Boeing 737 Max again, it would be nice if the windows [door plugs] stayed in!

[Analog Kid]

What?! To embrace DEI in any way is to toss the goal of hiring the MOST competent people and to use other criteria. By definition!

Not necessarily.
Playing devil's advocate here, DEI in theory at least means using measures other than competence when competence has been shown and when two applicants are roughly equally qualified.

In theory.

Companies that implement this policy aren't stupid; they realize that they can't just blindly hire or promote unqualified people to satisfy some social equity goal. (Though apparently that does happen sometimes.)

[vk6zgo]

The whole DEI controversy escapes me.

Every single report  is saying that they have to lower the bar for DEI hires.

And I argue that the bar is already as low as it goes, and can’t be made any worse with DEI hires.

What?! To embrace DEI in any way is to toss the goal of hiring the MOST competent people and to use other criteria. By definition!

Since when has HR been able to determine competence?

[wilfred]

What?! To embrace DEI in any way is to toss the goal of hiring the MOST competent people and to use other criteria. By definition!

Workplaces, schools or wherever lacking a representative cross section of the society are, by restricting certain classes, genders or races access, are necessarily not hiring from the broadest pool of talent. It is a fallacy to suggest that any restricted group selected is the best available and to broaden it is to drop merit based criteria. If any group is for example excluded based on skin colour or gender then selection is no longer merit based. Conversely selection based on gender or skin colour is also not based on merit unless it is merit within the restricted group. It is the other side of the same coin. So to redress the imbalance in order to draw from the widest group possible makes perfect sense

[coppercone2]

It should lay down, be offset, be frangible, go underground or be way further away.

It inherently cannot be offset. However it's easy to make it to give up on impact rather than act as impenetrable concrete wall. You really need to put some smooth brain effort to build it like this. They spent quite a bit of extra money to build that fortification.

Are you sure it can't be offset? Perhaps you can put the transmitters to the side and aim them at some sort of reflector. Perhaps a VHF meta material, that is lightly plated plastic, so the plane can go through it like a fruit stand (it says its around 100MHz)

I think that is kind of one of the things you can do with advanced RF meta materials, maybe. Kind of like a advanced passive repeater


Or something else, like a very fat underground wave guide that just is aimed at a reflector that is built so if you push on it, it lays down.

If you can do some trick like that, it might be easier to make then trying to make a reliable but flimsy traditional antenna.

I believe you can make things that kind of like... are somewhat insensitive to incident directions?

[tooki]

Boeing is a military contractor, it sounds so sloppy. To be fair the FCC share blame needs to have staff in both facilities taking
pictures, inspections.

The FCC definitely isn't in charge of aircraft manufacturing oversight.

Tooki,

My understanding of US inspection policy is that agencies may designate individuals who serve as contract inspectors on site.  There was a time when a federal inspector was on site, for everything from food processing to aircraft certification.  But as citizens demanded fewer govt employees, this approach evolved.  It is even reflected in education by our accreditation bodies approved by the Dept of Education to verify educational institutions meet standards, from elementary school to medical residencies.

But in all cases, the final responsibility rests with the designating agency.

So from my point of view, yes the FAA is involved, and yes they have responsibility for the fiasco.  What makes it worse is that this scenario has been a very slow moving train wreck since at least the 1990s.

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/designees_delegations/individual_designees/manufacturing

(very very late reply, sorry!)
Everything you say about FAA oversight is correct.

But I didn’t say FAA. Nor did the person I was lightly mocking.

I stand by my statement that I am quite certain the FCC is not in charge of aircraft manufacturing oversight!

[tszaboo]

Since when has HR been able to determine competence?

Since never, they don't understand the difference between electrical and electronics.
And the whole conversation is bad. We go into the details and intentions. It doesn't matter.

It's discrimination, which is illegal. It doesn't matter if it's positive or negative it's still illegal.
And it is not explicitly illegal. Then we will elect someone, anyone really, who will make it illegal. Even if that person is the devil himself with horns.

[RJSV]

   If we are arguing today, on who is worse,  The devil, or, Hitler, then it's junkified and waste of time.  Some public figures have,  shifted their 'Hitler' narratives, lately,  which makes them appear to be flakey.

   In reply#452, above,  the claim is made that DEI is applied in view of so-called 'racial' bias,  while all the applicants are technically qualified.
When pressed for PROOF,  their whole argument breaks down.
   Then, they offer as proof,  some factual account of racial motivated 'lynchings' from, like, 1922.

    It's all such a faulty waste,  some of the dialog.  I've seen some racially based shit-talk, so it's still present,  but those doing that seem very old, or off in the margins....not some current day corporation.

