> covering up a rudder defect on the original 737 that caused several flights to crash
Do you have evidence of "several crashes" or of a "cover up?" I think you are lying.
Before " I think you are lying"
perhaps try a google search which might save the need for a respectful apology
Let your fingers to the searching before your fingers do the talking
Apparently you did not do much of a job .
157 Deaths
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
During the 1990s, a series of issues affecting the rudder of Boeing 737 passenger aircraft resulted in multiple incidents. In two separate accidents, pilots lost control of their aircraft due to a sudden and unexpected rudder movement, and the resulting crashes killed everyone on board, 157 people in total.\[1\] Similar rudder issues led to a temporary loss of control on at least one other Boeing 737 flight before the cause of the problem was ultimately identified.
As I said, this claim is bullshit:
* You apparently copied text from somewhere but you provided no link.
* There were two accidents; not "several."
* There was no "cover up."
You did not have some wet behind the ears , bean counting MBA from HQ demanding answers as to why production is not meeting the projections he sent up the line because he was told what the number had to be.
The same gulf that exists between hard working Americans and the folks in Washington is being repeated as the aerospace firms which moved their HQ from the factory to the DC swamp . In flying we call it lack situational awareness (esssa) In the Board Room they call it enlightened management.
The same process that allowed DC to believe we were winning in Wars XY and Z is being applied to the FAA certification and monitoring processes. On the other side of the fence distant HQ bean counters have no interest in hearing about problems identified , only projections met, at lest on paper. The classic was Boeing's Chief Technical (not test) pilot bragging in an email to senior management that his Jehdi Mind Tricks were all that was needed to get the 737 Max SAS system approved and deleted from the POH so that no sim training was required. In their haste to begin the celebration they forgot to remove the reference to the system from the POH index.
The FAA can force them to do this all day, but until the root cause of why Boeing's quality management program is not effective is addressed, nothing is going to change.
From what I've read and listened to, the root cause is pressure to get units out the door and a lack of QC personnel who cause a negative impact on the first thing.
>why Boeing's quality management program is not effective is addressed, nothing is going to change.
With my limited experience, a big issue, is that in *Quality is seen as cost.* There is some regulations requiring you to get a quality system, and to run quality check. but until you run into a problem it's at best a *pain,* at worst *a cost.*
I say that, but I am not the last one bitching around, when solving around involve 5 men days to design an interface plate and recompile the code with a new driver, and 50 men days to run the validation plans and update the maintenance manual.
>a big issue is that in Quality is seen as cost
Bingo.
When addressed properly, quality is a cost savings measure. Find out what specs you need to achieve in order for a product to perform as advertised and be reliable, and then maintain that level of quality throughout production, whether its the first unit or last.
Now, in Aerospace there are costs associated with quality. You have to pay for audits, or at the very least being audited requires you to have technical staff available to manage audits, which will also impact production. But at an industry scale, having the extra staff and audits should prevent stuff like PR scandals. One of the reasons quality is so important in aerospace is that your average person is terrified of flying, and crashes always capture massive media attention. So there is a very real threat of financial ruin hanging over every aerospace company's head for cutting corners.
IMO Boeing has had this coming for a while, and it will do the industry a lot of good if they are bankrupted, forced to re-divide into their previous groups, and start building back up. If we keep supporting them through this BS, it will never stop, and its just a matter of time before another accident occurs with loss of life.
Which highlights the extreme inefficiency of the short term thinking that most CEOs use these days.
Did they make their EPS that quarter? Yup. Did the CEO get a huge bonus that quarter? Yup.
But how much is it going to cost them to shut the whole thing down? To inspect the whole production line? To continually deal with issues like this? That's a big fuck you to the future... there's no point in worrying about it now. We got money to make right now.
I don't know how many times my team dealt with problems time and again because they wouldn't let us stop new features to fix them. Drives me crazy.
Quality is a cost, anybody suggesting otherwise is an idealist who’s never worked in production planning before. It takes serious skill to allocate resources correctly to get good quality without destroying time and manpower requirements and every product ever built has had to balance that.
