visual of how cutting corners can kill people and its v scary

[Economy 52,901]

5 hours ago, Morphine Prince said:

Reminder that the Trump admin largely deregulated the airline industry and gave billions to them to bail them out during COVID. 

Was it given or loaned?

 

Here in Canada they got loans (that had to be payed back and i believe also some shares bought)

 

I only ask cuz ppl here in Canada also used language like "gave away money to airlines" which isnt factually true. Loans or bought shares is not the same as giving away money

 

CERB checks which everyday people got was free money as those didnt have to be repayed. But most money lent to businesses was loaned, not given

[Ladle Ghoulash 54,013]

8 minutes ago, Economy said:

Was it given or loaned?

 

Here in Canada they got loans (that had to be payed back and i believe also some shares bought)

 

I only ask cuz ppl here in Canada also used language like "gave away money to airlines" which isnt factually true. Loans or bought shares is not the same as giving away money

 

CERB checks which everyday people got was free money as those didnt have to be repayed. But most money lent to businesses was loaned, not given

So it was a $60B PPP loan, but to my understanding, a lot of PPP loans given during COVID were not necessarily expected to be repaid, as they were  sometimes conditional (must be used in this way etc.) or could also be forgiven (which was largely the case. The gov’t forgave billions in COVID PPP loans). Not sure which applies here, but all I’m saying is they likely did not have to repay, thus making it essentially a bailout.

[Future Lovers 7,680]

Absolutely begging people to stop losing their minds over this stuff. 

No one has been injured. No one has died. In many of these cases, the issue was with the AIRLINE and NOT Boeing themselves. 

The media loves to sensationalize air incidents. Why? Because they’re rare. There has not been a fatal air crash in the US since 2009 and they’re desperate to latch onto any sort of mechanical issue and turn it into a near death experience.

None of the planes that have had incidents in the last couple of months was EVER even close to crashing. At no point were the pilots or cabin crew EVER out of control of the situation. Airplanes are built with multiple failsafes. Airplanes can even stay airborne for a great deal of time even if both engines completely shut off. These flights making emergency landings were not landing because they were in danger of crashing, they were landing because they were flying close enough to an airport (which is a law) to immediately touch down and assess the problem and tend to any passengers that may be hurt (and there were none). 

The media doesn’t know how airplanes work, nor do they know the actual details of what happened in these incidents they’re reporting. They will make it sound infinitely worse than it was in actuality because it drives clicks and engagement. 

Boeing planes are safe. Why? Because they’re currently the single most scrutinized planes in the sky. And if the FAA has found they were unfit to be in the air, they wouldn’t be. 

Please god stop falling for the media’s nonsense around this whole thing. 

[Future Lovers 7,680]

5 hours ago, Edonis said:

It absolutely does not.

It does. 

The only wildly abnormal thing that has happened on a Boeing is the door on Alaska Air which is a design flaw that has been fixed. Instrument panel problems, shedding landing gear, all of it happens all the time and you never hear about it.

Know why?

Because it isn’t serious. The media would like you to believe it is but not a single one of the issues that have been reported on in regards to Boeing ever put the plane in danger of crashing. Not one. Zero.

You’re only hearing about this because of the media storm, which will go away.  

[Future Lovers 7,680]

3 hours ago, Pennywise said:

I have four Boeing flights in May and June 

Boeing 737-800 (domestic) (with United )

Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner (intercontinental) (Also with United )

Boeing 737-800 (international) (x2)

 

bye sistren I guess 

The Dreamliner is my personal favorite commercial aircraft in flight. Quiet, spacious, state of the art, and far and away the best seats on any plane in the sky. Even better than airbus.

The 737 variants are also quite nice planes, and don’t let the media firestorm right now convince you otherwise. Their track record speaks for itself. There are hundreds of these planes all over the world making a collective hundreds of thousands of flights year over year and yet we have a whopping handful of non-fatal, not uncommon, very much not life threatening incidents that are making everyone afraid to do the safest form of travel known to man.

Let me know how you like the Dreamliner. It’s a privilege to fly on one!  

[Morphine Prince 109,712]

1 hour ago, Economy said:

Was it given or loaned?

 

Here in Canada they got loans (that had to be payed back and i believe also some shares bought)

 

I only ask cuz ppl here in Canada also used language like "gave away money to airlines" which isnt factually true. Loans or bought shares is not the same as giving away money

 

CERB checks which everyday people got was free money as those didnt have to be repayed. But most money lent to businesses was loaned, not given

This is what I found: 

"Out of $54 billion, airlines must repay $14 billion, or 26.2%, and Treasury holds warrants currently worth approximately $200 million, a Commerce Committee memo says. Treasury also extended $25 billion in low-cost government loans to carriers." 

[David Ward 9,613]

43 minutes ago, Future Lovers said:

Absolutely begging people to stop losing their minds over this stuff. 

No one has been injured. No one has died. In many of these cases, the issue was with the AIRLINE and NOT Boeing themselves. 

The media loves to sensationalize air incidents. Why? Because they’re rare. There has not been a fatal air crash in the US since 2009 and they’re desperate to latch onto any sort of mechanical issue and turn it into a near death experience.

