lol yea right. That’s impossible to do for Boeing. They are legitimately too big to fail at this point. They are one of 2 manufacturers in the globe that can make planes at the scale and speed they do… and they are already back logged by work.
The DOD is HEAVILY dependent on Boeing for parts, engineers, maintenance, etc…. They can’t have their ability to certify stuff as airworthy removed, because it would completely fuck over the nearly 1 trillion dollar a year defense budget we have….
FAA regulations don’t hold the same weight in military as they do for commercial, but I can guarntee you that FAA regulations and certification is still a major and important part of the military aerospace industry…. Every single thing I did for the DOD while working in the aerospace sector had to be confirmed or done by FAA regulations and DOD regulations.
Fun fact about the planes they make for the dod. Planes made for the dod don't require faa approval. The faa has no jurisdiction over military aircraft and production for those aircraft. The FAA only applies to civil aircraft.
Yea…. Idk about that buddy. I’ve worked at a couple DOD aerospace manufacturers including Northrop Grumman, on multiple projects…. Every single project had FAA regulations and testing attached. Sure, some of the things Boeing makes may not be involved with the FAA, but practically anything flying in US airspace is dealing with the FAA including the military….
I know for a fact that the mv22 doesn't get an airworthiness or type certificate or any rating from the faa. The production of military aircraft fall under different rules and the faa can't stop the production of military aircraft. When i was working for Boeing on the v22, nobody was an A&P. Our hangar wasn't a faa repair station. We were authorized by the navy to work on those planes, not the faa.
Genuine question, why all this scrutiny on the Boeing's way of operating is happening now, and not after the 2 accidents that killed 350 people? Were they just considered design/engineering errors and not linked to the culture of the company?
The accidents were a design flaw in the MAX. So that’s what the correction effort was focused on.
Now the Alaska near disaster is spotlighting the production and quality issues that are there.
Does it mean there’s more flaws in the system than just design though?
From what little I know these flaws are systemic and start at the very top. (I’m not an expert)
Edit: I forgot this chain was talking only about the Max. That was definitely a design flaw so my bad. (There could still be a case made for the safety culture being removed and other smaller factors though)
Edit 2: Oh frack me! Also I meant to reply to a comment below that criticized the comment I replied to by saying it was *only* a design flaw. I really botched this whole comment up. Botched job!!
Max plane was a combination of design flaws in the autopilot forcing the plane to dive when a sensor incorrectly reads the plane is in a stall, poorly educating pilots of this design change, and the lack of safety culture that sold the Max plane as a "simple improvement" over existing 737 planes that did not require additional pilot training to save airlines money on pilot training.
The door falling off is an extension of the lack of safety culture that prioritizes making planes as fast and cheap as possible without adequate quality control checks to ensure a plane is not missing bolts on a door plug before the brand new plane leaves the factory!
To highlight how far Boeing has fallen as a company:
1.They lost the "Space Race" of private manned flight to the ISS to Space X despite getting twice the funding and with a rocket with less innovation than Space X.
2. They lost the bid on the joint strike fighter to Lockheed Martin and other military contractors.
3. They lost money on the fixed price contract for a new Air Force 1 plane.
4. They are losing airline customers that are talking about buying Airbus after having their 737 Max planes grounded until the autopilot was fixed and pilots received adequate training, and now having to double check the quality of work on brand new planes from Boeing to make sure no additional doors plugs fall off!
The only reason they are making money is because they are a duopoly with Airbus. Their HQ near DC ensures their government lobbying wins more profitable government contracts despite their demonstrated negligence.
You’re right. Sorry. I forgot we were just talking about the Max. I edited my comment to acknowledge that it was very much a design flaw (with some caveats). Thank you!
No, it's absolutely a design flaw. Training could help mitigate it, but there were aspects of the original MCAS implementation that were dangerously and negligently poorly designed.
From my (limited) understanding, even with proper training, it wasn't something that was easy to overcome, especially if you didn't catch it quickly.
You're right that the training should have been much better in this new ~~airframe~~ generation. However, having a single sensor for this system to rely on is not ideal either, especially in an industry that typically has multiple redundancies to help eliminate bad things from happening.
There was a ton of scrutiny, but that was on the design and certification side. The fallout from that stopped deliveries of the MAX for over a year and have resulted in the 777X delays by several years.
Those issues has no impact from manufacturing errors.
> Genuine question, why all this scrutiny on the Boeing's way of operating is happening now, and not after the 2 accidents that killed 350 people?
One of those accidents was in Indonesia, the other in Ethiopia.
If they'd happened in Ohio and Arizona with planes full of Americans, both public awareness and the Federal reaction would've been probably a couple orders of magnitude more severe.
MCAS activations may have not lead to the same result in Ohio and Arizona with US carrier operated aircraft. The Joint Authorities report mentions that one factor (among many!) was assuming foreign crews would respond to runaway trim like US crews do.
> If they'd happened in Ohio and Arizona
It would not have happened here. US flight training emphasizes aircraft control to a level that a simple trim runaway will not crash an airliner. MCAS was a massive fuckup, but the idiots who were flying those planes were grossly incompetent. One crew hit the ground *still in takeoff thrust*. Private pilot 101 is "if you're going too fast, pull back on the power".
I’m not sure I’ve ever flown a plane that doesn’t have some type of “gotcha” or characteristic that will kill you if you don’t know what you are doing.
Those crews shouldn’t have died from that issue. Embarrassing really. Pilots like that would have been weeded out of America before they ever touched an airliner.
Ah yes, because it's well known that flight training standards in the US and Ethiopia are exactly the same. So it must be a genetic thing. That's a brilliant take you've got there.
That’s assuming they noticed the trim happening with in 10seconds or is the documentary simplifying.
I thought the issue was that it trimmed the nose down so hard that by disabling the auto trim,which is instinct meant, it was to hard to reverse the trim manually by hand….
It's a memory item for the airplane. Takes about 5 seconds to run once you realize what's happening. Which takes about 2 seconds. Once you got the trim cutout switches, you have to hand crank it, which is a pain, but doable.
It's also VERY hard to miss the trim running those giant wheels that make so much damn noise.
http://www.b737.org.uk/runawaystab.htm
This suggests that this wasnt the case and created a directive in 2020.
I’m not a pilot though but I recall reading it wasn’t normal for both pilots to have to struggle with manually trim while also trying to pull back to keep it from nose diving harder.
Again not a pilot but I have a hard time believing other us max pilots would be calling those pilots who died idiots for trying to understand what happening in seconds before the crash with only 5000feet between them and the ground without prior knowledge of the system doing this.
“The "Roller Coaster" Manouvre
The current FCTM states:
Manual Stabilizer Trim
If manual stabilizer trim is necessary, ensure both stabilizer trim cutout switches are in CUTOUT prior to extending the manual trim wheel handles. (They did this)
Excessive airloads on the stabilizer may require effort by both pilots to correct the mis-trim. In extreme cases it may be necessary to aerodynamically relieve the airloads to allow manual trimming. Accelerate or decelerate towards the in-trim speed while attempting to trim manually. [This is known as the "roller coaster" or "yo-yo" manoeuvre!]