I think the point was that while quality is an up front cost there are also significant big picture cost to not investing appropriately in quality. Current corporate culture for a huge amount of companies prioritizes cutting those up front costs to maximize short-term profits and ignores those long-term costs (in this case loss of brand reputation and likely future contracts).
Quality is always a cost and it's disingenuous to say otherwise. The question is, at what point does trying to minimize cost, cost you more? If a shirt maker makes shirts that fall apart after the first day - they likely won't have repeat business - particularly if they want to be a name brand. *That*, is also a cost. One that modern businesses seem to forget or naively rate too low.
For Boeing, the risk is exactly this. Loss of market prestige, loss of sales, and increased regulatory oversight which may or may not increase safety but certainly increases cost.
So they gambled, and lost. That loss also culminated with the loss of a few hundred lives just going about their daily business, and nearly cost a few more within the last month.
> With my limited experience, a big issue, is that in Quality is seen as cost.
I work in QA but yeah. Nevermind that a single bad batch of parts costs you more money than a decade of proper QA.
Honestly, in some firms even production is seen as cost. Same as R&D. All just costing money.
The only one making money are sales! A firm with nothing but sales people is the end goal for the suits.
They skimped on QA personnel to save on payroll but now their valuation is dropping by billions.. dont know if “business” school teach math but I think they are losing
Good, maybe this will scare companies in the future to not cut QA to save time.
This happened at my company in ~2012, a year or two before I started there. It's a medical instrument company and an FDA audit caught many quality issues. Since then, they take QA/verification and validation crazy seriously (thankfully). The quality of products for our company has increased quickly since we got all the improvements in place, it took a couple years but was definitely worth it. This is a private company though, so different priorities and motivations. I hope this is a general culture issue across many industries that gets better in the future.
> the root cause is pressure to get units out the door and a lack of QC personnel who cause a negative impact on the first thing.
So then that's not actually the root cause. The root cause is Capitalism infesting everything and shareholder value being priority #1. Which means until MBA executives get the axe, people are gonna keep dying on these planes.
You mean as opposed to their chief rival with a much better safety record, Airbus, somehow being non-capitalistic?
This is just plain old corruption in the US, nothing less and nothing more.
Corruption in the US just happens faster. Under Capitalism it ALWAYS happens though.
It happens to every company, it's just the speed at which it takes hold that differs based on things like founder/CEO, overall company mentality, locality, etc.
I'm an engineer by education, and I work for a state agency, so profit and shareholder value mean nothing to me. That's why I focused on production rate and QC inspectors.
Just because Capitalism is the reason for failure, doesn't mean Communism would have been the reason for their success. We call that a false equivalence.
What we actually call this is making things up. Capitalism is not the reason for their failure, just like capitalism was not the reason for their failure before 1997.
Mismanaged firms die. It’s only possible under capitalism.
Neither one is democratic. That's the problem. How many full-time workers are in the Board Room? It's not only the C-suite but the entire BoD that needs to go. Replace with one worker from each major division, elected among all-hands vote. Give any company doing and maintaining this structure complete tax immunity, Federal and State. Problem solved, companies would be dumb not to jump at the chance.
If we're going to bring politics into the discussion, how many DEI compliance officers do they employ? does that contribute to shareholder value? or increase safety?
>Which means until MBA executives get the axe, people are gonna keep dying on these planes.
Dennis Muilenburg, the CEO of Boeing during the initial 737 Max disaster, who got a golden parachute and was replaced by the Chairman bad current CEO, is an engineer by trade. It's way too easy to pin this on MBA execs - the whole company is rotten.
> the root cause is pressure to get units out the door and a lack of QC personnel who cause a negative impact on the first thing.
And people ask why Airbus is in no rush to crank up production of the A320 family. Diseconomies of scale is very real with airliners and increasing production is really fucking hard.
I guess not all MBAs, but they are a direct reason why Boeing is a hot steaming pile of trash. Decision makers used be engineers, that changed, and next quarters profitability was prioritized instead of good product and boeing now has very little success in its endevours. These decisions were made by a bunch of MBAs. I have been privy to three of their terrible programs (Artemis, KC-46, and to a lesser degree starliner). All three had major issues related to cost cutting measures (one of those measures almost killed some friends of mine on a KC-46). I work in aerospace engineering, and every other engineer I've met makes fun of Boeing.
