• EeeDawg101@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    5 months ago

    I don’t get why they don’t just make it a bit bigger on the inside so that when pressurized, the pressure itself seals it. Seems like a fail safe solution instead of this shadiness.

    • MigratingApe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      But mah profits!

      737 Max is still a developing example of what happens when you leave corporate to self-regulate themselves.

      • Tangentism
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        5 months ago

        It’s a well documented that when Boeing merged with McDonald Douglas, they turned from an engineering led company to an executive led one & have been shit since

        https://archive.is/vy5p7

    • Starfighter@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      It is, kind of. The plug is secured by 6 stops (or tabs) along each side. The positive pressure differential pushes the plug outwards into those stops.

      To remove the plug you uninstall 4 bolts which allow the plug to go up and over the stops, after which it can hinge outwards on a hinge found at the bottom of the plug.

      Source: https://youtu.be/WhfK9jlZK1o?si=dbUV1i2nNFcNixQh

      • EeeDawg101@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Just seems like a better design would be if no bolts existed (like from them loosening over time and falling off), it would still be sealed perfectly fine. The obvious failure point is the bolts and seems they could do better.