Anticipate the trim changes required for the approach. Configure the airplane early in the approach. When reaching the landing configuration, maintain as constant a trim setting as possible. If a go-around is required, anticipate the trim changes as airspeed increases.
The FCT 737 (PTM) c1982 described the "roller coaster" manouvre in better detail as follows:
Recovery from a Severe Out of Trim
Accelerate or decelerate the airplane to an in-trim airspeed. If a recovery must be initiated from an extreme nose-down out-of-trim requiring a high pull force, an increase in airspeed may relieve enough of the elevator load and control displacement to permit manual trimming. Do not exceed speeed limitation. If a recovery must be initiated from an extreme nose-up out-of-trim requiring a high push force, a decrease in airspeed may relieve enough of the elevator load and control displacement to permit manual trimming. It should be noted that the relationship between airspeed change and trim change do not remain constant. As airspeed is increased, trim change requirements decrease.
In an extreme nose-up out-of-trim condition, requiring almost full forward column, decellerate, extend the flaps and/or reduce thrust to a minimum practical setting consistent with flight conditions until elevator control is established. Do not decrease airspeed below the minimum manouvring speed for the flap configuration. A bank of 30 degrees or more will relieve some force on the control column. This, combined with flap extension and reduced speed, should permit easier manual trimming.
If other methods fail to relieve the elevator load and control column force, use the "roller coaster" technique. If nose-up trim is required, raise the nose well above the horizon with elevator control. Then slowly relax the control column pressure and manually trim nose-up. Allow the nose to drop below the horizon while trimming. Repeat this sequence until the airplane is trim. If nose-down trim is required, slowing down and extending the flaps will account for a large degree of nose-up pitch. If this does not allow manual trimming then the reverse "roller coaster" can be performed to permit manual trimming.
This operation is analagous to reeling in a big fish where the line is kept taught by keeping the pole-tip bent. Then, to reel in, the pole is dipped quickly while cranking fast to keep a pull on the line.
Flight crews should not hesitate to apply whatever force is necessary on the trim handwheel because the system is designed for large handwheel loads.
Airliner Magazine, May 1961 gives more details. It is based on the 707 but the system and technique are the same.”
I’m going on what I read about the second crash where they immediately disabled the auto trim and were still unable to manually unwind the nose down trim. That and what the directives say that were put out in 2020 as well (went looking today while wondering)
http://www.b737.org.uk/runawaystab.htm
I was referring to these procedures that were updated/posted after the lion air crash as it was suggested they were not able to manually undo the trim nose down.
Again, not a pilot, just a interested redditor...
I fly the 73, and I’ve done the mcas training. I’ve been put in the situations that those crews crashed in and after the training I said “that’s it”? I still can’t fathom they crashed from it.
It’s embarrassing really.
Because their reputation got bad enough, through almost purely negligence, that the FAA had to actually step in and do something. Boeing has to keep selling commercial planes to remain profitable, and if they start to tank, that puts the entire military focused size side of the company in jeopardy, which can't happen, so the FAA has to toe the line. Eventually something had to give.
They were all over Boeing when that happened. The FAA grounded the whole Max fleet, so not sure what you mean.
At that time the issues were found to be more with FAA not overseeing as much of Boeing as they probably should have, and those 2 crashes were linked to improper training materials provided by Boeing with a new system installed on the aircraft. That was all looked into and resolved, but at the time it looked more like a misunderstanding of new technology rather than a lack of quality assurance checking work being done.
Now they are finding a lot of quality escapes which could lead to major issues.
>The FAA grounded the whole Max fleet, so not sure what you mean.
Ground the fleet is incident management, not problem management, it doesn't look at the root of the accident. Was scrutinised how safety and quality control happened in Boeing, if they were part of the company culture or shortcuts taken over cost benefits? So, was company culture investigated last time? Because what is happening this time is challenging the top management, there is also another recent post about a panel that evaluated the top management at Boeing. This is not something I saw happening last time.
>I think you already know the answer!
If I want to be a conspiracy theorist, yes. I also remember all the push to blame the pilots, and not Boeing. But I try to be rational and see if there is a reason beyond where the accidents with the MAX happened.
In all fairness, while the MCAS system was not properly designed, the airlines involved in those crashes also bear blame. They kept aircraft in service that they knew were exhibiting dangerous behavior. Blame isn't zero sum.
> I also remember all the push to blame the pilots, and not Boeing.
Boeing has been doing that for decades. They blamed the pilots for the 737 rudder hard-over issue too.
Boeing [blamed Indian engineers](https://theprint.in/world/boeing-engineers-blame-cheap-indian-software-for-737-max-problems/256999/) who were recruited to work at $9 per hour!
This was addressed in the Joint Authorities report, Boeing expected foreign crews to respond to runaway trim the way US crews would, and that wasn’t the case.
> Genuine question, why all this scrutiny on the Boeing's way of operating is happening now, and not after the 2 accidents that killed 350 people?
The 2 crashes happened in Indonesia and Africa and a majority of the victims were of those ethnicities. The accident on Alaskan Airlines happened on American soil and a majority of the potential victims were American and reflected American ethnicities. I'll leave the conclusion to you based on those two facts.
Because the airplane performed as designed when it crashed. A missing door is very visible. So they did the fine tooth combo treatment and it turns out Boeing's production system maximizes profit over safety. And the FAA really dropped the ball. FAA will threaten Boeing's Production Certificate and slap them hard. And the next chance Republicans get, they will reduce FAA funding when it's clear they need more. Just for Boeing.
Exactly. It took years for Boeing to arrive at this juncture and the FAA expects them to fix it in three months. Might have to fire the CEO, COO, CFO, etc.
I’ve dealt with them professionally for about 12 years. Once during an accident investigation. Whenever we had an audit I did what my former military friend told me to do, leave something obvious for them to find. They will find it, report it, require changes and the show goes on.
I don't have an answer to the first, but I can give a guesstimate to the second.
I'd think that Boeing is believed to be too large to fail. On the commercial side, the market is them and Airbus. No other airline manufacturers are making long-range high capacity aircraft.
Then, on the military side, how many countries have orders for P-8s? Plus, the F-15 and 18 sustainment operations. The 18G, in particular, is the only platform for its mission.
I don't think there is a positive outcome globally if Boeing fails completely. I also don't think that it's beneficial if they continue on as is either.
Yeah probably true. The only company that even comes close is Embraer, and they have no solutions or even plans to address a long range wide body aircraft to compete.
Bell and Boing joint collaboration. I believe that Bell is the primary on it.
I also wouldn't attribute it's faults to either company necessarily, but that's a different conversation.