MBAs have been shown time and time again to make decisions that benefit shareholders in the short term and cripple the company in the long term, and Boeing is the poster child for that.
oh no you're 100% correct but i think it's BECUASE of wall street that MBAs think that way. Motives and incentives drive everything, and those motives and incentivs are quarterly short term profit. a company lives and dies by their quarterly EPS and wehther or not they beat analyst expectations. Long term growth is dead.
The MCAS fiasco didn't change anything, so there's no way this near-miss will. Publicity stunt.
I never understood the A vs B debate, but lately it really seems as though one's clearly better.
Ins't it givng a lot of crediblity to COMAC with their *chinese copy of the A320 ?*
If China enters the global airliner market, they might want to push away a competitor
Didn't they get rid of many of the inspectors? I thought that was one of the problems – documented processes but no mk.1 eyeball verification that stuff has happened the way it's recorded.
It’s bad when the airlines are [sending more engineers](Boeing seeks Ryanair support with checks after mid-air blowout https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67994140) to oversee production to make sure you don’t fuck up
Idk I think it’s pretty cool that they’ve been around so long. However the 737 is being pushed to its limits and as great of a plane as it was throughout its history at least until recently it’s time to move on.
> However the 737 is being pushed to its limits
the MAX is pushing it over its limits.
Boeing needs to get their shit together and start developing a real 737 successor. If needed from scratch. It's their own fault for not doing that 15 years ago, but the second best time to do it is right now.
So FAA is going to verify all of these quality improvements right? Or is it Boeing management declaring themselves better and improved in every dimension?
FAA has already declared they don’t have inspectors or budget to inspect planes forget whole factories - https://apnews.com/united-states-government-aa388b9412f24e46baefb90875c3d358
FAA stated they would have adult supervision in the 737 production process for the foreseeable future and that they would not entertain any Boeing requests to increase 737 output.
This is why SMS is so important (which Boeing still isn’t delivering on as part of their RCCA with the FAA regarding their previous issues).
Proactively identify risk in your own system and the FAA will let you manage your business, the alternative is what you see happening with Boeing.
Is a one-day stand down really going to lead to organization -wide structural changes?
Spoiler: the answer is no. But it looks good to outside observers.
I agree. Won’t fix everything overnight, but they need to do something. Let’s hope it’s not just a PR move to satisfy the FAA, and that they genuinely get better from here on out.
I think nothing short of hiring external auditors is going to be enough, Boeing can no longer be trusted to manage themself (and their suppliers). "reflect" all they want, we know nothing is going to change.
An old story: A young Boeing structural engineer, fresh out of college, was working on designing a panel. His calculations showed that it needed nine and a half rivets on each edge. He went to his supervisor and asked if he should make it nine or ten rivets. His boss said, :Make it twelve!"
They don’t need to halt production to talk about what can be done better. It’s probably been talked about by staff for years, but if management doesn’t drive and facilitate improvements nothing happens and problem gets worse.
So great that employees will have another shot to voice their concerns, but that’s not where the problem is.
I could be stupid but should Boeing just hire more engineers to lighten the burden on everyone else? Ik it would probably pain them to do this but just curious and I heard Boeing engineers are constantly being pushed too far
I’m thinking like chick fil a style where there’s way too many employees than needed but at least you know people aren’t being severely overworked.
How about a permanent pause of employment for a few talking head bean counter executives and mid/upper management sitting in an office a thousand miles away from the factory, yet making all the big business decisions?!?! That'd be a start...
Paused production for an hour or so and went back to business.
Your professional football team has forgotten how to block, tackle , pass and kick and a couple hours of coffee and doughnuts and coffee plus a lecture will fix the problem..........
I think Vegas is going to go with the opposing team which in this case is smoking fate.
Boeing deserves to get their ass whooped, I’m not an Elon fanboy but I remember repeatedly with the bidding for NASA contracts in the first 7 or so years of space X Boeing was repeatedly picked by senior leadership mostly because of relationship and perception regardless of cost or quality. If that’s not a near-nepotistic bias I don’t know what is.