[MT]

3 years ago. Boeing’s 737 Max Software Outsourced to $9-an-Hour Engineers.
https://archive.ph/vdg9S

[coppice]

3 years ago. Boeing’s 737 Max Software Outsourced to $9-an-Hour Engineers.
https://archive.ph/vdg9S

That number gets quoted like it should alarm people. The full quote is "workers making as little as $9 an hour to develop and test software", so its the starting point. Its not that far below minimum wage in some European countries, and there are plenty of people with entry level software jobs getting little more than minimum wage. The real question is what level of expertise did the senior people on these projects bring to the table?

[SteveThackery]

Re. the recent accident, I wonder why the aircraft landed without the landing gear down and without any flaps deployed. Very odd.

[tszaboo]

Re. the recent accident, I wonder why the aircraft landed without the landing gear down and without any flaps deployed. Very odd.

Hydraulic failure. By recent accident which one do you mean, there was like 4 just in the past week. If you don't count the russians shooting down a commercial plane yet again then 3.

[floobydust]

The 737 hydraulic system is highly fault-tolerant and redundant, an engine failure would not take it out. It's of course well thought out. There's even hydraulic fuses which trip if a line loses pressure, to prevent emptying reservoir fluid.
That the plane's locator turned off after the strike, no flaps or landing gear deployed implies a control failure, maybe electrical. I don't know how much the two systems are interwoven.


On the DEI issue, a huge problem I've seen is hiring immigrant "engineers" amidst the business cries that "there are no qualified people". No, actually there are plenty of qualified technical people - it's just that you don't want to pay for them. Recently Elon Musk has stirred up the pot over this and H1B because he wants cheap skilled people, so screw the country - let's import them. But... HR cannot and does not verify their international credentials. There is a language barrier and easy to fake graduating from an institution etc. I've worked with a few immigrant engineer hires and it's your basic disaster in that they have fake abilities, they've lied.

Boeing outsourced MCAS to a third-world country full of people claiming to have experience and credentials in aviation - despite the country having no aviation manufacturing industry, they do not even make airplanes 
I think it's the usual - you can sell cars/planes etc. to our country if you use our people and set up shop manufacturing here. The S/W outsourcing may have been to elude regulatory scrutiny, save money, appear to develop the (flight control) technology in the country.
My point is those politics overruled any decent engineering effort, and then people wonder why people got killed. Engineering comes first when you want safety, not profit or politics.

[magic]

It's money. You wouldn't find competent software engineers for $9/hr here, maybe not even farther east in the former USSR.

So I wonder where those $9 guys may have been from (well, I actually don't, everybody knows the answer )

[vad]

Re. the recent accident, I wonder why the aircraft landed without the landing gear down and without any flaps deployed. Very odd.

Hydraulic failure. By recent accident which one do you mean, there was like 4 just in the past week. If you don't count the russians shooting down a commercial plane yet again then 3.

Unlikely cause. On the Boeing 737, the landing gear can be manually extended by pulling manual levers in the event of complete hydraulic failure. This system relies on gravity and free-fall - pulling manual extension levers engages cables that unlock the landing gear uplocks, allowing the gear to drop into place under its own weight.

[Analog Kid]

Let's wait until they release the black box data before jumping to conclusions here.

[Gyro]

Re. the recent accident, I wonder why the aircraft landed without the landing gear down and without any flaps deployed. Very odd.

Hydraulic failure. By recent accident which one do you mean, there was like 4 just in the past week. If you don't count the russians shooting down a commercial plane yet again then 3.

Unlikely cause. On the Boeing 737, the landing gear can be manually extended by pulling manual levers in the event of complete hydraulic failure. This system relies on gravity and free-fall - pulling manual extension levers engages cables that unlock the landing gear uplocks, allowing the gear to drop into place under its own weight.

Explained and illustrated at 12:15 in the video in Reply #440. Just pull the strings.

[floobydust]

It's money. You wouldn't find competent software engineers for $9/hr here, maybe not even farther east in the former USSR.

So I wonder where those $9 guys may have been from (well, I actually don't, everybody knows the answer )

What happens is they have fake training programs to mass produce instant credentials to put on your resume. Qualifying you to write flight control software despite never having been on an airplane. New graduates welcome!
We talk about how merit-based hiring has been tossed out with DEI, but the fake skills mill is another big problem.

How I deal with it is pretty easy - candidates get a 10 question test to complete, simple questions using Ohm's Law or common EE knowledge. No phone or google assistance, just you and your head, and plenty of time.
Another company I know gives a multimeter and dud machine to troubleshoot. Why is this dead/won't start etc.? The candidate is even paid for their time doing this test.
In both instances, the results are quite saddening. Very few can achieve a basic outcome. All the resume hype gets shattered.
Unless you spend more, offer a higher wage to the experienced people- noobs are not suitable for safety and high performance tech work.

[coppice]

It's money. You wouldn't find competent software engineers for $9/hr here, maybe not even farther east in the former USSR.

