sanpedropeddler

joined 2 years ago
[–] sanpedropeddler 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There is no "probably" here, it just a possibility.

Its a possibility that seems very likely, that's what I mean by probably.

If you brought the evidence you have right now that Boeing killed this guy for a civil claim, you would be laughed out of court.

That's very interesting, however, I am not in court.

[–] sanpedropeddler 1 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I know its speculation, that's why I'm using the word probably. There is a rock solid motive, but no hard evidence. Which is why I'm not going to outright claim they did it. Maybe your definition of probably is different than mine, but to me, it means there is a very real possibility that I'm wrong.

[–] sanpedropeddler 3 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Iberia flight 1456

[–] sanpedropeddler 4 points 10 months ago (9 children)

I think a "probably" is pretty reasonable considering the circumstances. Its a lot less certainty than I'm seeing in the rest of these comments.

[–] sanpedropeddler 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Absolutely, I don't mean there is no warning whatsoever. There is almost always a history of depression, but that history is not always visible to loved ones, let alone the public. I just mean they are likely not specifically planning to commit suicide until soon before they do it, which at least in my experience is true

[–] sanpedropeddler 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If you're going to fly Boeing at all, what is the point in avoiding the 737-max?

[–] sanpedropeddler 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

To be fair, they would've said that regardless. Its standard corporate speak.

[–] sanpedropeddler 6 points 10 months ago (12 children)

It was a gunshot wound to the head. Its plausible the wound was self inflicted, although its pretty clear Boeing probably did it. They are evil, not stupid.

[–] sanpedropeddler 7 points 10 months ago (5 children)

The only crash I know of thats similar to what they're talking about happened in an airbus plane, and during landing not takeoff. The pilots tried to pull up on their side sticks to avoid crashing, but the plane ignored the input because it would have overcorrected and caused the plane to stall. As a result they crashed onto the runway.

That isn't to say Boeing doesn't have a history with such things. Look into United Airlines 811 in 1989. Improper design caused a massive chunk of the fuselage to be ripped out in flight, throwing 9 people into the ocean and causing a rapid decompression. Initial investigations said the cause was human error, but the family of one of the victims researched it themselves and found out that wasn't the case.

[–] sanpedropeddler 21 points 10 months ago

Better to be stuck on the ground than to be stuck in the air in a plane that needs maintinence, or in bad weather.

[–] sanpedropeddler 164 points 11 months ago (17 children)

By doing this they have effectively secured their survival. We will never stop growing them.

view more: ‹ prev next ›