▲ 161 ▼ South Korea plane crash, Boeing 737-800 from Jeju air (i.imgur.com) submitted 2 years ago by IndustryStandard@lemmy.world to c/crazyfuckingvideos@lemmy.world 50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) According to another poster its a 15 year old plane. This ain't a manufacturer issue. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] herrvogel@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) At 15 years old a decently maintained plane is going to have like another decade in it. Maybe more. That's not that high a number. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) I know - but it has another decade with proper maintenance. Blaming the manufacturer 15 years ago has come and passed- that aircraft has had thousands of basic inspections, and probably hundreds more replacement parts, in depth inspections and rectified faults. Probably the only thing still original is the frame and skin. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 2 years ago The design is in large part responsible for detecting failures. If Boeing designed the plane without redundant sensors or failsafes these things happen. Whose fault it is cannot be concluded yet, but Boeing could be partially to blame. In the past everything had many failsafes but Boeing removed them to cut cost. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] herrvogel@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) At 15 years old a decently maintained plane is going to have like another decade in it. Maybe more. That's not that high a number. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) I know - but it has another decade with proper maintenance. Blaming the manufacturer 15 years ago has come and passed- that aircraft has had thousands of basic inspections, and probably hundreds more replacement parts, in depth inspections and rectified faults. Probably the only thing still original is the frame and skin. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 2 years ago The design is in large part responsible for detecting failures. If Boeing designed the plane without redundant sensors or failsafes these things happen. Whose fault it is cannot be concluded yet, but Boeing could be partially to blame. In the past everything had many failsafes but Boeing removed them to cut cost. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) I know - but it has another decade with proper maintenance. Blaming the manufacturer 15 years ago has come and passed- that aircraft has had thousands of basic inspections, and probably hundreds more replacement parts, in depth inspections and rectified faults. Probably the only thing still original is the frame and skin. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 2 years ago The design is in large part responsible for detecting failures. If Boeing designed the plane without redundant sensors or failsafes these things happen. Whose fault it is cannot be concluded yet, but Boeing could be partially to blame. In the past everything had many failsafes but Boeing removed them to cut cost. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world [S] 2 points 2 years ago The design is in large part responsible for detecting failures. If Boeing designed the plane without redundant sensors or failsafes these things happen. Whose fault it is cannot be concluded yet, but Boeing could be partially to blame. In the past everything had many failsafes but Boeing removed them to cut cost. permalink fedilink source parent