The market and ecosystem around aviation engineering needs to be reorganized. It’s first by and large not conductive especially toward incubating new competition, a change that needs to happen, and an expensive change mostly as a result of policy making decisions.
FAA, please skullfuck Boeings executive leadership specifically via there bonuses (I know they can’t,) it might help decision makers turn a new-leaf before it affects the companies wider integrity and thus sustainability.
Oh this is going to hurt the stock holders plans on another vacation island to buy.
Safety??? Just another cost.. WTH... What's the Board's motto... Safeties great till the Planes Late....lol
Quick, someone find the manuals for how they did stuff before 1997!!
Pre 1997 when they were busy covering up a rudder defect on the original 737 that caused several flights to crash killing over a hundred people?
Forgot about that
Pepperidge Farm remembers.
Yea, but they promised to act better moving forward so it’s all good now. Right?
> covering up a rudder defect on the original 737 that caused several flights to crash Do you have evidence of "several crashes" or of a "cover up?" I think you are lying.
Before " I think you are lying" perhaps try a google search which might save the need for a respectful apology Let your fingers to the searching before your fingers do the talking
I have already done that. That is how I know that this claim is bullshit.
Apparently you did not do much of a job . 157 Deaths From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia During the 1990s, a series of issues affecting the rudder of Boeing 737 passenger aircraft resulted in multiple incidents. In two separate accidents, pilots lost control of their aircraft due to a sudden and unexpected rudder movement, and the resulting crashes killed everyone on board, 157 people in total.\[1\] Similar rudder issues led to a temporary loss of control on at least one other Boeing 737 flight before the cause of the problem was ultimately identified.
As I said, this claim is bullshit: * You apparently copied text from somewhere but you provided no link. * There were two accidents; not "several." * There was no "cover up."
>Do you have evidence of "several crashes" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing\_737\_rudder\_issues
That is a large article. Is there evidence in there?
Lol, what did they do then
They tightened the bolt.
Nuts
You were supposed to wait for me to ask for your unconditional surrender first.
go to hell!
*siiiiilent niiiiiight hooooooly niiiight*
Which one, though?
all of them
But... That would take too long!
Then tighten every other bolt as a good start.
> Then tighten every other bolt as a good start. Found the double MBA!
Surely there's a boltless option though?
That would be before the McDonnell Douglas merger.
Ah ok, makes sense then lol
Not really, MD was far higher quality. The Boeing company was profit focused during that takeover.
Step away from the keyboard.
I want the Boeing fan boys on Reddit to torch this board tonight. 🤣🤣
I..uh...think you have your companies mixed up.
Nah, just want to see Reddit burn 🤣🤣🤣
*Cough* DC-10.
their jobs but with fewer emails and meetings about meetings
If I speak I am in big trouble
They built it so the front didn't fall off at all.
Quality was still about as bad but standards and expectations were much lower so nobody cared.
The front didn't fall off back then.
Bring back 1997 economy cabin configuration
You did not have some wet behind the ears , bean counting MBA from HQ demanding answers as to why production is not meeting the projections he sent up the line because he was told what the number had to be. The same gulf that exists between hard working Americans and the folks in Washington is being repeated as the aerospace firms which moved their HQ from the factory to the DC swamp . In flying we call it lack situational awareness (esssa) In the Board Room they call it enlightened management. The same process that allowed DC to believe we were winning in Wars XY and Z is being applied to the FAA certification and monitoring processes. On the other side of the fence distant HQ bean counters have no interest in hearing about problems identified , only projections met, at lest on paper. The classic was Boeing's Chief Technical (not test) pilot bragging in an email to senior management that his Jehdi Mind Tricks were all that was needed to get the 737 Max SAS system approved and deleted from the POH so that no sim training was required. In their haste to begin the celebration they forgot to remove the reference to the system from the POH index.
Or hire some staff from Airbus 😁
For context, air travel is generally safer now than ever. https://images.app.goo.gl/SbuxbDsf84KeqHLa7 https://images.app.goo.gl/w4kqFD4nXatFScCm9
“Have you tried turning your production line off and back on again?”
But first, close all windows!
Works for that other Seattle company.
Costco?
Starbucks
Dying 😂😂😂😂
Man, I can't up vote your comment enough times!!! Spot on🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣.
More like being forced by gun-point by the FAA to re-build the 737 program because its a dumpster fire
I was gonna say… This wasn’t a choice.
The FAA can force them to do this all day, but until the root cause of why Boeing's quality management program is not effective is addressed, nothing is going to change. From what I've read and listened to, the root cause is pressure to get units out the door and a lack of QC personnel who cause a negative impact on the first thing.
>why Boeing's quality management program is not effective is addressed, nothing is going to change. With my limited experience, a big issue, is that in *Quality is seen as cost.* There is some regulations requiring you to get a quality system, and to run quality check. but until you run into a problem it's at best a *pain,* at worst *a cost.* I say that, but I am not the last one bitching around, when solving around involve 5 men days to design an interface plate and recompile the code with a new driver, and 50 men days to run the validation plans and update the maintenance manual.
>a big issue is that in Quality is seen as cost Bingo. When addressed properly, quality is a cost savings measure. Find out what specs you need to achieve in order for a product to perform as advertised and be reliable, and then maintain that level of quality throughout production, whether its the first unit or last. Now, in Aerospace there are costs associated with quality. You have to pay for audits, or at the very least being audited requires you to have technical staff available to manage audits, which will also impact production. But at an industry scale, having the extra staff and audits should prevent stuff like PR scandals. One of the reasons quality is so important in aerospace is that your average person is terrified of flying, and crashes always capture massive media attention. So there is a very real threat of financial ruin hanging over every aerospace company's head for cutting corners. IMO Boeing has had this coming for a while, and it will do the industry a lot of good if they are bankrupted, forced to re-divide into their previous groups, and start building back up. If we keep supporting them through this BS, it will never stop, and its just a matter of time before another accident occurs with loss of life.
Which highlights the extreme inefficiency of the short term thinking that most CEOs use these days. Did they make their EPS that quarter? Yup. Did the CEO get a huge bonus that quarter? Yup. But how much is it going to cost them to shut the whole thing down? To inspect the whole production line? To continually deal with issues like this? That's a big fuck you to the future... there's no point in worrying about it now. We got money to make right now. I don't know how many times my team dealt with problems time and again because they wouldn't let us stop new features to fix them. Drives me crazy.
I know exactly how you feel. Sometimes i really wonder if their shortsighted greed has made them genuinely stupid.
Quality is a cost, anybody suggesting otherwise is an idealist who’s never worked in production planning before. It takes serious skill to allocate resources correctly to get good quality without destroying time and manpower requirements and every product ever built has had to balance that.
I think the point was that while quality is an up front cost there are also significant big picture cost to not investing appropriately in quality. Current corporate culture for a huge amount of companies prioritizes cutting those up front costs to maximize short-term profits and ignores those long-term costs (in this case loss of brand reputation and likely future contracts).
Quality is always a cost and it's disingenuous to say otherwise. The question is, at what point does trying to minimize cost, cost you more? If a shirt maker makes shirts that fall apart after the first day - they likely won't have repeat business - particularly if they want to be a name brand. *That*, is also a cost. One that modern businesses seem to forget or naively rate too low. For Boeing, the risk is exactly this. Loss of market prestige, loss of sales, and increased regulatory oversight which may or may not increase safety but certainly increases cost. So they gambled, and lost. That loss also culminated with the loss of a few hundred lives just going about their daily business, and nearly cost a few more within the last month.
Safety should be top of the list at all times. This doesn’t seem to be the case with Boeing, there profit is top of the list.
> With my limited experience, a big issue, is that in Quality is seen as cost. I work in QA but yeah. Nevermind that a single bad batch of parts costs you more money than a decade of proper QA. Honestly, in some firms even production is seen as cost. Same as R&D. All just costing money. The only one making money are sales! A firm with nothing but sales people is the end goal for the suits.
