Boeing CEO steps down, 737 may never fly again

[bob10]

Boeing CEO Muilenburg steps down to ′restore confidence′ | News | DW | 23.12.2019 (https://www.dw.com/en/boeing-ceo-muilenburg-steps-down-to-restore-confidence/a-51782500'maca=en-newsletter_en_bulletin-2097-html-newsletter)

[Tins]

Boeing CEO Muilenburg steps down to ′restore confidence′ | News | DW | 23.12.2019 (https://www.dw.com/en/boeing-ceo-muilenburg-steps-down-to-restore-confidence/a-51782500'maca=en-newsletter_en_bulletin-2097-html-newsletter)

Misleading heading.. The 737 has been flying since the '60s. The 737 still flies today. There are many variants of the 737. The 737 Max aircraft will almost definitely fly again, but the FAA is inspecting each and every one of them at this time. The 737 Max production line is shut down at this point, because they have around 4xx of them sitting around. These aircraft are ones already ordered by carriers, and will be delivered when the FAA re-certifies them.

Boeing is in a serious hurt situation ATM. They were complacent in a way, but I'll bet that has changed. Nobody wins here. Airbus cannot suddenly ramp up production to deal with the Boeing loss. We aren't talking about cars here. Boeing will fill their orders, and this will go away. After all, do YOU know what aircraft you fly on?

I have to ask, is there any point in just repeating "headlines"?

[bob10]

Misleading heading.. The 737 has been flying since the '60s. The 737 still flies today. There are many variants of the 737. The 737 Max aircraft will almost definitely fly again, but the FAA is inspecting each and every one of them at this time. The 737 Max production line is shut down at this point, because they have around 4xx of them sitting around. These aircraft are ones already ordered by carriers, and will be delivered when the FAA re-certifies them.

Boeing is in a serious hurt situation ATM. They were complacent in a way, but I'll bet that has changed. Nobody wins here. Airbus cannot suddenly ramp up production to deal with the Boeing loss. We aren't talking about cars here. Boeing will fill their orders, and this will go away. After all, do YOU know what aircraft you fly on?

I have to ask, is there any point in just repeating "headlines"?

The Boeing company has suspended production of the 737 Max as of January. Over 40 0f the aircraft have left the Renton production site every month at a test site facility and have to be parked in the desert, Moses Lake airfield or some where. The talk is that all 737 manufacturing may be moved to the largest production facility outside the US, in China. They will be tasked with fixing the problem. Those airlines that operate the 737 have almost to a man ordered the 737 Max. This will not go away.

Can Boeing recover?


As Boeing halts 737 MAX production, can the planemaker recover from the blow? | Business| Economy and finance news from a German perspective | DW | 17.12.2019 (https://www.dw.com/en/as-boeing-halts-737-max-production-can-the-planemaker-recover-from-the-blow/a-51705562)

[goingbush]

None of the grounded 737MAX aircraft will be in as good a condition as when they were parked,
this was written 5 months in, its now 9 months and counting.

How Airlines Are Defending Dormant 737 MAX Jets From The Ravages Of Corrosion, Insects And Time (https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremybogaisky/2019/08/12/boeing-737-max-desert-storage/#497f01041e61)

I would not fly on one even if they handed out parachutes.

[bob10]

Julian Bray, Cambridge University, on the 737

Aviation expert says Boeing 737 may never fly again | DW News - latest news and breaking stories | DW | 17.12.2019 (https://www.dw.com/en/aviation-expert-says-boeing-737-may-never-fly-again/av-51715017)

[Barraman]

"After all, do YOU know what aircraft you fly on?"

Indeed I do, each and every time - and I fly at least once a week!

There are some airlines and aircraft that I will not set foot on.

[bob10]

Misleading heading.. The 737 has been flying since the '60s. The 737 still flies today. There are many variants of the 737. The 737 Max aircraft will almost definitely fly again, but the FAA is inspecting each and every one of them at this time. The 737 Max production line is shut down at this point, because they have around 4xx of them sitting around. These aircraft are ones already ordered by carriers, and will be delivered when the FAA re-certifies them.

Boeing is in a serious hurt situation ATM. They were complacent in a way, but I'll bet that has changed. Nobody wins here. Airbus cannot suddenly ramp up production to deal with the Boeing loss. We aren't talking about cars here. Boeing will fill their orders, and this will go away. After all, do YOU know what aircraft you fly on?

I have to ask, is there any point in just repeating "headlines"?

I hope I have answered your Question. You must have had some interesting flights, I normally fly in Aircraft.

[JDNSW]

Julian Bray, Cambridge University, on the 737

Aviation expert says Boeing 737 may never fly again | DW News - latest news and breaking stories | DW | 17.12.2019 (https://www.dw.com/en/aviation-expert-says-boeing-737-may-never-fly-again/av-51715017)

Again, misleading headline. There are many 737s flying today, and likely to be far into the future. And the argument given by this 'expert', if it means anything, means that the 737MAX may never resume production, not that it may never fly. They are almost certain to fly again, even if production never resumes - and there are around 400 almost new ones waiting for delivery.