None of the planes that have had incidents in the last couple of months was EVER even close to crashing. At no point were the pilots or cabin crew EVER out of control of the situation. Airplanes are built with multiple failsafes. Airplanes can even stay airborne for a great deal of time even if both engines completely shut off. These flights making emergency landings were not landing because they were in danger of crashing, they were landing because they were flying close enough to an airport (which is a law) to immediately touch down and assess the problem and tend to any passengers that may be hurt (and there were none). 

The media doesn’t know how airplanes work, nor do they know the actual details of what happened in these incidents they’re reporting. They will make it sound infinitely worse than it was in actuality because it drives clicks and engagement. 

Boeing planes are safe. Why? Because they’re currently the single most scrutinized planes in the sky. And if the FAA has found they were unfit to be in the air, they wouldn’t be. 

Please god stop falling for the media’s nonsense around this whole thing. 

It's true that sensationalism exists in media coverage, however, dismissing concerns about recent flight mishaps involving Boeing is overly simplistic and potentially dangerous. 

While it's fortunate that there haven't been fatalities, we must acknowledge that incidents can serve as warnings of potential issues that need to be addressed. Waiting for a catastrophic event before taking action is not a prudent approach to safety.

The fact that Boeing planes are under intense scrutiny is not necessarily a guarantee of safety. Regulatory agencies like the FAA work to mitigate risks, but they also have limitations and can be influenced by various factors including political and economic pressures. Past incidents, such as the Boeing 737 MAX crashes, have revealed shortcomings in both Boeing's practices and regulatory oversight.

[Pennywise 36,080]

1 hour ago, Future Lovers said:

The Dreamliner is my personal favorite commercial aircraft in flight. Quiet, spacious, state of the art, and far and away the best seats on any plane in the sky. Even better than airbus.

The 737 variants are also quite nice planes, and don’t let the media firestorm right now convince you otherwise. Their track record speaks for itself. There are hundreds of these planes all over the world making a collective hundreds of thousands of flights year over year and yet we have a whopping handful of non-fatal, not uncommon, very much not life threatening incidents that are making everyone afraid to do the safest form of travel known to man.

Let me know how you like the Dreamliner. It’s a privilege to fly on one!  

Oh I never flew on the dreamliner before, I think. Not that I would know, but I know for a fact that I never flew on a comfortable plane, lmao. 

 

I'll talk about how it goes if I remember. It's gonna be like a 10+hour flight, so it better be comfortable, I hope  

[Pennywise 36,080]

1 hour ago, Future Lovers said:

The Dreamliner is my personal favorite commercial aircraft in flight. Quiet, spacious, state of the art, and far and away the best seats on any plane in the sky. Even better than airbus.

The 737 variants are also quite nice planes, and don’t let the media firestorm right now convince you otherwise. Their track record speaks for itself. There are hundreds of these planes all over the world making a collective hundreds of thousands of flights year over year and yet we have a whopping handful of non-fatal, not uncommon, very much not life threatening incidents that are making everyone afraid to do the safest form of travel known to man.

Let me know how you like the Dreamliner. It’s a privilege to fly on one!  

What do you think about this incident where plane dropped like 500 feet instantly, I think this is the one that scared me the most and I need reassurance 

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/12/australia/latam-airlines-flight-injuries-new-zealand-tuesday-intl-hnk/index.html

 

oh, and the fact that Boeing, apparently, murdered a whistleblower, does not make me feel calm either 

[Future Lovers 7,680]

1 hour ago, David Ward said:

It's true that sensationalism exists in media coverage, however, dismissing concerns about recent flight mishaps involving Boeing is overly simplistic and potentially dangerous. 

While it's fortunate that there haven't been fatalities, we must acknowledge that incidents can serve as warnings of potential issues that need to be addressed. Waiting for a catastrophic event before taking action is not a prudent approach to safety.

The fact that Boeing planes are under intense scrutiny is not necessarily a guarantee of safety. Regulatory agencies like the FAA work to mitigate risks, but they also have limitations and can be influenced by various factors including political and economic pressures. Past incidents, such as the Boeing 737 MAX crashes, have revealed shortcomings in both Boeing's practices and regulatory oversight.

I would absolutely agree with you if any single one of these issues other than the door (which is fixed) was not commonplace across every type of airplane from Airbus to Boeing to the old DC-10s but they’re are. We just don’t hear about them because they’re usually not newsworthy. Not a single one of these things is irregular, uncommon, or even really dangerous to anyone that was on board. 

Every single emergency landing that has made the news the last 10 days could have safely completed their flight. They only didn’t because of the airline policy, not because they were unable to. That is true for 99.99% of emergency landings, but unfortunately most of the general public interprets that term to mean the plane is in imminent danger.  

The only prominent failure the 737 MAX has shown is the MCAS system which was not even an actual failure of the system (it was working perfectly in both crashes) but a failure in keeping with redundancy policy (which is incredibly rare across all manufacturers—especially Beoing—and was an issue exclusive to one specific type of aircraft) and airlines not properly training the pilots on how to interpret that system (both issues have since been resolved). 