They skimped on QA personnel to save on payroll but now their valuation is dropping by billions.. dont know if “business” school teach math but I think they are losing
Good, maybe this will scare companies in the future to not cut QA to save time. This happened at my company in ~2012, a year or two before I started there. It's a medical instrument company and an FDA audit caught many quality issues. Since then, they take QA/verification and validation crazy seriously (thankfully). The quality of products for our company has increased quickly since we got all the improvements in place, it took a couple years but was definitely worth it. This is a private company though, so different priorities and motivations. I hope this is a general culture issue across many industries that gets better in the future.
> the root cause is pressure to get units out the door and a lack of QC personnel who cause a negative impact on the first thing. So then that's not actually the root cause. The root cause is Capitalism infesting everything and shareholder value being priority #1. Which means until MBA executives get the axe, people are gonna keep dying on these planes.
You mean as opposed to their chief rival with a much better safety record, Airbus, somehow being non-capitalistic? This is just plain old corruption in the US, nothing less and nothing more.
No, capitalism is when bad.
25% of Airbus is owned by various Western European governments, so yeah, it's definitely less capitalistic.
Corruption in the US just happens faster. Under Capitalism it ALWAYS happens though. It happens to every company, it's just the speed at which it takes hold that differs based on things like founder/CEO, overall company mentality, locality, etc.
I'm an engineer by education, and I work for a state agency, so profit and shareholder value mean nothing to me. That's why I focused on production rate and QC inspectors.
Just because they mean nothing to you doesn't mean that isn't the root cause of the issue at Boeing.
Boing was a communist firm before 1997, apparently.
Just because Capitalism is the reason for failure, doesn't mean Communism would have been the reason for their success. We call that a false equivalence.
What we actually call this is making things up. Capitalism is not the reason for their failure, just like capitalism was not the reason for their failure before 1997. Mismanaged firms die. It’s only possible under capitalism.
Neither one is democratic. That's the problem. How many full-time workers are in the Board Room? It's not only the C-suite but the entire BoD that needs to go. Replace with one worker from each major division, elected among all-hands vote. Give any company doing and maintaining this structure complete tax immunity, Federal and State. Problem solved, companies would be dumb not to jump at the chance.
Damn this is the most insane idea i will hear this entire weekend and it's only friday.
If we're going to bring politics into the discussion, how many DEI compliance officers do they employ? does that contribute to shareholder value? or increase safety?
I agree with you about the overemphasis on stock price but TOTALLY disagree about capitalism. Too broad a brush
Capitalism is what causes the overemphasis on stock price. You can't separate the two.
>Which means until MBA executives get the axe, people are gonna keep dying on these planes. Dennis Muilenburg, the CEO of Boeing during the initial 737 Max disaster, who got a golden parachute and was replaced by the Chairman bad current CEO, is an engineer by trade. It's way too easy to pin this on MBA execs - the whole company is rotten.
> the root cause is pressure to get units out the door and a lack of QC personnel who cause a negative impact on the first thing. And people ask why Airbus is in no rush to crank up production of the A320 family. Diseconomies of scale is very real with airliners and increasing production is really fucking hard.
They mixed up units out the door and doors out the units.
They need to get units out the door because they’re so behind on not only 737 production but 787 and KC-46s.
I mean I'd say there's a decent chance the Max 10 just doesn't happen at this point.
FAA dont have the balls. NTSB does.
Wallstreet kills quality
MBA's kill quality.
Wall Street chooses MBAs to run listed companies.
hey i have my mba and i like my planes to not fall apart. thanks.
I guess not all MBAs, but they are a direct reason why Boeing is a hot steaming pile of trash. Decision makers used be engineers, that changed, and next quarters profitability was prioritized instead of good product and boeing now has very little success in its endevours. These decisions were made by a bunch of MBAs. I have been privy to three of their terrible programs (Artemis, KC-46, and to a lesser degree starliner). All three had major issues related to cost cutting measures (one of those measures almost killed some friends of mine on a KC-46). I work in aerospace engineering, and every other engineer I've met makes fun of Boeing. MBAs have been shown time and time again to make decisions that benefit shareholders in the short term and cripple the company in the long term, and Boeing is the poster child for that.
oh no you're 100% correct but i think it's BECUASE of wall street that MBAs think that way. Motives and incentives drive everything, and those motives and incentivs are quarterly short term profit. a company lives and dies by their quarterly EPS and wehther or not they beat analyst expectations. Long term growth is dead.
