Comments by "ke6gwf - Ben Blackburn" (@ke6gwf) on "Wendover Productions"
channel.
-
5
-
2
-
1
-
@kingg213 reading you repeat yourself over and over blindly doesn't change the fact that Boeing offered a plane for sale that could fly anywhere in the world, and had all the necessary certifications for use just like any other plane.
Boeing failed in proper design and testing, and lost that certification worldwide.
The plane is a fraction of its original promised value if it then gets certified in the US, but not the rest of the world, because Boeing is selling it to the world market mostly.
So if Boeing sold a plane to Malaysia Air, and Malaysia Air is unable to fly the plane because it lost its certification, then Boeing is not able to deliver that plane until they get certification in Malaysia.
And if Boeing tries to force it, Malaysia Air can sue Boeing for breach of contract, and easily win, because the plane does not meet the original promise of being usable in Malaysia.
The difference that you are missing is that it used to be that if the FAA certified a plane, the rest of the world accepted the certification.
It's kind of like how some countries you can visit with just your passport, but other countries you have to apply for a Visa.
Previously the rest of the world accepted FAA certification without question, but Boeing and FAA messed up so badly that they lost that trust.
Going forward, each agency will want to do their own certification, or maybe they will band together into subgroups, but no more simply trusting the FAA.
And Boeing can do nothing about this, except continue working with each country's agency to win its approval, until it meets the worldwide certification originally promised.
And even US airlines have grounds for delay or cancelation if Boeing is unable to get international certification, because if people have the choice between flying on a carrier with planes they ESSA says aren't safe, or another carrier without those planes, a lot of people are going to choose the carrier without them, and so the carrier with them will lose money.
So Boeing basically has to do whatever it has to in order to win international certification, because anything else is breach of contract.
1
-
@kingg213 I can tell that you were on the customer facing side of the aviation industry, because you are such a people person and have an amazing grasp of human psychology! /s
While I agree with you that a lot of people will not even think about it and fly whatever plane shows up at their gate, there are also a lot of people who WILL care, and it will cost the early return carriers business.
The big difference that you are missing between this and comet and DC 10 is the internet.
Back then, people were more likely to accept the official statements, which isn't so much anymore (see: antivax, flat earth, 9/11, etc).
Back then you had Walter Cronkite and a newspaper, and they would not have spent much time on the subject.
Now you have the news everywhere, and now when a pilot union leader tweets that Southwest is trying to pressure them into flying an airplane that they feel is unsafe, because EASA is not certifying it because of an issue with short circuiting wires, that's going to be plastered everywhere, and the investigative articles will explain how FAA is defending their original approval as following the normal procedures, and then it will go on to quote the FAA when they refused to ground the Max originally, saying how all the normal procedures were followed and it was safe, and FAA is going to not be trusted.
And then people are going to be watching the other Boeing sagas with Starliner and the military planes where they also are showing an inability to provide their own oversight, and the inability of the government agencies to provide proper oversight, and lots of people will get on Twitter and say how they aren't going to fly the Max and will be avoiding Southwest, and those tweets will get scrolled across the news, and Southwest will notice their numbers drop off, and demand compensation from Boeing because the lack international certification is hurting their business.
And while it is true that the pilots have limited ability to refuse to fly it, the pilots union, and flight attendants union have a LOT of social power, and unless Boeing and the airlines can satisfy them, including with international certification, even if they don't strike, if they continue making public statements that they feel that they are being forced to fly unsafe planes, the public behavior WILL be effected by it, putting more passengers on the carriers that aren't flying the Max.
And none of that happened back in the Comet days.
1
-
You made 2 serious mistakes.
1. An "Inverter" takes DC and creates AC. It does NOT create DC from AC. That would be a "Convertor".
2. You make a false assumption on needing as many chargers as gas stations.
No one, barring a few farmers with diesel trucks, can fuel their vehicle at home, and battery electric is the only type of vehicle that can "fuel" at home while you sleep.
The current density of gas stations is specifically because no one can fuel at home, and so every home needs a gas station nearby, with enough to handle the daily volume of people needing fuel.
With EVs, a large percentage if not a majority of owners will be charging at home, and for every person who does that, the need for a public charger diminishes.
This is why you hear very few Tesla owners complaining about having a hard time finding an available Supercharger, because the Superchargers are mainly used on road trips, and so need to be placed with that in mind, rather than near homes.
As more apartment dwellers buy EVs, and the need for public charging increases because they can't charge at home, then the charging stations will have demand, and gas stations will reduce in demand. But at least with Tesla, they can monitor this shift by how busy the city Superchargers are, and also by watching the data coming from the cars about whether they are charging at home, or only at public chargers, and they can build out the network as needed to support the no-home-charger demographic.
But at the same time, more employers and businesses will be adding charging facilities, further reducing the need for dedicated charging stations, and since the majority of people will probably always have home charging as the preferred option, I don't think that the public chargers will ever have to equal the current gas station density.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1