None of these are warnings. These exact same things happen constantly on every type of plane, they’re only making news right now with Boeing because it’s a hot topic.

Planes are complex machines that have millions of parts to them, and it’s inevitable that sometimes these parts will fail. Boring and the airlines flying them have detailed and complex procedures for how to address it when they do, and the same planes that experience these failures can be in the air again in most cases a day later. 

We have yet to see a single incident beyond that door that is out of the realm of normalcy for commercial aviation, and no I do not count MCAS because is is impossible for that specific issue to ever happen again. 

[HelloHangoverz 17,452]

6 hours ago, weed said:

girl I'm gonna be flying in May and even before I knew I was I was having nightmares of being in plane crashes and I still do sometimes  ofc it's factually very rare but hope you have a safe flight mama! 

I'm flying in May too and I just KNOW I'm gonna get that funky plane straight off the production line waved through without supervisor checks. I try not to be some pearl clutching Karen who gets scared at the news but I'm scared 

[HelloHangoverz 17,452]

I know it sounds a lil derivative or basic but this is honestly why I can't stand capitalism. They'll be all sorts of meetings that happen at Boeing about we care about our customers, and safety but it's literally all bollocks. I want to see heads on spikes, I really do 

[weed 79,043]

1 minute ago, HelloHangoverz said:

I'm flying in May too and I just KNOW I'm gonna get that funky plane straight off the production line waved through without supervisor checks. I try not to be some pearl clutching Karen who gets scared at the news but I'm scared 

Girllll our brains are feeling hostile!! If not a janky plane (so scared of that lol) I am scared that my plane will get shot out of the sky by Russia or something as we're going to Poland and tensions are just escalating everywhere  a queen is SCARED! Manifesting our safety in May and forever after 

[Future Lovers 7,680]

41 minutes ago, Pennywise said:

What do you think about this incident where plane dropped like 500 feet instantly, I think this is the one that scared me the most and I need reassurance 

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/12/australia/latam-airlines-flight-injuries-new-zealand-tuesday-intl-hnk/index.html

I don't think anything of it because 

1) The investigation is not complete yet 

2) The 500 feet quote is more than likely an interpretation of what it felt like rather than what actually took place (and I'll explain why in just a moment)

3) This occurred over a matter of seconds

4) It is not possible for a plane to just drop out of the sky which is what I referenced in #2 

To explain #4 more:

Think of the air like a big bowl of jello. Jello is a semi-solid and when you stick something into it, that thing stays suspended within the jello. That is what a plane does on the air. Though we think of the air as thin and light, when you're moving at the speed an airplane is, the air is thick and heavy. Think of when you put your hand out of the moving car window and it glides on the air and it's impossible for you to push it down without concentrated effort. That is what happens to a plane up in the air moving at speed.  

The air is physically keeping your plane in the air. This happens because planes are designed to create their own lift by the way the air comes off of the wings (this is why the wings and slats are sloped). It is not scientifically possible for an airplane to simply drop out of the sky, even in turbulence. In turbulence, yes a plane can lose some altitude of a couple of hundred feet, but even then it is not possible for the plane to lose flight. Physics doesn't work that way. 

The absolute only way that a plane can fall from the sky is if there is an input, intentional or unintentional, from a flight control to make that happen. In some high profile accidents in the past, this is what sent a plane down: a failure that emulated an input control. 

Did you know that a plane will not even fall from the sky if it loses both of it's engines at the same time? It will simply continue to glide on the air, making a slow, gradual descent that the pilot will be in total control of provided the engine failure was not the result of an incident that destroyed the plane in the air. 

But the brilliant thing about these crashes is that it led to the thing that caused them being fixed and it is not possible for them to happen anymore. If you'd like me to tell you about some specific crashes that led to changes to make a repeat impossible, I can. 

I will also add that what we feel inside of an airplane is not always (in fact is rarely) a reflection of reality. In an airplane, we cannot see forward, only to the side and in limited capacity. That means our brains cannot truly rationalize what each movement of the plane is. Example: when a plane turns, it feels like an incredibly steep bank angle to us when in reality, it is not possible due to the programs on airplanes for a plane to bank more than 30 degrees via steering input. Another example: when we take off, the incline feels steep when it's in reality only around 15 degrees nose up. 

All that to say, sensations within an airplane are not reliable. It may feel like they were in a free fall for 500+ feet, but the chances of that being accurate are incredibly low. Did they lose some altitude quickly? Probably yes. To a dangerous degree? Nope! Was anyone who was wearing a seatbelt hurt? Nope! Were the people who weren't wearing a seatbelt and therefore got injured injured in any way that was threatening to their life, required hospitalization, or anything like that? Nope! 

There has not been a fatal air crash in the US in 15 years. To put that into context, there are an average of 46,000 flights every day in the US. That's an average of 16.4 million flights per year. So in the fifteen years since that 2009 crash, there's been about 246 million flights. All 246 million of them landed without a single fatality, and less than 1% of them landed due to any sort of emergency.