Not sure of your point? There are thousands of airplanes flying in the air today because of excellent engineering and quality control. The Max 800 had a single point of failure that can bring it to the ground if inexperienced pilots cannot figure out the correct bypass in that situation. The situation has been corrected and they are flying again.
Unlike the quality of the aircraft industry, that carries hundreds of thousands of people per day, the quality control of Russian steel cased ammo varies, and has proven to be unreliable in a gun designed to shoot brass cased ammunition.
I agree with your last sentence, and I think I was too obtuse about Boeing. I just finished the book
Flying Blind: The 737 MAX Tragedy and the Fall of Boeing
https://www.amazon.com/Flying-Blind...5546491/ref=pd_lpo_1?pd_rd_i=0385546491&psc=1
and what is revealed is a plane in which the design was nicked and dimed to maximize corporate profits at the expense of safety. And the FAA has zero credibility , as Congress turned the FAA into a subordinate, rubber stamp organization to Boeing. Based on the duct tape and bailing wire fixes going into the 737 MAX, it is only a matter of if, not when, the next plane load of passengers goes down screaming to their deaths. There are a lot of baseline faults that are not being addressed and corrected, other than the automated kamikaze crash system which downed two planes.
Boeing of course, claims the design was perfect, the plane was perfectly built, and the crashes are all due to brown skin pilots. An explanation that has been accepted by the majority of Americans.
I actually like the Eugene Stoner I see in these youtube interviews.
I listened to four hours of them, and if you have a technical background, and you understand gun mechanisms to the level of Chin Vol IV Machine Gun, then you can see that the M16 and its cartridge were not fully developed, were in fact, rush jobs, back of the envelope items. Mr Stoner in one of the tapes, expresses his opinion about the M16 needing time to mature in service. I can tell you, based on what I read, the Secretary of Defense thought he was buying a fully developed weapon system, gun and cartridge. History shows that the AR15 that needed more troop, field trials, and then hardware and cartridge fixes. Which in fact, is what happened, but only after a sufficient number of good American boys died with jammed M16's in their hands. People believe in the Big Man theory of history, that is one Big Man moves the mountain all by himself sort of thing. And you see in the tapes the organization that Stoner worked in, it took teams of experts to work out issues that the mechanical designer did not know about. And I don't think those people were available to Stoner, as subsequent events have shown.
I was surprised to hear Stoner claim he designed the 223 cartridge. There is a contending claim to who designed the 223/5.56 cartridge. I read the 1971 Guns & Ammo article
“The 223 is here to stay” by Robert Hutton. Robert Hutton was technical editor of Guns and Ammo magazine and must have been very wealthy as he owned a big piece of real estate in Topanga Canyon California. It was called Hutton’s Shooting Ranch. (probably worth billion’s now!) Hutton’s article documents how he developed the 223 round. If you have any sort of technical background, it is apparent he is an amateur and his cartridge represents what an amateur would do. He took an existing cartridge, (222 Remington) necked it up and down, blew the shoulder out, changed shoulder angles, he had a chronograph, got the velocity he wanted at distance. The crowning achievement in the article was punching holes in the wobble pot at 500 yards. That is about all the lethality testing Hutton did, punching holes in a helmet. Bob Hutton used the Powell Computer, a paper slide rule, to estimate pressures. He did not pressure test his cartridge he did not have pressure curve data. This cartridge was then adopted as the US service round.
Even with brass as a case material the 223 cartridge drags during extraction, as per 2003 DTIC document
Understanding Extractor Lift in the M16 Family of Weapons. That tells me that the cartridge expansion and contraction dynamics were not modeled by Mr Stoner, or his company, and it surely was not by Mr Hutton.
And things have not gotten better when the case materials are changed to steel!.