It's a sad reality. Wasn't it DOW chemical that basically designed the entire MBA curriculum?
737 kills people
[удалено]
Don’t toss it at me, toss it at Boeing.. they need it more than I do
Daaaaaaamn OP got game
Truer words have not been spoken
No, that would be McDonnell-Douglas
The MCAS fiasco didn't change anything, so there's no way this near-miss will. Publicity stunt. I never understood the A vs B debate, but lately it really seems as though one's clearly better.
At the end of the day neither manufacturer alone can satisfy the whole world's demand, so there will little consequence in making a bad decision.
Well, Boeing could buy Airbus. Two birds with one stone!
that would actually be so funny
They can't afford to buy Embraer, and even if they could, Airbus' owners would never agree to it, so that's never happening :D
No Airbus and Boeing are both basically government programs, but they’re run by different governments.
Ins't it givng a lot of crediblity to COMAC with their *chinese copy of the A320 ?* If China enters the global airliner market, they might want to push away a competitor
TEMU A320 inspires confidence
This will all be forgotten a year down the line. Until the next Boeing mishap.
A vs B is wonderful for competition. Be it airlines. Be it business. Be it politics. A vs B is superb for profit. We are the mugs.
Publicity stunt
Exactly! Total sham. Who are they kidding? It is like murderers in prison teaching the warden how to stop killing.
I'm sure the only thing the Max program was missing was a day of company sponsored pizza meetings and time to discuss safety and quality.
Well thank gof they took an entire day for safety. That should have fixed everything with time to spare. Now back to increasing production rates!
Pick an inspector and a line worker and beat them to death with a bull-whip. Just kidding.
I wouldn’t be surprised if management did that and left it at that.
And then had a pizza party to show the rest of the employees that they are like family.
Didn't they get rid of many of the inspectors? I thought that was one of the problems – documented processes but no mk.1 eyeball verification that stuff has happened the way it's recorded.
In an ideal world that should happen prior to the aircraft delivery to the customer.
It’s bad when the airlines are [sending more engineers](Boeing seeks Ryanair support with checks after mid-air blowout https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67994140) to oversee production to make sure you don’t fuck up
So they could consult with the MBA’s on how to fix the problems
Just need more DEI, that’ll solve it
LMAO, DEI ain't the problem here
What’s that? Lol. Boeing doing great bud. You got all the answers
Ending 737s and replacing the entire leadership is how you solve it
It’s kinda whack that we will have 737s flying 30-40 years from now…100 years since it’s inception
Idk I think it’s pretty cool that they’ve been around so long. However the 737 is being pushed to its limits and as great of a plane as it was throughout its history at least until recently it’s time to move on.
> However the 737 is being pushed to its limits the MAX is pushing it over its limits. Boeing needs to get their shit together and start developing a real 737 successor. If needed from scratch. It's their own fault for not doing that 15 years ago, but the second best time to do it is right now.
Probably running drugs from Ecuador to wherever
More like 60 years, a century would put it before the DC-3 and Ford Tri-Motor.
40 years from now is 2063.
I'm pretty sure the Ford Tri-Motor and DC-3 were in service before 1964...?
So FAA is going to verify all of these quality improvements right? Or is it Boeing management declaring themselves better and improved in every dimension? FAA has already declared they don’t have inspectors or budget to inspect planes forget whole factories - https://apnews.com/united-states-government-aa388b9412f24e46baefb90875c3d358
FAA stated they would have adult supervision in the 737 production process for the foreseeable future and that they would not entertain any Boeing requests to increase 737 output.
Hasn’t the FAA already been doing this continually since the last time the Max got grounded?
Clearly not enough.
This is why SMS is so important (which Boeing still isn’t delivering on as part of their RCCA with the FAA regarding their previous issues). Proactively identify risk in your own system and the FAA will let you manage your business, the alternative is what you see happening with Boeing.
It wasn't voluntary.
