737 max loses window
Discussion
From the BBC:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-6789956...
Looks like it was an emergency exit, but not configured as one from the BBC article. Is the 737 max just unlucky, or are there now further serious questions to ask? One off or indicative of poor production quality?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-6789956...
Looks like it was an emergency exit, but not configured as one from the BBC article. Is the 737 max just unlucky, or are there now further serious questions to ask? One off or indicative of poor production quality?
craig1912 said:
Interesting FAA article,
“Do you want to fly in an airplane where they prioritized DEI hiring over your safety?“
https://nypost.com/2024/01/14/news/faas-diversity-...
Surely they can both add DEI and perform their duties safely. “Do you want to fly in an airplane where they prioritized DEI hiring over your safety?“
https://nypost.com/2024/01/14/news/faas-diversity-...
Not every role in the FAA is going to be safety critical, after all - they’ve got to have tons of back office staff…Can’t say I find anything in the article particularly worrying. It seems to be a Fox / Musk “anti-woke” load of nonsense.
ChemicalChaos said:
hidetheelephants said:
craig1912 said:
Interesting FAA article,
“Do you want to fly in an airplane where they prioritized DEI hiring over your safety?“
https://nypost.com/2024/01/14/news/faas-diversity-...
What a surprise, internet gufftraps have got excited about a hiring policy. The relevant people will still need qualifications, pilots licences, STEM degrees, etc to do the roles that demand these things. No excitement over the FAA's corporate capture by Boeing, just frothing over hiring people who can do jobs.“Do you want to fly in an airplane where they prioritized DEI hiring over your safety?“
https://nypost.com/2024/01/14/news/faas-diversity-...
https://www.discovery.org/education/2022/05/31/mov...
Secondly - just because the FAA might be keeping them away from safety critical roles, the it appears airlines may not be...
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2024/01/07/united-air...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institut...
wiki said:
The Discovery Institute (DI) is a politically conservative think tank that advocates the pseudoscientific concept of intelligent design (ID). It was founded in 199 in Seattle as a non-profit offshoot of the Hudson Institute.
Its "Teach the Controversy" campaign aims to permit the teaching of anti-evolution, intelligent-design beliefs in United States public high school science courses in place of accepted scientific theories, positing that a scientific controversy exists over these subjects when in fact there is none.
Your other article even states “Keep in mind these are unconfirmed allegations that have yet to be addressed by United Airlines.”. For unconfirmed, perhaps read unfounded? Particularly in light of:Its "Teach the Controversy" campaign aims to permit the teaching of anti-evolution, intelligent-design beliefs in United States public high school science courses in place of accepted scientific theories, positing that a scientific controversy exists over these subjects when in fact there is none.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bizpac-review/
Edit: also, the discovery institute article is talking about a high school, not a university, and how students might be set up for failure if their grades are inflated. This is contrary to the point I think you’re trying to make, that unqualified people might be put in place. They won’t, because they’ll fail if unqualified.
Edited by DanL on Wednesday 17th January 12:18
ChemicalChaos said:
My gast will be flabbered if the police are allowed to find any evidence of foul play here
Well, you’ve already assumed there’s evidence to be found it seems. This is ripe for conspiracy theories, obviously… Is it possible he killed himself for some reason? If the answer is yes, evidently there will be some people who won’t believe that.
Teddy Lop said:
GliderRider said:
Seasonal Hero said:
Matt Stoller wrote this in 2019 FFS - and still it goes on:
https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/the-coming-boei...
Seasonal Hero,thank you for posting that. It does seem that Boeing are incapable of relearning how to build aeroplanes properly.https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/the-coming-boei...
Teddy Lop said:
DanL said:
Teddy Lop said:
GliderRider said:
Seasonal Hero said:
Matt Stoller wrote this in 2019 FFS - and still it goes on:
https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/the-coming-boei...
Seasonal Hero,thank you for posting that. It does seem that Boeing are incapable of relearning how to build aeroplanes properly.https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/the-coming-boei...
Unfortunately sensible discussions around this specific on open internet forums in this age probably isn't one of them. I plopped it there as I've heard some interesting stuff, Others may wish to look. Any further thought is probably best shoved over to NPE, colours adorned, and prams loaded with toys.
Do you believe they would be doing better with fewer minorities? If not, why raise DEI hiring in this context? If you believe they would be doing better, I’d love to understand the rationale.
OldGermanHeaps said:
DanL said:
ou know, it is possible to hit DEI targets and hire fully qualified people…
Qualified is the absolute bare minimum to be considered for a role. There are some well qualified idiots in the world who can pass an exam but make a right mess of things in the real world. What they should be looking to recruit is the absolute best of the best regardless of age, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation etc the recruiting process should be completely blind to all of that and seek out the best engineers possible regardless. Adding other quotas, criteria and targets can only dilute the end result, not help it.With having had diversity targets for decades now even on paper experience can be misleading, it can be skewed because someone can be poorly performing but unfireable in a role in a big company for a long long time because of their protected characteristics.
Edited by OldGermanHeaps on Tuesday 9th April 17:29
All you actually need is someone good enough, who will work well with the team - it’s generally accepted that someone like that is preferable to a superstar who can’t work with anyone else. Of course the ideal is the star player who is great in a team, but good luck finding them.
It’s also entirely untrue to say it’s impossible to fire people. Anyone can be managed out of a company following a PIP and the company process - it just requires willingness to do so. People with protected characteristics are no harder to get rid of than anyone else who under performs if processes are followed, and they always should be.
Edit: the above is for the UK. In the USA, where there’s much more of a hire / fire at will set up, it really shouldn’t be a concern.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff