Boeing Solves 777X Thrust Link Issue

[system]

Originally published at: Boeing Solves 777X Thrust Link Issue - AVweb

Flight tests are continuing and Lufthansa is expected to get the first 777X in 2026

[RationalityKeith (Keith Sketchley)]

Grammar Kop Keith says the correct word is ‘problem’.

‘Issue’ is of Avweb.

[Raf]

Yes, “issue” here is the apologetic PR version, a way to address cracks in a critical load-bearing part without panicking shareholders or regulators or affecting subscribers. In hangar talk? That was no “issue.” That was a damn problem with the part that ties engine thrust to the fuselage.

[Raf]

I’ve been with AVweb since 1998. The comment section used to be a hangar full of sharp minds, crusty insight, and real pilots who didn’t need hand-holding. Some of those voices are gone now, and what’s left feels processed, muted, and boxed in.

The new setup with this off-site Discourse clone might look slick to the tech team, but it amputates the flow. No one sticks around for a half-buried conversation thread that feels like it was designed by people who don’t actually read what we write. And if that’s the goal—less interaction, fewer reader voices—it’s working. This new system is bleeding out engagement fast.

AVweb used to feel like a place for us. Now it feels like we’ve been shuffled into a hold.

Raf

[jjbaker (Jason J. Baker)]

RAF, leaving a commenting feature up and functional serves one single purpose, these days. Clicks & Ad revenue. More drama = more visitors = more clicks = more ad interactions. Opinions are entirely meaningless, both to community and publisher.

[Raf]

JaBa:
Ad revenue and clicks matter, no doubt. That’s good business. But so is the tone and insight of readers who take the time to chime in. A lot of us add something to the editorial and help keep the whole thing alive.

What I was pointing out is the loss of that community. For years, AVweb felt like a hangar full of sharp voices trading real-world experience. Not drama.

A cleaner setup that checks the right boxes might look good on paper. But if it sidelines the voices that built this place, it’s not just about clicks. It’s about losing what made AVweb matter.

Raf

[jjbaker (Jason J. Baker)]

Times have changed. Desired course of AVweb seems to be out if line with the past communication style.

[roganderson60]

For a few days I’ve been wondering what was going one with AVWeb. An editorial explanation from staff would be nice. I’ve been on here since late '90s.