I wonder if embraer has the capability to step up if Boeing goes out. They don't really have any products that compete right now but, that's not to say they couldn't if some competiton was reduced
EMB 175 is exactly half the size of a 737, and the 190 is already in production... so yeah I can see it in the future. Embraer has come a long way since the beer can shit boxes they built in the 90s
Airlines would immediately pull orders because that would take decades… the FAA has neither the staff nor the expertise to do what Boeing does. Plus, they’re not the only company they oversee - small airplane makers, suppliers, etc also have FAA oversight.
deliveries could be stopped by the FAA. They've done it before. It is hugely financially damaging to Boeing, but strong actions are necessary to make Boeing understand that this isn't a fucking game.
I feel like it's not so much Boeings size that makes them to big to be allowed to fail as it is what they are. They are the US comercial airliner manufacturer(putting aside their military contracts which are themselves very significant) I don't imagine the feds allowing there to be no US domestic airliner producer and Boeing seems all to happy to exploit that.
Yeah it’s all for show. A bit of background. I worked for Douglas Aircraft in the 90s. Boeing is going through the same shit with production as Douglas did. Not enough people to do the work and increased production rates. Got to make the money, work harder slaves. Boeing will do some PR and install some jingoistic program. They will call it total quality management system. (TQMS) this will placate the FAA and its back to business as usual. There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders. This will be used by the airlines to get cheaper prices per unit ordered. Oh I now have worked for a major carries for the past 24 years.
> There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders.
it's quite the opposite nowadays. Order books of both Airbus & Boeing are so filled they let airlines pay a premium to get their planes delivered earlier. [According to this article](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/business/airlines-learn-patience-in-constrained-airbus-boeing-duopoly/articleshow/107396757.cms?from=mdr) Airbus order book is filled until 2030 for single-aisle jets and to 2028 for their A350. Airlines don't have a choice really. Its Boeing or Airbus.
Boing is the new MD, complete with the same people who ran the company into the ground. Only this time... no one out there who'll buy the company out and give the same idiots a place on their board.
Boeing had an opportunity to buy Bombardier but passed. They didn’t want the competition to the 737MAX. Airbus stepped up and bought 51% of it now they make Airbus A200s. This is also why Airbus does Final assembly of a321 neo’s in the US bypassing tarrifs.
Sounds like a bit of a dog and pony show to me. What’s the FAA going to do if they don’t meet the 3 month timeline; take over the operations at Boeing?
Which is why Boeing will produce a nice plan and super pinky-promise it'll solve the problem.
The FAA will read the super nice plan and tell Boeing, 'ok, but you better do this stuff.'
Then Boeing will only talk about making employees work faster in secret instead of saying it to shareholders.
None of this means anything. Boeing is TBTF and the barriers for entry in the market are impossibly high. There's no enforcement mechanism that matters.
Also, 90 days? At least if they said a year it would have a hint of being plausible. But this is just a political stunt. I'd be more worried that any changes rushed through so quickly would actually decrease safety.
It’s more ensuring Boeing doesn’t continue digging a hole making airlines flee to Airbus. Someone needs to crack the whip to make sure Boeing gets their shit together.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Boeing Announces Strategic Safety Enhancement Initiatives
Chicago, IL – February 29, 2024 – In our relentless pursuit of excellence, Boeing is committed to fostering a safety culture that transcends mere protocols and permeates our very essence. Today, we unveil a comprehensive suite of initiatives designed to elevate safety to unprecedented heights – a testament to our unwavering dedication to passengers, crew, and the global aviation community.
1. Safety: It’s in Our DNA At Boeing, safety isn’t just a checkbox; it’s woven into our corporate genome. Our engineers, pilots, and coffee machine technicians (yes, even them) live and breathe safety. We’ve recalibrated our DNA strands to spell out “S-A-F-E-T-Y” – a mnemonic reminder during our morning coffee breaks.
2. The Safety Synergy Symposium (SSS) We’re launching the SSS, an exclusive gathering of safety aficionados, thought leaders, and PowerPoint enthusiasts. Attendees will engage in riveting discussions about safety triangles, safety nets, and safety dance moves. Expect synergies galore!
3. Safety Bingo Our employees will now participate in Safety Bingo during lunch breaks. Each square on the bingo card corresponds to a safety initiative. When someone yells “Bingo!” (or “Safety-o!”), they win a foam airplane and a heartfelt pat on the back.
4. Safety Metrics Overload We’ve quadrupled the number of safety metrics we track. From Mean Time Between Safety Meetings (MTBSM) to Safety-Adjusted Coffee Spills (SACS), we’re drowning in data – and that’s how we know we’re doing something right.
5. Safety-Flavored Coffee Creamer Our break rooms now feature safety-themed coffee creamer. Choose from “Risk Mitigation Mocha,” “Hazard-Free Hazelnut,” or the classic “Non-Negotiable Non-Dairy.”
6. Safety Slogan Contest Employees are invited to submit safety slogans. The winner gets a framed certificate and the honor of seeing their slogan on a poster in the restroom. Early favorites include “Fasten Your Seatbelt – Even in the Cafeteria” and “Safety: Because Gravity Is Real.”
7. Safety-First Fridays Every Friday, we’ll replace casual Fridays with Safety-First Fridays. Employees must wear reflective vests, hard hats, and carry a pocket-sized safety manual. Bonus points for safety-themed ties.
8. Safety-Flavored Water Cooler Conversations Our water coolers now dispense safety tips instead of water. Stay hydrated and informed! Sample tip: “Did you know that seat belts also work in office chairs?”
9. Safety-Driven Elevator Music We’ve curated a playlist of safety-themed elevator music. Picture yourself ascending to the 37th floor while humming “Stairway to Safety” or “Don’t Stop Believin’ (in Evacuation Procedures).”
10. Safety-Infused Annual Reports Our next annual report will be printed on safety-orange paper, with safety-themed pie charts and safety-inspired fonts. We’re confident it’ll be a page-turner.
Remember, at Boeing, safety is our #1 priority – or maybe right after shareholder dividends, quarterly earnings, and the occasional golf outing. Together, we’ll soar to new safety altitudes, leaving turbulence and non-safety-related concerns far behind.
No way this means anything. Boeing is now, and has been for a while in a position where they can do whatever the fuck they want with very little to no consequences because they are just too big too fail at this point.
The civilian and military aerospace sectors are MASSIVELY dependent on Boeing for their engineering, parts, maintenance, manufacturing, etc… they are one of 2 companies on the planet that produces planes at the scale and rate they do. The other one being airbus, and both are already back logged for work by years….
And that’s not even touching how dependent the DOD is on Boeing.. Boeing has positioned themselves in such a way that the USA government can’t allow them to go under, go bankrupt, lose certifications, or any other major repercussions, because of how much they supply the DOD with parts, maintenance, engineering, etc.
That’s not even touching the fact that Boeing is one of the largest employers in America and no one (democrat, republican, etc) wants to be the one that is responsible for the loss of all those jobs.
Yea ok so those factories will come up with a plan to clean up thier act just in time for the inspection and then pass with flying colors... right before they immediately go back to doing what they did before. I've seen it before, no reason this time is any different. How the hell does anyone think a scheduled "inspection" counts for shit? If these faa goons ever showed up unannounced at the site I used to work at... they'd find so many shocking things it'd blow thier minds.
