▲ 735 ▼ Nose wheel falls off Boeing 757 airliner waiting for takeoff (www.theguardian.com) submitted 2 years ago by Womble@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 157 comments fedilink hide all child comments Because Boeing were on such a good streak already...
[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 76 points 2 years ago (9 children) Which, as we know, is not supposed to happen. permalink fedilink source hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 29 points 2 years ago (7 children) Wasn't it built so that the nose wheel wouldn't fall off? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (3 children) That design choice was revolutionary at the time. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (2 children) I don't know where to put it but here's about MCAS anyway, the cost-cutting system meant to keep Boeing in the game, but also took over flight controls sometimes and nose dived planes straight into the ground, causing hundreds (some say thousands!) of fatalities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuvering_Characteristics_Augmentation_System permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wikibot@lemmy.world [B] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Here's the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment: The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) is a flight stabilizing feature developed by Boeing that became notorious for its role in two fatal accidents of the 737 MAX, which killed all 346 passengers and crew among both flights. Systems similar to the Boeing 737 MCAS were previously included on the Boeing 707 and Boeing KC-46, a 767 variant. On the 737 MAX, MCAS was intended to mimic the flight behavior of the previous generation of the series, the Boeing 737 NG. During MAX flight tests, Boeing discovered that the position and larger size of the engines tended to push the nose up during certain maneuvers. Engineers decided to use MCAS to counter that tendency, since major structural redesign would have been prohibitively expensive and time-consuming. ^to^ ^opt^ ^out^^,^ ^pm^ ^me^ ^'optout'.^ ^article^ ^|^ ^about^ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago I'm starting to think Boeing is under bad management. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Welt@lazysoci.al 12 points 2 years ago The front fell off, so just tow it outside the environment permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rob@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago Well obviously not… Because the nose wheel fell off. permalink fedilink source parent [–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Yes but probably management saw that as a problem limiting the future wheel assembly purchases. I mean you can land without the wheel right? permalink fedilink source parent [+] CH3DD4R_G0BL1N@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 29 points 2 years ago (7 children) Wasn't it built so that the nose wheel wouldn't fall off? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (3 children) That design choice was revolutionary at the time. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (2 children) I don't know where to put it but here's about MCAS anyway, the cost-cutting system meant to keep Boeing in the game, but also took over flight controls sometimes and nose dived planes straight into the ground, causing hundreds (some say thousands!) of fatalities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuvering_Characteristics_Augmentation_System permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wikibot@lemmy.world [B] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Here's the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment: The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) is a flight stabilizing feature developed by Boeing that became notorious for its role in two fatal accidents of the 737 MAX, which killed all 346 passengers and crew among both flights. Systems similar to the Boeing 737 MCAS were previously included on the Boeing 707 and Boeing KC-46, a 767 variant. On the 737 MAX, MCAS was intended to mimic the flight behavior of the previous generation of the series, the Boeing 737 NG. During MAX flight tests, Boeing discovered that the position and larger size of the engines tended to push the nose up during certain maneuvers. Engineers decided to use MCAS to counter that tendency, since major structural redesign would have been prohibitively expensive and time-consuming. ^to^ ^opt^ ^out^^,^ ^pm^ ^me^ ^'optout'.^ ^article^ ^|^ ^about^ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago I'm starting to think Boeing is under bad management. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Welt@lazysoci.al 12 points 2 years ago The front fell off, so just tow it outside the environment permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rob@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago Well obviously not… Because the nose wheel fell off. permalink fedilink source parent [–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Yes but probably management saw that as a problem limiting the future wheel assembly purchases. I mean you can land without the wheel right? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (3 children) That design choice was revolutionary at the time. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (2 children) I don't know where to put it but here's about MCAS anyway, the cost-cutting system meant to keep Boeing in the game, but also took over flight controls sometimes and nose dived planes straight into the ground, causing hundreds (some say thousands!) of fatalities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuvering_Characteristics_Augmentation_System permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wikibot@lemmy.world [B] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Here's the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment: The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) is a flight stabilizing feature developed by Boeing that became notorious for its role in two fatal accidents of the 737 MAX, which killed all 346 passengers and crew among both flights. Systems similar to the Boeing 737 MCAS were previously included on the Boeing 707 and Boeing KC-46, a 767 variant. On the 737 MAX, MCAS was intended to mimic the flight behavior of the previous generation of the series, the Boeing 737 NG. During MAX flight tests, Boeing discovered that the position and larger size of the engines tended to push the nose up during certain maneuvers. Engineers decided to use MCAS to counter that tendency, since major structural redesign would have been prohibitively expensive and time-consuming. ^to^ ^opt^ ^out^^,^ ^pm^ ^me^ ^'optout'.^ ^article^ ^|^ ^about^ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago I'm starting to think Boeing is under bad management. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (2 children) I don't know where to put it but here's about MCAS anyway, the cost-cutting system meant to keep Boeing in the game, but also took over flight controls sometimes and nose dived planes straight into the ground, causing hundreds (some say thousands!) of fatalities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuvering_Characteristics_Augmentation_System permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wikibot@lemmy.world [B] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Here's the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment: The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) is a flight stabilizing feature developed by Boeing that became notorious for its role in two fatal accidents of the 737 MAX, which killed all 346 passengers and crew among both flights. Systems similar to the Boeing 737 MCAS were previously included on the Boeing 707 and Boeing KC-46, a 767 variant. On the 737 MAX, MCAS was intended to mimic the flight behavior of the previous generation of the series, the Boeing 737 NG. During MAX flight tests, Boeing discovered that the position and larger size of the engines tended to push the nose up during certain maneuvers. Engineers decided to use MCAS to counter that tendency, since major structural redesign would have been prohibitively expensive and time-consuming. ^to^ ^opt^ ^out^^,^ ^pm^ ^me^ ^'optout'.^ ^article^ ^|^ ^about^ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago I'm starting to think Boeing is under bad management. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] wikibot@lemmy.world [B] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) Here's the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment: The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) is a flight stabilizing feature developed by Boeing that became notorious for its role in two fatal accidents of the 737 MAX, which killed all 346 passengers and crew among both flights. Systems similar to the Boeing 737 MCAS were previously included on the Boeing 707 and Boeing KC-46, a 767 variant. On the 737 MAX, MCAS was intended to mimic the flight behavior of the previous generation of the series, the Boeing 737 NG. During MAX flight tests, Boeing discovered that the position and larger size of the engines tended to push the nose up during certain maneuvers. Engineers decided to use MCAS to counter that tendency, since major structural redesign would have been prohibitively expensive and time-consuming. ^to^ ^opt^ ^out^^,^ ^pm^ ^me^ ^'optout'.^ ^article^ ^|^ ^about^ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago I'm starting to think Boeing is under bad management. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] anarchy79@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago I'm starting to think Boeing is under bad management. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Welt@lazysoci.al 12 points 2 years ago The front fell off, so just tow it outside the environment permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rob@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago Well obviously not… Because the nose wheel fell off. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Yes but probably management saw that as a problem limiting the future wheel assembly purchases. I mean you can land without the wheel right? permalink fedilink source parent