FAA warns of possible defect in Boeing 777 engines::undefined

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    411 year ago

    Tell me that you don’t understand the difference between airframes and engines without telling me you don’t understand the difference between airframes and engines

    • @shashi154263
      link
      English
      -141 year ago

      You really expect everyone to understand the difference?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        241 year ago

        definitely not, but wouldn’t it be nice if people who know nothing about a particular subject just keep quiet about it and learn?

        • @shashi154263
          link
          English
          -91 year ago

          It would be nicer if people knew about that particular subject wouldn’t make fun of others .

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 year ago

            Nah. We’re not being assholes. We’re irritated because you’re clearly done absolutely ZERO digging on the topic, and are just throwing out wildly inaccurate statements, and then expecting everyone to bring the info to you - not, I suspect, that you’ll actually read any of it.

      • @SupersonicScrub
        link
        English
        101 year ago

        Knowing that the information is in the article you are commenting on… Yeah I do

      • @LifeInOregon
        link
        English
        41 year ago

        No, but the difference is in the linked article. The commenter in question would have likely been able to understand that the real issue was with GE, not Boeing if they’d read more than the headline.

        • @ozymandias117
          link
          English
          -31 year ago

          That surprises me. Can an airframe really support multiple different engine designs?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            0
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yes, really. For civil aircraft, the prevalent nacelle/pod design these days makes it fairly easy to re-engine a plane, and to adapt to new engine technologies as time progressed. This is extremely obvious if you compare images of a 737-100 and a 737-MAX9. This is common practice for both civil and military aircraft.

            On a side note: Seriously, are you genuinely so lazy that you can’t throw a couple queries into your search engine of choice and find, like, all the sources that indicate that this is common practice? Or, like, go to a Wikipedia page about a couple civil aircraft and find the section that’s titled “engines”, read a couple paragraphs and see the images, and understand that yes, planes can support multiple engine types from different manufacturers? Maybe I’m overreacting, but this sort of “I’m going to force everyone else to bring facts to me to disprove my wildly inaccurate and baseless assumptions” bullshit is pretty fucking obnoxious.

            It was a different user. But the number of people who clearly haven’t read the article or done ANY background research - even briefly - is a bit annoying on topics like this. If you want to participate intelligently in the conversation, do so. If you’re just going to pull things out of your head on topics you have zero knowledge on and zero willingness to increase that knowledge by, you know, looking for sources and reading… lurk moar.

            • @ozymandias117
              link
              English
              11 year ago

              Alright, next time I won’t try to learn anything and just “lurk,” then.