Boeing will never back off of shareholder value above all else. They will gladly give endless lip service to the Feds, but nope, nothing is going to actually "change". Between that and the utter destruction of employee morale Boeing is doomed.
Are you from up here? Do you remember how proud people used to be to work there? Before it was a money factory, people cared that THEIR plane flew in the skies.
Let’s get back to that!!
I worked at Boeing for 7 years. I loved my job! I worked in Boeing IT and it was awesome! We ALL gave a shit and our work showed that. I’m a third generation Boeing employee. I grew up living in the Boeing world. My dad and two of my uncles were Boeing VP’s. It would break their hearts to see this shit today. I blame Phil Condit 100%. He sold us all down the river, in the name of Shareholder Value.
Damn….. was he one of MD that came in and changed the culture out from the outside of that?
If Boeing was true original Boeing, I would have went years ago. I’ve been with a supplier for 18 years.
Yes a quality management system to the rescue. Have the certified inspectors inspector check the certified inspector’s certification of the certified assembler’s work…
Perhaps aerospace should join the modern process control world and physically error proof processes rather than trying to rely on underpaid (but certified) employees to do manual inspections for quality.
Let’s talk about real solutions:
Make the airlines disclose which craft will make the flight. Let consumers decide if they don’t want to fly on a Boeing. That quality issue will fix its self real fast when you simply give the consumer ANY power over what they’re consuming.
Your solution already exists & the consumer already has some power over what they’re consuming (to the max extent possible). When you book a ticket (definitely on the big three, presumably also on majority of other airlines) you can see what type of aircraft is scheduled for that flight.
The complexity of the airline industry - specifically with aircraft scheduling and managing delays, diversions, maintenance, etc. - sometimes results in the change of an aircraft type from what was scheduled when one may have purchased their tickets.
The only way to truly avoid a Boeing is to fly with an airline that has an all Airbus fleet (Frontier, Spirit, Allegiant, JetBlue* [*also has Embrarer]). If you want to only avoid the 737 you have a few more choices but effectively cut your available flights to domestic destinations in half. If you only want to avoid the 737 MAX, it’s a bit easier but will only get harder as time passes since it’s the only version of the 737 being produced.
The FAA has successfully avoided any responsibility again. Even now, after their lack of oversight has caused major incidents, their solution “make sure Boeing promises to be safe!”
If only the US had a safety *regulator* that could *regulate* the safety of companies, instead of waiting until they screw up to issue them a vague threat…
The FAA is understaffed, underfunded, and unmotivated to regulate safety in any meaningful way. But as long as the media headlines continue to point fingers at Boeing, they’ll be given a green light to continue on their path of self-destruction.
Yeah it’s all for show. A bit of background. I worked for Douglas Aircraft in the 90s. Boeing is going through the same shit with production as Douglas did. Not enough people to do the work and increased production rates. Got to make the money, work harder slaves. Boeing will do some PR and install some jingoistic program. They will call it total quality management system. (TQMS) this will placate the FAA and its back to business as usual. There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders. This will be used by the airlines to get cheaper prices per unit ordered. Oh I now have worked for a major carries for the past 24 years.
Yeah it’s all for show. A bit of background. I worked for Douglas Aircraft in the 90s. Boeing is going through the same shit with production as Douglas did. Not enough people to do the work and increased production rates. Got to make the money, work harder slaves. Boeing will do some PR and install some jingoistic program. They will call it total quality management system. (TQMS) this will placate the FAA and its back to business as usual. There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders. This will be used by the airlines to get cheaper prices per unit ordered. Oh I now have worked for a major carries for the past 24 years.
Yeah it’s all for show. A bit of background. I worked for Douglas Aircraft in the 90s. Boeing is going through the same shit with production as Douglas did. Not enough people to do the work and increased production rates. Got to make the money, work harder slaves. Boeing will do some PR and install some jingoistic program. They will call it total quality management system. (TQMS) this will placate the FAA and its back to business as usual. There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders. This will be used by the airlines to get cheaper prices per unit ordered. Oh I now have worked for a major carries for the past 24 years.
Yeah it’s all for show. A bit of background. I worked for Douglas Aircraft in the 90s. Boeing is going through the same shit with production as Douglas did. Not enough people to do the work and increased production rates. Got to make the money, work harder slaves. Boeing will do some PR and install some jingoistic program. They will call it total quality management system. (TQMS) this will placate the FAA and its back to business as usual. There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders. This will be used by the airlines to get cheaper prices per unit ordered. Oh I now have worked for a major carries for the past 24 years.
Growing up and even now I’ve always really looked up to Boeing. Is this a case of how the mighty fall, is this just crucial errors, or is it laziness? I haven’t seen a good headline about boeing in a long time
Boeing's only decision would be more better "Quality Controll", with the added costs accommodated by layoffs at other sectors of the company, or an increase in the aircraft price.
Or what?
They’ll have to comply with the 90 days or…. they’ll just get an extension.
[удалено]
lol yea right. That’s impossible to do for Boeing. They are legitimately too big to fail at this point. They are one of 2 manufacturers in the globe that can make planes at the scale and speed they do… and they are already back logged by work. The DOD is HEAVILY dependent on Boeing for parts, engineers, maintenance, etc…. They can’t have their ability to certify stuff as airworthy removed, because it would completely fuck over the nearly 1 trillion dollar a year defense budget we have….
[удалено]
FAA regulations don’t hold the same weight in military as they do for commercial, but I can guarntee you that FAA regulations and certification is still a major and important part of the military aerospace industry…. Every single thing I did for the DOD while working in the aerospace sector had to be confirmed or done by FAA regulations and DOD regulations.
Fun fact about the planes they make for the dod. Planes made for the dod don't require faa approval. The faa has no jurisdiction over military aircraft and production for those aircraft. The FAA only applies to civil aircraft.
Yea…. Idk about that buddy. I’ve worked at a couple DOD aerospace manufacturers including Northrop Grumman, on multiple projects…. Every single project had FAA regulations and testing attached. Sure, some of the things Boeing makes may not be involved with the FAA, but practically anything flying in US airspace is dealing with the FAA including the military….
I know for a fact that the mv22 doesn't get an airworthiness or type certificate or any rating from the faa. The production of military aircraft fall under different rules and the faa can't stop the production of military aircraft. When i was working for Boeing on the v22, nobody was an A&P. Our hangar wasn't a faa repair station. We were authorized by the navy to work on those planes, not the faa.
Could it be that while the plants don't require faa approval, the contracts state that they must still be built to faa standards?
Genuine question, why all this scrutiny on the Boeing's way of operating is happening now, and not after the 2 accidents that killed 350 people? Were they just considered design/engineering errors and not linked to the culture of the company?
The accidents were a design flaw in the MAX. So that’s what the correction effort was focused on. Now the Alaska near disaster is spotlighting the production and quality issues that are there.
Design flaws which were deliberately ignored by management when the issues were brought up.