So I wonder where those $9 guys may have been from (well, I actually don't, everybody knows the answer )

I think it was clearly stated at the time to be India. Boeing has at least one operation in India. I used to frequently walk past it in Bangalore. I assume that means the $9 figure is what a Boeing employee was being paid, and not what a subcontractor was charging Boeing to do the work. It would a very low figure if it were, as subcontractors charge a lot, even if they pay very little.

Are you saying you have no juniors on software projects where you live who earn less than $9 a hour? Do you have a minimum wage there, and what is it?

[coppice]

It's money. You wouldn't find competent software engineers for $9/hr here, maybe not even farther east in the former USSR.

So I wonder where those $9 guys may have been from (well, I actually don't, everybody knows the answer )

What happens is they have fake training programs to mass produce instant credentials to put on your resume. Qualifying you to write flight control software despite never having been on an airplane. New graduates welcome!
We talk about how merit-based hiring has been tossed out with DEI, but the fake skills mill is another big problem.

How I deal with it is pretty easy - candidates get a 10 question test to complete, simple questions using Ohm's Law or common EE knowledge. No phone or google assistance, just you and your head, and plenty of time.
Another company I know gives a multimeter and dud machine to troubleshoot. Why is this dead/won't start etc.? The candidate is even paid for their time doing this test.
In both instances, the results are quite saddening. Very few can achieve a basic outcome. All the resume hype gets shattered.
Unless you spend more, offer a higher wage to the experienced people- noobs are not suitable for safety and high performance tech work.

Do you think the Indians in Boeing India are easily fooled by credential mills? That's something that happens when you are thousands of kilometres from the "institution" and have no idea what is might really be. HR in India are really tight about checking things like that. Big companies there only hire from well known colleges.

[vad]

More likely, they lost thrust in both engines and were trying to conserve energy by not deploying the flaps or extending the landing gear. In my opinion, this is also one of few plausible explanations for why they rushed to land, did not go-around, and didn’t give the airport emergency services time to prepare for an emergency landing. But I could be wrong. Hopefully voice and flight data recorders would shed light on the exact causes.

[krish2487]

On the DEI issue, a huge problem I've seen is hiring immigrant "engineers" amidst the business cries that "there are no qualified people". No, actually there are plenty of qualified technical people - it's just that you don't want to pay for them. Recently Elon Musk has stirred up the pot over this and H1B because he wants cheap skilled people, so screw the country - let's import them. But... HR cannot and does not verify their international credentials. There is a language barrier and easy to fake graduating from an institution etc. I've worked with a few immigrant engineer hires and it's your basic disaster in that they have fake abilities, they've lied.

Boeing outsourced MCAS to a third-world country full of people claiming to have experience and credentials in aviation - despite the country having no aviation manufacturing industry, they do not even make airplanes 
I think it's the usual - you can sell cars/planes etc. to our country if you use our people and set up shop manufacturing here. The S/W outsourcing may have been to elude regulatory scrutiny, save money, appear to develop the (flight control) technology in the country.
My point is those politics overruled any decent engineering effort, and then people wonder why people got killed. Engineering comes first when you want safety, not profit or politics.

And is there a point to this rant??
Maybe we should limit automotive manufacturing to germany, japan and a few other countries...
or limit rail coach manufacturing similarly??
FWIW only a handful countries have the ability to manufacture airplanes - of all sizes.. US, France, Brazil to say about the most popular manufacturers..
Are you seriously telling me that any development that any of these companies do for their planes is done entirely in their homecountries and not outsourced??
Not just software, but hardware, manufacturing, supply chain etc and so on?

Counterpoint to your argument, Apple iphone manufacturing is entirely done in China - they make good money on it AND dont compromise in quality..
What excuse does Boeing have?

[wraper]

More likely, they lost thrust in both engines and were trying to conserve energy by not deploying the flaps or extending the landing gear. In my opinion, this is also one of few plausible explanations for why they rushed to land, did not go-around, and didn’t give the airport emergency services time to prepare for an emergency landing. But I could be wrong. Hopefully voice and flight data recorders would shed light on the exact causes.

They started doing go-around after the bird strike during landing. However it looks like pilots soon realized they won't be able to do it properly due to losing thrust in both engines and did a rapid shortcut from opposite direction instead. If they had continued the initial landing attempt after the bird strike, very likely they'll be fine.

[wraper]

Effing genius.

[Analog Kid]

So do you think any heads will roll on account of that brain-damaged antenna design?

I understand that in Asian cultures like Korea, shame over incidents like this is a lot more serious than in other places.

[magic]

Counterpoint to your argument, Apple iphone manufacturing is entirely done in China - they make good money on it AND dont compromise in quality..

"Designed by Apple in California, assembled in China" is how it went