this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2024
370 points (98.4% liked)

News

23387 readers
2419 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The "preventable incident" endangered scores of lives both on the plane itself and others flying Max 9 aircraft, the suit alleges.

Three passengers are suing Boeing and Alaska Airlines for $1 billion in damages in the wake of a door panel blowing out midair on their flight.

The suit, announced Feb. 23, accuses Boeing and Alaska Airlines of negligence for allegedly having ignored warning signs that could have prevented the Jan. 5 incident, which forced the plane pilots to make an emergency landing.

"This experience jeopardized the lives of the 174 passengers and six crew members that were on board," a release announcing the suit states. "For those reasons, the lawsuit seeks substantial punitive damages ... for what was a preventable incident."

all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CobblerScholar@lemmy.world 36 points 8 months ago

Right after John Oliver just shined his huge spotlight on the company too

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 34 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Does Boeing's behavior qualify as gross negligence? I think they would have to be knowingly selling defective airplanes, or at least knowingly disregarding proper procedure when building those airplanes.

I'm not sure Alaska Airlines was even negligent.

[–] baru@lemmy.world 22 points 8 months ago

I'm not sure Alaska Airlines was even negligent.

Apparently in a previous flight passengers reported a whistling sound. Further, a pressurisation computer was apparently replaced multiple times instead of noticing why it was giving issues.

See https://youtu.be/ROeGKs4xTfs?t=16m33s

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I’m not sure Alaska Airlines was even negligent.

Where I'm guessing they're going on this is the Alaska Airlines actions on the pressurization computer. There was a fault detected, and the tech assumed the computer was bad because the fault cleared on its own. The computer was replaced. I think this happened two times.

The fault the door shimmying slightly releasing pressure because it wasn't bolted.

[–] baru@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Plus I'm a previous flight passengers apparently reported a whistling sound. See https://youtu.be/ROeGKs4xTfs?t=16m33s

[–] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Depends if AA ran the maintenance, or if an item was missed in preflight, or a myriad of other things that may have contributed in any way.

Personally I think 1 billion is a money grab, and don't know how they found that value. What is that - $20 million each or something for being on a plane that lost its door in flight and landed safely?

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 26 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Because it’s intended to be punitive, not a reparation.

[–] jumjummy@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

That punitive judgement should be paid to some public fund versus a lottery for some random person. Reparations sure, but I don’t feel like events like this should be a lottery ticket.

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 12 points 8 months ago

From what i understood from the new last week tonight episode, they were just lucky, that the door fell off already, before they reached altitude. Otherwise all the passengers would propbably have died. I think 20 million dollars is perfectly appropriate for being subjected to hours of panicy fear of death.

And if you would put your life on the line to win 20 Million Dollars, that is your personal choice. I wouldnt.

Finally you need to consider that the 1 Billion is the start of negotiation, and the companies will aim for much lower. If they just start with idk. say 100 million, the company would try to haggle it down to 10 million.

[–] harderian729@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

I think it should be both.

Hang'em high.

[–] harderian729@lemmy.world 24 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Feels like the airline industry is really feeling the crush of capitalism.

It's just not something that can be operated like a fast food restaurant, but it's clear this is what the ruling class wants.

[–] Cuttlefish1111@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Feels like the ruling class has lost control of the ship

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

It was always the creepy crab monster in the hold that ran the ship.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The FAA used to protect against Capitalism's race to the bottom.

Not sure what's changed recently with them so that these kind of things are happening now.

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Deregulation, vastly more flights, and lower budgets.

Deregulation is easy to go read about but it had huge impacts on the airline industry and spawned the current race to the bottom.

In 1990 there were a little more than 18,000 flights per day in the US. In 2024 there are more than 45,000.

The FAA budget in 1990 was $2.5B which is $31B when adjusted for inflation. The current FAA budget is $20B.

So, the FAA has less authority, a budget that is 1/3 smaller, and is dealing with tripple the air traffic when compared to 1990.

[–] whotookkarl@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

The wealth class doesn't care because they have their own personal planes they use instead of the plebian flying busses.

https://ycharts.com/companies/BA/stock_buyback paints a grim picture where all of the time and money that should have been going to safety and quality standards were going to stock price inflation from buybacks. 1 billion is not enough, it should be 10+ billion all invested into hiring and training FAA investigators and QC to meet those standards, and an anti trust suit to break up Boeing.

[–] turkishdelight@lemmy.ml 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There are only two commercial airplane producers at scale. If there was any competition in this market Boeing would have bankrupt by now.

[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Aeroplanes aren't like loaves of bread where you can just buy another one tomorrow if you don't like this one today.

You have to plan, order, buy, support and maintain, and one presumes a lot of money is lost if you change half way. Besides the efficiency of buying from the same company (and better still, the same model) you already have planes from.

So there's a lot of inertia for competition to pull a customer from.

[–] turkishdelight@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You lose a lot more money when your MAX crashes or when it's grounded for two years.

[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'd hope so... do you think it's really true?

[–] turkishdelight@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The groundings are true - but does it really cost companies more than changing suppliers?

[–] turkishdelight@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Imagine paying for a car, and then not being allowed to drive it for two years.

[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Imagine you have a whole department dedicated to managing your fleet of cars and getting them serviced at the same dealer, then you switch brand loyalty so you buy a new fleet and contract a new garage.

[–] turkishdelight@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

it's bad. but not as bad as the plane sitting in the airport for two years.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Not that I don't want to see Boeing pay a cool B, but can they seek damages over a hypothetical?

[–] Cort@lemmy.world 54 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I mean, the door didn't hypothetically fly off the plane. They're asking for punitive damages, so they want the court to punish the airline financially

[–] Steve@startrek.website 6 points 8 months ago

Which is the only thing Boeing cares about so it might just work

[–] ByteJunk@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I'm in the same boat.

Boing sold their soul for profit and it's biting them hard, as it should, but this sounds more like an airline maintenance issue rather than some sort of design or manufacturing defect, no?

[–] toast@retrolemmy.com 11 points 8 months ago

Boeing was sending them out the door like this and it was a new plane. They've had quality issues that they haven't been addressing

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 9 points 8 months ago

The door came off the line from boeing missing some of the bolts holding it in entirely.

Engineers at boeing had flagged for issues in the 737 construction line, and even recommended it be stopped, and issues worked out before something dangerous happened. But the higher ups didn't want to stop production due to, what else, money.

This is according to a whistleblower inside Boeing.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

damn i wish this was my flight

[–] bradorsomething@ttrpg.network 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

I absolutely do