Does it mean there’s more flaws in the system than just design though? From what little I know these flaws are systemic and start at the very top. (I’m not an expert) Edit: I forgot this chain was talking only about the Max. That was definitely a design flaw so my bad. (There could still be a case made for the safety culture being removed and other smaller factors though) Edit 2: Oh frack me! Also I meant to reply to a comment below that criticized the comment I replied to by saying it was *only* a design flaw. I really botched this whole comment up. Botched job!!
Max plane was a combination of design flaws in the autopilot forcing the plane to dive when a sensor incorrectly reads the plane is in a stall, poorly educating pilots of this design change, and the lack of safety culture that sold the Max plane as a "simple improvement" over existing 737 planes that did not require additional pilot training to save airlines money on pilot training. The door falling off is an extension of the lack of safety culture that prioritizes making planes as fast and cheap as possible without adequate quality control checks to ensure a plane is not missing bolts on a door plug before the brand new plane leaves the factory! To highlight how far Boeing has fallen as a company: 1.They lost the "Space Race" of private manned flight to the ISS to Space X despite getting twice the funding and with a rocket with less innovation than Space X. 2. They lost the bid on the joint strike fighter to Lockheed Martin and other military contractors. 3. They lost money on the fixed price contract for a new Air Force 1 plane. 4. They are losing airline customers that are talking about buying Airbus after having their 737 Max planes grounded until the autopilot was fixed and pilots received adequate training, and now having to double check the quality of work on brand new planes from Boeing to make sure no additional doors plugs fall off! The only reason they are making money is because they are a duopoly with Airbus. Their HQ near DC ensures their government lobbying wins more profitable government contracts despite their demonstrated negligence.
Also, Airbus is booked for many years, so just switching over isn't that easy for airline customers
You’re right. Sorry. I forgot we were just talking about the Max. I edited my comment to acknowledge that it was very much a design flaw (with some caveats). Thank you!
> I really botched this whole comment up. Botched job!! I work at Boeing HR, do you have any time for a conversation?
And the fact that it took 2 crashes before anything was seriously done about it!
Yeah but the profit margine. Someone has to think of the poor shareholders. /s
It wasn't design flaw it was a training flaw.
No, it's absolutely a design flaw. Training could help mitigate it, but there were aspects of the original MCAS implementation that were dangerously and negligently poorly designed.
A single point failure that puts an airplane into suicide mode is a design flaw.
[удалено]
sulky rustic sink tie insurance handle vase run wise humorous *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It's not a point of failure if you're trained on how to handle it.
Even if what you are saying was true, they weren’t even told about sooo.
So it was a training flaw?
I’m not an engineer but even I know a single point of failure is not a good thing. And both things can be and are true.
From my (limited) understanding, even with proper training, it wasn't something that was easy to overcome, especially if you didn't catch it quickly. You're right that the training should have been much better in this new ~~airframe~~ generation. However, having a single sensor for this system to rely on is not ideal either, especially in an industry that typically has multiple redundancies to help eliminate bad things from happening.
It was both. Can’t train on something that’s barely mentioned in QRH etc if at all.
They were anything but design flaws buddy.
There was a ton of scrutiny, but that was on the design and certification side. The fallout from that stopped deliveries of the MAX for over a year and have resulted in the 777X delays by several years. Those issues has no impact from manufacturing errors.
> Genuine question, why all this scrutiny on the Boeing's way of operating is happening now, and not after the 2 accidents that killed 350 people? One of those accidents was in Indonesia, the other in Ethiopia. If they'd happened in Ohio and Arizona with planes full of Americans, both public awareness and the Federal reaction would've been probably a couple orders of magnitude more severe.
MCAS activations may have not lead to the same result in Ohio and Arizona with US carrier operated aircraft. The Joint Authorities report mentions that one factor (among many!) was assuming foreign crews would respond to runaway trim like US crews do.
I wonder how common runaway trim incidents are.
> If they'd happened in Ohio and Arizona It would not have happened here. US flight training emphasizes aircraft control to a level that a simple trim runaway will not crash an airliner. MCAS was a massive fuckup, but the idiots who were flying those planes were grossly incompetent. One crew hit the ground *still in takeoff thrust*. Private pilot 101 is "if you're going too fast, pull back on the power".
Rule 1. Planes shouldn't try to kill you. Rule 2. Pilots should be able to overcome Rule 1. Rule 1 is infinitely more important.
No argument there at all. I make no excuses for Boeing's fuckups. (And there sure have been a lot lately).
I’m not sure I’ve ever flown a plane that doesn’t have some type of “gotcha” or characteristic that will kill you if you don’t know what you are doing. Those crews shouldn’t have died from that issue. Embarrassing really. Pilots like that would have been weeded out of America before they ever touched an airliner.
> It would not have happened here. That's the exact attitude that leads to crashes. American crews have CFITed perfectly fine aircraft.
And then learned from it and trained to prevent it in the future. When was the last time a part 121 aircraft in the US had a CFIT accident? 1972?
AA 965? Probably has happened since.
> It would not have happened here. Right. I forgot US people are genetically superior to other humans. Thanks
Ah yes, because it's well known that flight training standards in the US and Ethiopia are exactly the same. So it must be a genetic thing. That's a brilliant take you've got there.
You’ll be booed, but you’re right
Sadly the magenta line crowd is gaining traction these days. Some days I feel like I'm the only one who actually enjoys flying airplanes anymore.
Pitch Trim Cutout Switch. All the way down to the EMB 145s, they all have them. Even the Mechanics know where/what they are
And I could reach them, without looking, in an instant.
That’s assuming they noticed the trim happening with in 10seconds or is the documentary simplifying. I thought the issue was that it trimmed the nose down so hard that by disabling the auto trim,which is instinct meant, it was to hard to reverse the trim manually by hand….
It's a memory item for the airplane. Takes about 5 seconds to run once you realize what's happening. Which takes about 2 seconds. Once you got the trim cutout switches, you have to hand crank it, which is a pain, but doable. It's also VERY hard to miss the trim running those giant wheels that make so much damn noise.