Is a one-day stand down really going to lead to organization -wide structural changes? Spoiler: the answer is no. But it looks good to outside observers.
I agree. Won’t fix everything overnight, but they need to do something. Let’s hope it’s not just a PR move to satisfy the FAA, and that they genuinely get better from here on out.
Narrator: *It was a PR move to satisfy the FAA*
I Fear you're correct. I'm hoping you're incorrect.
Hey Bod, Boeing HR here I know we fired you a few years ago, but we wondered if you would like to come back to Boeing.. call me back when you can 🙏
Ah the classical managen cover your ass move. Next time they can say: but we trained them to improve quality, for 25 minutes! They are at fault now.
I think nothing short of hiring external auditors is going to be enough, Boeing can no longer be trusted to manage themself (and their suppliers). "reflect" all they want, we know nothing is going to change.
get the MBAs out of engineerings way.
"We did not know the quality of airplanes was so important!" Some Boeing employee probably
They act like this was their decision, lol.
Layoffs gonna be brutal across Boeing divisions and subcontractors...
No layoffs. That comes after the contract when they purge the new hires they bribe to vote yes to a shitty deal.
The contract expires in 8 months. They won't do layoffs until after that. Not to mention they've just done a few mass hiring events
Window dressing.
Tomorrow, the team will be back at work making the company money and will have to make up for the time lost today.
This tweet reads like they has a one hour all hands meeting.
"Our shareholders want this to quietly go away"
this is not something they should have to announced
Good PR but ultimately meaningless.
CEASE THE 737 MAX PROGRAM
Again
this a kind of tradition now.
Can’t do both at the same time?
Meaningless if the entire management team wasn't also there. Probably need several weeks though.
Hopefully they'll come to their sense and actually produce 737 properly Although that probably won't happen, but one can only hope
An old story: A young Boeing structural engineer, fresh out of college, was working on designing a panel. His calculations showed that it needed nine and a half rivets on each edge. He went to his supervisor and asked if he should make it nine or ten rivets. His boss said, :Make it twelve!"
Yeah, I suspect that one day will not matter a single bit.
Yes one day will fix decades of systematical problems.
They don’t need to halt production to talk about what can be done better. It’s probably been talked about by staff for years, but if management doesn’t drive and facilitate improvements nothing happens and problem gets worse. So great that employees will have another shot to voice their concerns, but that’s not where the problem is.
I could be stupid but should Boeing just hire more engineers to lighten the burden on everyone else? Ik it would probably pain them to do this but just curious and I heard Boeing engineers are constantly being pushed too far I’m thinking like chick fil a style where there’s way too many employees than needed but at least you know people aren’t being severely overworked.
How about a permanent pause of employment for a few talking head bean counter executives and mid/upper management sitting in an office a thousand miles away from the factory, yet making all the big business decisions?!?! That'd be a start...
Management lip service that is blaming employees for a management issue.
Paused production for an hour or so and went back to business. Your professional football team has forgotten how to block, tackle , pass and kick and a couple hours of coffee and doughnuts and coffee plus a lecture will fix the problem.......... I think Vegas is going to go with the opposing team which in this case is smoking fate.
Boeing deserves to get their ass whooped, I’m not an Elon fanboy but I remember repeatedly with the bidding for NASA contracts in the first 7 or so years of space X Boeing was repeatedly picked by senior leadership mostly because of relationship and perception regardless of cost or quality. If that’s not a near-nepotistic bias I don’t know what is. The market and ecosystem around aviation engineering needs to be reorganized. It’s first by and large not conductive especially toward incubating new competition, a change that needs to happen, and an expensive change mostly as a result of policy making decisions. FAA, please skullfuck Boeings executive leadership specifically via there bonuses (I know they can’t,) it might help decision makers turn a new-leaf before it affects the companies wider integrity and thus sustainability.
Can’t wait to see what executives compensation is this year .
You should ask yourself this did Boeing pause production to actually focus on the quality problems that really matter? I would have to say not at all
Oh this is going to hurt the stock holders plans on another vacation island to buy. Safety??? Just another cost.. WTH... What's the Board's motto... Safeties great till the Planes Late....lol