this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2025
219 points (99.1% liked)

Buy European

6251 readers
457 users here now

Overview:

The community to discuss buying European goods and services.


Matrix Chat of this community


Rules:

  • Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. No direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments.

  • Do not use this community to promote Nationalism/Euronationalism. This community is for discussing European products/services and news related to that. For other topics the following might be of interest:

  • Include a disclaimer at the bottom of the post if you're affiliated with the recommendation.

  • No russian suggestions.

Feddit.uk's instance rules apply:

  • No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia or xenophobia
  • No incitement of violence or promotion of violent ideologies
  • No harassment, dogpiling or doxxing of other users
  • Do not share intentionally false or misleading information
  • Do not spam or abuse network features.
  • Alt accounts are permitted, but all accounts must list each other in their bios.
  • No generative AI content

Useful Websites

Benefits of Buying Local:

local investment, job creation, innovation, increased competition, more redundancy.

European Instances

Lemmy:

Friendica:

Matrix:


Related Communities:

Buy Local:

Continents:

European:

Buying and Selling:

Boycott:

Countries:

Companies:

Stop Publisher Kill Switch in Games Practice:


Banner credits: BYTEAlliance


founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] MrPoletki@feddit.uk 4 points 8 hours ago

Boeing should start building their planes out of rubber and change their name to Boing.

[โ€“] Squizzy@lemmy.world 6 points 11 hours ago

Amazing what hapoens when your planes come down on command and not without.

[โ€“] Coreidan@lemmy.world 11 points 14 hours ago

Mean while Boeing repeatedly punches it self in the face

[โ€“] Solano@piefed.social 15 points 18 hours ago

Gee, I wonder why, when Boeing is crashing and burning, literally and figuratively.

[โ€“] cronenthal@discuss.tchncs.de 49 points 23 hours ago (5 children)

NGL, the recent safety record of Boeing jets doesn't instill confidence. I am always relieved when I see my flight is on an Airbus.

[โ€“] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

They did before they took under McDonald Douglas. Ever since McD-D bought Boeing with Boeing's money it's been downhill.

[โ€“] MysteriousSophon21@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Exactly - when McDonnell Douglas "reverse-merged" with Boeing in 97, the corporate culture shifted from engineering-first to finance-first, and we're seeing the consquences of that prioritization now with all these safety issues.

"Hey, you know those executives that decided to do the whole DC-10 cargo door that almost killed one airplane full of passengers and then DID kill another one? Let's put those sister groping fuck knuckles in charge."

That boeing is still allowed to exist at this point is a capitalistic travesty.

[โ€“] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 20 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

recent

Several years already... and eventually, it trickles down even into the hardest boneheads

[โ€“] SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz 7 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Several years is 'recent' in aviation, compared to the high-profile early FBW crashes Airbus had and AF447.

[โ€“] albert180@piefed.social 10 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

AF447 was pilot error and not cheapening out knowingly on the construction to save money.

The whole Boeing 737 is completely outdated and wouldn't get approved today. Like they would have needed a new pilot warning system for years, but are just rolling by with exemptions after exemption

[โ€“] SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz 2 points 11 hours ago

AF447 is sometimes blamed on lack of coupled sidesticks amongst other possible deficiencies in aircraft design. Pilot error doesn't happen in a vacuum.

Certainly not the same situation as the 737, though.

[โ€“] nevm@lemmy.ml 9 points 20 hours ago

As someone said on another thread, โ€œIf itโ€™s on a Boeing, Iโ€™m not goingโ€

[โ€“] xploit@lemmy.world 7 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

Or the odd Embraer - I know fuck all about them but at least it's not boeing

[โ€“] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 15 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

They almost became Boeing. Boeing basically asked congress to tariff the Bombardier C series so hard that nobody would import it. Congress responded by introducing a tariff even higher than what Boeing asked for. Airbus had a manufacturing plant in the US and made a deal with Bombardier to build the C series there to avoid the tariff. That's how the A220 came into existence. Initially it was selling so well that Boeing looked into buying Embraer to have competition in the regional jet market.

[โ€“] kcuf@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

The a220 is really nice to ride in (though weird size with air Canada running them in a 2-3 layout). The engines are apparently a nightmare, but last I heard we're now seeing similar issues with pw's non-geared engines too, so everything is fucked.

[โ€“] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

It's a nice plane, but it's likely at a dead end. It was designed to be stretched and reach into the territory of the A320 and Boeing 737. Airbus doesn't really have an incentive to stretch it for a couple reasons. It would cut into their A320 sales which is selling like crazy right now. It also has a different cockpit layout to other Airbus aircraft so it's harder to cross train pilots from an A220 to other Airbus aircraft. Bombardier built a good plane, but the US Congress screwed them to protect Boeing.

[โ€“] kcuf@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

That sucks. It was a nicer ride than any a320 variant I've been in recently. Though they've all been very old planes now that I think about it..

They are Brazilian actually.

[โ€“] atro_city@fedia.io 7 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

A duopoly isn't good. I do hope there will be other manufacturers that bring more competition. Brazil and China are the most likely contenders.

[โ€“] int_not_found@feddit.org 6 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

While I agree with the Duopolies are bad statement. I don't see how Brazil or China would be able to break this in the near to medium future.

Brazil/Embraer are quite happy in the regional/ business jet niche. Their CEO recently said that they have no plans to break into new markets. And even if they would start developing a new narrow body aircraft, they would need at least a decade before they could deliver it.

China/Comac theoretically have a narrow body aircraft in production, but they seem to have lost the ambition to get this aircraft certified outside of China. Looks like they are unable to meet international safety standards with the C919. For the C929 or the C939 to be competitive , they would need to fly international and thus fulfill even higher standards than the ones already missed by the C919.

[โ€“] ollie@sh.itjust.works 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah but the article is kinda general, it just rides the recent crash wave to bash Boink boink. We donโ€™t know why the 787 crashed yet, we should wait at least for the prelim report, see if itโ€™s manufacturing issue or maintenance issue. I do see Boeing struggling, hope Ortberg can pull shit around before next ceo reverts it back.

[โ€“] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 5 points 19 hours ago

Killing whistle blowers will sour people on your brand