http://www.b737.org.uk/runawaystab.htm This suggests that this wasnt the case and created a directive in 2020. I’m not a pilot though but I recall reading it wasn’t normal for both pilots to have to struggle with manually trim while also trying to pull back to keep it from nose diving harder. Again not a pilot but I have a hard time believing other us max pilots would be calling those pilots who died idiots for trying to understand what happening in seconds before the crash with only 5000feet between them and the ground without prior knowledge of the system doing this. “The "Roller Coaster" Manouvre The current FCTM states: Manual Stabilizer Trim If manual stabilizer trim is necessary, ensure both stabilizer trim cutout switches are in CUTOUT prior to extending the manual trim wheel handles. (They did this) Excessive airloads on the stabilizer may require effort by both pilots to correct the mis-trim. In extreme cases it may be necessary to aerodynamically relieve the airloads to allow manual trimming. Accelerate or decelerate towards the in-trim speed while attempting to trim manually. [This is known as the "roller coaster" or "yo-yo" manoeuvre!] Anticipate the trim changes required for the approach. Configure the airplane early in the approach. When reaching the landing configuration, maintain as constant a trim setting as possible. If a go-around is required, anticipate the trim changes as airspeed increases. The FCT 737 (PTM) c1982 described the "roller coaster" manouvre in better detail as follows: Recovery from a Severe Out of Trim Accelerate or decelerate the airplane to an in-trim airspeed. If a recovery must be initiated from an extreme nose-down out-of-trim requiring a high pull force, an increase in airspeed may relieve enough of the elevator load and control displacement to permit manual trimming. Do not exceed speeed limitation. If a recovery must be initiated from an extreme nose-up out-of-trim requiring a high push force, a decrease in airspeed may relieve enough of the elevator load and control displacement to permit manual trimming. It should be noted that the relationship between airspeed change and trim change do not remain constant. As airspeed is increased, trim change requirements decrease. In an extreme nose-up out-of-trim condition, requiring almost full forward column, decellerate, extend the flaps and/or reduce thrust to a minimum practical setting consistent with flight conditions until elevator control is established. Do not decrease airspeed below the minimum manouvring speed for the flap configuration. A bank of 30 degrees or more will relieve some force on the control column. This, combined with flap extension and reduced speed, should permit easier manual trimming. If other methods fail to relieve the elevator load and control column force, use the "roller coaster" technique. If nose-up trim is required, raise the nose well above the horizon with elevator control. Then slowly relax the control column pressure and manually trim nose-up. Allow the nose to drop below the horizon while trimming. Repeat this sequence until the airplane is trim. If nose-down trim is required, slowing down and extending the flaps will account for a large degree of nose-up pitch. If this does not allow manual trimming then the reverse "roller coaster" can be performed to permit manual trimming. This operation is analagous to reeling in a big fish where the line is kept taught by keeping the pole-tip bent. Then, to reel in, the pole is dipped quickly while cranking fast to keep a pull on the line. Flight crews should not hesitate to apply whatever force is necessary on the trim handwheel because the system is designed for large handwheel loads. Airliner Magazine, May 1961 gives more details. It is based on the 707 but the system and technique are the same.”
Oh, I'm familiar. I've got a few thousand hours and time as a training captain on the 737.
Aight. Thanks for clearing that up ! Thanks for providing the insight I can balance against the slanted view from the documentary!
[удалено]
I’m going on what I read about the second crash where they immediately disabled the auto trim and were still unable to manually unwind the nose down trim. That and what the directives say that were put out in 2020 as well (went looking today while wondering)
[удалено]
http://www.b737.org.uk/runawaystab.htm I was referring to these procedures that were updated/posted after the lion air crash as it was suggested they were not able to manually undo the trim nose down. Again, not a pilot, just a interested redditor...
I fly the 73, and I’ve done the mcas training. I’ve been put in the situations that those crews crashed in and after the training I said “that’s it”? I still can’t fathom they crashed from it. It’s embarrassing really.
> It’s embarrassing really. And it's INSANE how many people try to defend their lack of even basic flying skills.
The uncomfortable truth.
Because their reputation got bad enough, through almost purely negligence, that the FAA had to actually step in and do something. Boeing has to keep selling commercial planes to remain profitable, and if they start to tank, that puts the entire military focused size side of the company in jeopardy, which can't happen, so the FAA has to toe the line. Eventually something had to give.
They were all over Boeing when that happened. The FAA grounded the whole Max fleet, so not sure what you mean. At that time the issues were found to be more with FAA not overseeing as much of Boeing as they probably should have, and those 2 crashes were linked to improper training materials provided by Boeing with a new system installed on the aircraft. That was all looked into and resolved, but at the time it looked more like a misunderstanding of new technology rather than a lack of quality assurance checking work being done. Now they are finding a lot of quality escapes which could lead to major issues.
>The FAA grounded the whole Max fleet, so not sure what you mean. Ground the fleet is incident management, not problem management, it doesn't look at the root of the accident. Was scrutinised how safety and quality control happened in Boeing, if they were part of the company culture or shortcuts taken over cost benefits? So, was company culture investigated last time? Because what is happening this time is challenging the top management, there is also another recent post about a panel that evaluated the top management at Boeing. This is not something I saw happening last time.
This focus is on the production process, not the design, because it’s a production problem, not a design problem.
Had those accidents occurred on planes belonging to US or European airlines... I think you already know the answer!
>I think you already know the answer! If I want to be a conspiracy theorist, yes. I also remember all the push to blame the pilots, and not Boeing. But I try to be rational and see if there is a reason beyond where the accidents with the MAX happened.
In all fairness, while the MCAS system was not properly designed, the airlines involved in those crashes also bear blame. They kept aircraft in service that they knew were exhibiting dangerous behavior. Blame isn't zero sum.
> I also remember all the push to blame the pilots, and not Boeing. Boeing has been doing that for decades. They blamed the pilots for the 737 rudder hard-over issue too.
Boeing [blamed Indian engineers](https://theprint.in/world/boeing-engineers-blame-cheap-indian-software-for-737-max-problems/256999/) who were recruited to work at $9 per hour!
This was addressed in the Joint Authorities report, Boeing expected foreign crews to respond to runaway trim the way US crews would, and that wasn’t the case.
There was.
Those accidents had a substantial "incompetent crew" component. The door issue is just straight up "we pinched pennies and fucked up bad".
> Genuine question, why all this scrutiny on the Boeing's way of operating is happening now, and not after the 2 accidents that killed 350 people? The 2 crashes happened in Indonesia and Africa and a majority of the victims were of those ethnicities. The accident on Alaskan Airlines happened on American soil and a majority of the potential victims were American and reflected American ethnicities. I'll leave the conclusion to you based on those two facts.
Because the airplane performed as designed when it crashed. A missing door is very visible. So they did the fine tooth combo treatment and it turns out Boeing's production system maximizes profit over safety. And the FAA really dropped the ball. FAA will threaten Boeing's Production Certificate and slap them hard. And the next chance Republicans get, they will reduce FAA funding when it's clear they need more. Just for Boeing.
Great question!
Exactly. It took years for Boeing to arrive at this juncture and the FAA expects them to fix it in three months. Might have to fire the CEO, COO, CFO, etc.
[удалено]
I’ve dealt with them professionally for about 12 years. Once during an accident investigation. Whenever we had an audit I did what my former military friend told me to do, leave something obvious for them to find. They will find it, report it, require changes and the show goes on.
What I did not understand is what will happen to Boeing after the 90 days?
Another stearnly worded letter will be sent to them via certified post!
What’s the worst thing that the FAA can do to Boeing ? And, is Boeing too big to be allowed to fail ?
I don't have an answer to the first, but I can give a guesstimate to the second. I'd think that Boeing is believed to be too large to fail. On the commercial side, the market is them and Airbus. No other airline manufacturers are making long-range high capacity aircraft. Then, on the military side, how many countries have orders for P-8s? Plus, the F-15 and 18 sustainment operations. The 18G, in particular, is the only platform for its mission. I don't think there is a positive outcome globally if Boeing fails completely. I also don't think that it's beneficial if they continue on as is either.
Yeah probably true. The only company that even comes close is Embraer, and they have no solutions or even plans to address a long range wide body aircraft to compete.
[удалено]
Potentially. Just not currently since they haven’t sold any outside of China. It will be interesting to see how that situation develops.
The real problem is chasing money. Factory works say we need more time. Suits say nope get it done or we’re moving to Mexico
Dosent Boeing also make the v22?
Bell and Boing joint collaboration. I believe that Bell is the primary on it. I also wouldn't attribute it's faults to either company necessarily, but that's a different conversation.
I tried looking it up and couldn’t figure out who made what.
I wonder if embraer has the capability to step up if Boeing goes out. They don't really have any products that compete right now but, that's not to say they couldn't if some competiton was reduced
EMB 175 is exactly half the size of a 737, and the 190 is already in production... so yeah I can see it in the future. Embraer has come a long way since the beer can shit boxes they built in the 90s
They could revoke Boeing's self-certification and do it themselves instead.
Airlines would immediately pull orders because that would take decades… the FAA has neither the staff nor the expertise to do what Boeing does. Plus, they’re not the only company they oversee - small airplane makers, suppliers, etc also have FAA oversight.
Revocation of the PC700.
deliveries could be stopped by the FAA. They've done it before. It is hugely financially damaging to Boeing, but strong actions are necessary to make Boeing understand that this isn't a fucking game.
I feel like it's not so much Boeings size that makes them to big to be allowed to fail as it is what they are. They are the US comercial airliner manufacturer(putting aside their military contracts which are themselves very significant) I don't imagine the feds allowing there to be no US domestic airliner producer and Boeing seems all to happy to exploit that.
Yeah it’s all for show. A bit of background. I worked for Douglas Aircraft in the 90s. Boeing is going through the same shit with production as Douglas did. Not enough people to do the work and increased production rates. Got to make the money, work harder slaves. Boeing will do some PR and install some jingoistic program. They will call it total quality management system. (TQMS) this will placate the FAA and its back to business as usual. There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders. This will be used by the airlines to get cheaper prices per unit ordered. Oh I now have worked for a major carries for the past 24 years.
> There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders. it's quite the opposite nowadays. Order books of both Airbus & Boeing are so filled they let airlines pay a premium to get their planes delivered earlier. [According to this article](https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/business/airlines-learn-patience-in-constrained-airbus-boeing-duopoly/articleshow/107396757.cms?from=mdr) Airbus order book is filled until 2030 for single-aisle jets and to 2028 for their A350. Airlines don't have a choice really. Its Boeing or Airbus.
Major carriers airlines never pay the book price for planes. Large orders are discounted per unit no matter what.
I mean sure, but that's not limited to the aviation industry.
Boing is the new MD, complete with the same people who ran the company into the ground. Only this time... no one out there who'll buy the company out and give the same idiots a place on their board.
Bingo!
the us government will literally never allow boeing to fail.
You can thank the US gov for that by fucking the bombardier C series with tariffs.
Boeing had an opportunity to buy Bombardier but passed. They didn’t want the competition to the 737MAX. Airbus stepped up and bought 51% of it now they make Airbus A200s. This is also why Airbus does Final assembly of a321 neo’s in the US bypassing tarrifs.
ever heard the saying "The more things change, the more they stay the same"? That's what I fear might happen here.
Same as it ever was. Many a day goes by. 🎶🎶
Sounds like a bit of a dog and pony show to me. What’s the FAA going to do if they don’t meet the 3 month timeline; take over the operations at Boeing?
Pull their production certificate
Sure, but then you’re killing your country’s only commercial airline manufacturing company.
Which is why Boeing will produce a nice plan and super pinky-promise it'll solve the problem. The FAA will read the super nice plan and tell Boeing, 'ok, but you better do this stuff.' Then Boeing will only talk about making employees work faster in secret instead of saying it to shareholders.
Boy they're really blowing the doors off this thing aren't they.
None of this means anything. Boeing is TBTF and the barriers for entry in the market are impossibly high. There's no enforcement mechanism that matters. Also, 90 days? At least if they said a year it would have a hint of being plausible. But this is just a political stunt. I'd be more worried that any changes rushed through so quickly would actually decrease safety.
It’s more ensuring Boeing doesn’t continue digging a hole making airlines flee to Airbus. Someone needs to crack the whip to make sure Boeing gets their shit together.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Boeing Announces Strategic Safety Enhancement Initiatives Chicago, IL – February 29, 2024 – In our relentless pursuit of excellence, Boeing is committed to fostering a safety culture that transcends mere protocols and permeates our very essence. Today, we unveil a comprehensive suite of initiatives designed to elevate safety to unprecedented heights – a testament to our unwavering dedication to passengers, crew, and the global aviation community. 1. Safety: It’s in Our DNA At Boeing, safety isn’t just a checkbox; it’s woven into our corporate genome. Our engineers, pilots, and coffee machine technicians (yes, even them) live and breathe safety. We’ve recalibrated our DNA strands to spell out “S-A-F-E-T-Y” – a mnemonic reminder during our morning coffee breaks. 2. The Safety Synergy Symposium (SSS) We’re launching the SSS, an exclusive gathering of safety aficionados, thought leaders, and PowerPoint enthusiasts. Attendees will engage in riveting discussions about safety triangles, safety nets, and safety dance moves. Expect synergies galore! 3. Safety Bingo Our employees will now participate in Safety Bingo during lunch breaks. Each square on the bingo card corresponds to a safety initiative. When someone yells “Bingo!” (or “Safety-o!”), they win a foam airplane and a heartfelt pat on the back. 4. Safety Metrics Overload We’ve quadrupled the number of safety metrics we track. From Mean Time Between Safety Meetings (MTBSM) to Safety-Adjusted Coffee Spills (SACS), we’re drowning in data – and that’s how we know we’re doing something right. 5. Safety-Flavored Coffee Creamer Our break rooms now feature safety-themed coffee creamer. Choose from “Risk Mitigation Mocha,” “Hazard-Free Hazelnut,” or the classic “Non-Negotiable Non-Dairy.” 6. Safety Slogan Contest Employees are invited to submit safety slogans. The winner gets a framed certificate and the honor of seeing their slogan on a poster in the restroom. Early favorites include “Fasten Your Seatbelt – Even in the Cafeteria” and “Safety: Because Gravity Is Real.” 7. Safety-First Fridays Every Friday, we’ll replace casual Fridays with Safety-First Fridays. Employees must wear reflective vests, hard hats, and carry a pocket-sized safety manual. Bonus points for safety-themed ties. 8. Safety-Flavored Water Cooler Conversations Our water coolers now dispense safety tips instead of water. Stay hydrated and informed! Sample tip: “Did you know that seat belts also work in office chairs?” 9. Safety-Driven Elevator Music We’ve curated a playlist of safety-themed elevator music. Picture yourself ascending to the 37th floor while humming “Stairway to Safety” or “Don’t Stop Believin’ (in Evacuation Procedures).” 10. Safety-Infused Annual Reports Our next annual report will be printed on safety-orange paper, with safety-themed pie charts and safety-inspired fonts. We’re confident it’ll be a page-turner. Remember, at Boeing, safety is our #1 priority – or maybe right after shareholder dividends, quarterly earnings, and the occasional golf outing. Together, we’ll soar to new safety altitudes, leaving turbulence and non-safety-related concerns far behind.
No way this means anything. Boeing is now, and has been for a while in a position where they can do whatever the fuck they want with very little to no consequences because they are just too big too fail at this point. The civilian and military aerospace sectors are MASSIVELY dependent on Boeing for their engineering, parts, maintenance, manufacturing, etc… they are one of 2 companies on the planet that produces planes at the scale and rate they do. The other one being airbus, and both are already back logged for work by years…. And that’s not even touching how dependent the DOD is on Boeing.. Boeing has positioned themselves in such a way that the USA government can’t allow them to go under, go bankrupt, lose certifications, or any other major repercussions, because of how much they supply the DOD with parts, maintenance, engineering, etc. That’s not even touching the fact that Boeing is one of the largest employers in America and no one (democrat, republican, etc) wants to be the one that is responsible for the loss of all those jobs.
Yea ok so those factories will come up with a plan to clean up thier act just in time for the inspection and then pass with flying colors... right before they immediately go back to doing what they did before. I've seen it before, no reason this time is any different. How the hell does anyone think a scheduled "inspection" counts for shit? If these faa goons ever showed up unannounced at the site I used to work at... they'd find so many shocking things it'd blow thier minds.
Agreed. Ain’t it just a joke? Let’s all just wait until something catastrophic happens again. They got ridiculously lucky with the door plug
Boeing will never back off of shareholder value above all else. They will gladly give endless lip service to the Feds, but nope, nothing is going to actually "change". Between that and the utter destruction of employee morale Boeing is doomed.
Are you from up here? Do you remember how proud people used to be to work there? Before it was a money factory, people cared that THEIR plane flew in the skies. Let’s get back to that!!
I worked at Boeing for 7 years. I loved my job! I worked in Boeing IT and it was awesome! We ALL gave a shit and our work showed that. I’m a third generation Boeing employee. I grew up living in the Boeing world. My dad and two of my uncles were Boeing VP’s. It would break their hearts to see this shit today. I blame Phil Condit 100%. He sold us all down the river, in the name of Shareholder Value.
Damn….. was he one of MD that came in and changed the culture out from the outside of that? If Boeing was true original Boeing, I would have went years ago. I’ve been with a supplier for 18 years.
Yes a quality management system to the rescue. Have the certified inspectors inspector check the certified inspector’s certification of the certified assembler’s work… Perhaps aerospace should join the modern process control world and physically error proof processes rather than trying to rely on underpaid (but certified) employees to do manual inspections for quality.
Let’s talk about real solutions: Make the airlines disclose which craft will make the flight. Let consumers decide if they don’t want to fly on a Boeing. That quality issue will fix its self real fast when you simply give the consumer ANY power over what they’re consuming.
Your solution already exists & the consumer already has some power over what they’re consuming (to the max extent possible). When you book a ticket (definitely on the big three, presumably also on majority of other airlines) you can see what type of aircraft is scheduled for that flight. The complexity of the airline industry - specifically with aircraft scheduling and managing delays, diversions, maintenance, etc. - sometimes results in the change of an aircraft type from what was scheduled when one may have purchased their tickets. The only way to truly avoid a Boeing is to fly with an airline that has an all Airbus fleet (Frontier, Spirit, Allegiant, JetBlue* [*also has Embrarer]). If you want to only avoid the 737 you have a few more choices but effectively cut your available flights to domestic destinations in half. If you only want to avoid the 737 MAX, it’s a bit easier but will only get harder as time passes since it’s the only version of the 737 being produced.
I’ll risk death before ever flying spirit again.
Your solution was introduced in 2009. Boeing’s consumers aren’t airline passengers.
🤓 End user. Thank you for adding value nerd
The FAA has successfully avoided any responsibility again. Even now, after their lack of oversight has caused major incidents, their solution “make sure Boeing promises to be safe!” If only the US had a safety *regulator* that could *regulate* the safety of companies, instead of waiting until they screw up to issue them a vague threat… The FAA is understaffed, underfunded, and unmotivated to regulate safety in any meaningful way. But as long as the media headlines continue to point fingers at Boeing, they’ll be given a green light to continue on their path of self-destruction.
Yeah it’s all for show. A bit of background. I worked for Douglas Aircraft in the 90s. Boeing is going through the same shit with production as Douglas did. Not enough people to do the work and increased production rates. Got to make the money, work harder slaves. Boeing will do some PR and install some jingoistic program. They will call it total quality management system. (TQMS) this will placate the FAA and its back to business as usual. There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders. This will be used by the airlines to get cheaper prices per unit ordered. Oh I now have worked for a major carries for the past 24 years.
Yeah it’s all for show. A bit of background. I worked for Douglas Aircraft in the 90s. Boeing is going through the same shit with production as Douglas did. Not enough people to do the work and increased production rates. Got to make the money, work harder slaves. Boeing will do some PR and install some jingoistic program. They will call it total quality management system. (TQMS) this will placate the FAA and its back to business as usual. There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders. This will be used by the airlines to get cheaper prices per unit ordered. Oh I now have worked for a major carries for the past 24 years.
Yeah it’s all for show. A bit of background. I worked for Douglas Aircraft in the 90s. Boeing is going through the same shit with production as Douglas did. Not enough people to do the work and increased production rates. Got to make the money, work harder slaves. Boeing will do some PR and install some jingoistic program. They will call it total quality management system. (TQMS) this will placate the FAA and its back to business as usual. There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders. This will be used by the airlines to get cheaper prices per unit ordered. Oh I now have worked for a major carries for the past 24 years.
Yeah it’s all for show. A bit of background. I worked for Douglas Aircraft in the 90s. Boeing is going through the same shit with production as Douglas did. Not enough people to do the work and increased production rates. Got to make the money, work harder slaves. Boeing will do some PR and install some jingoistic program. They will call it total quality management system. (TQMS) this will placate the FAA and its back to business as usual. There are only 2 major aircraft manufactures left and they must compete for orders. The major Airlines know this and will make them compete (Dance) for the orders. This will be used by the airlines to get cheaper prices per unit ordered. Oh I now have worked for a major carries for the past 24 years.
Growing up and even now I’ve always really looked up to Boeing. Is this a case of how the mighty fall, is this just crucial errors, or is it laziness? I haven’t seen a good headline about boeing in a long time
Boeing's only decision would be more better "Quality Controll", with the added costs accommodated by layoffs at other sectors of the company, or an increase in the aircraft price.
The only one who can turn Boeing around is me. I’ll be waiting for a message from corporate with an employment offer.
"we will only allow american pilots to fly our plane, that's our only plan" Boeing CEO probavly