How long they remain in service may be a different story - many passengers know and care what they fly in (including myself) and it is very likely that the MAX may prove so unpopular with passengers that it gets rapidly relegated to budget airlines and freight. Whether airlines replace it with a different Boeing or an Airbus will decide Boeing's long term future. (provided they survive the financial stress of the next couple of years)

[bob10]

Again, misleading headline. There are many 737s flying today, and likely to be far into the future. And the argument given by this 'expert', if it means anything, means that the 737MAX may never resume production, not that it may never fly. They are almost certain to fly again, even if production never resumes - and there are around 400 almost new ones waiting for delivery.

How long they remain in service may be a different story - many passengers know and care what they fly in (including myself) and it is very likely that the MAX may prove so unpopular with passengers that it gets rapidly relegated to budget airlines and freight. Whether airlines replace it with a different Boeing or an Airbus will decide Boeing's long term future. (provided they survive the financial stress of the next couple of years)

Their are 7,046 737's of 11 variants [ commercial/business] flying around the World today. Some of the earlier 737's have reported airframe fatigue problems.[ pickle fork] , and the MAX was going to replace this generation 737. Boeing said the MAX would be certified, airworthiness directive issued, and ungrounded in mid December. FAA officials say that Boeings timetable is aggressive and far from certain. Nothing is certain with the 737 MAX. It will be the FAA whom determine the fate of the MAX, and after accusations that Boeing and the FAA were in bed together for the original certification of the MAX, the FAA will be playing hard ball. Any thinking air traveller will do their homework before flying with any airline, on any aircraft. That's why Airlines that may have been going to order the 737 MAX will be thinking again. Boeing have given Airbus the ultimate marketing ploy.

[4bee]

"After all, do YOU know what aircraft you fly on?"


Jesus, I hope the rostered Pilots do or we'll all be in the do da.[smilebigeye]

[DiscoMick]

It would be deeply politically controversial if Boeing moved production to China. Imagine the reaction.

[bob10]

It would be deeply politically controversial if Boeing moved production to China. Imagine the reaction.

Boeing has had a factory in China for ' finishing ' 737's since 2018, or there abouts .


Boeing delivers first 737 from Chinese completion site - CNN (https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/15/business/boeing-china-factory-737/index.html)

[Hugh Jars]

I believe the MAX will fly again. We are getting regular updates from Boeing on its progress.
Unless the aircraft designation on the booking engine relates somehow to a MAX (unlikely), it will be difficult for the average punter to tell.
Apart from the engine placement there is very little visible difference.
Personally I feel reasonably confident that Boeing will get this right. They have no choice. And I would be comfortable to fly the aeroplane once it’s gains certification.

[DiscoMick]

Boeing 737 Max: new 'troubling communications' sent to regulators

Boeing 737 Max: new 'troubling communications' sent to regulators | Business | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/dec/24/boeing-737-max-new-troubling-communications-faa?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard)

[vnx205]

I believe the MAX will fly again. We are getting regular updates from Boeing on its progress.
Unless the aircraft designation on the booking engine relates somehow to a MAX (unlikely), it will be difficult for the average punter to tell.
Apart from the engine placement there is very little visible difference.
Personally I feel reasonably confident that Boeing will get this right. They have no choice. And I would be comfortable to fly the aeroplane once it’s gains certification.

One of the astronauts scheduled to fly on the first shuttle after the Challenger disaster is reported to have said that he felt quite confident about his safety.

He said that everything would have been checked and double checked even more thoroughly than usual because NASA could not afford another disaster.

Maybe the same principle will apply to the 737 MAX. Maybe it will be tested and scrutinised even more thoroughly than usual before it takes to the skies again.

[Tins]

"After all, do YOU know what aircraft you fly on?"

Indeed I do, each and every time - and I fly at least once a week!

There are some airlines and aircraft that I will not set foot on.

Fair enough. I fly so rarely that i take what the airline sends. I wouldn't know a MAX from an NG to look at, and i would suggest that most casual fliers would be the same. As for airlines, well I flew Tiger once, and that will remain at once. Love Thai, ,don't really like Qantas, Emirates seem ok. That's about the limit of my experience unless you include TAA and Ansett.

[bob10]

The MAX has larger engines set more forward on the wing than the NG, which it was to replace. This moved the CG forward, and upset the trim. Hence the new computer trickery , that's how I read it. A former Boeing manager has testified that a major Boeing factory in the US was a factory in chaos. When he reported to his boss that the military would have shut down a factory for the number of safety concerns at Boeing, he was told the military is not a profit making concern. He is calling for a major investigation into procedures at that Boeing factory. Boeing workers were under immense pressure to reach deadlines, short cuts were taken.

Boeing ex-manager warned of a 'factory in chaos' (https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/other/boeing-ex-manager-warned-of-a-factory-in-chaos/vi-AAK277Z)

[DiscoMick]

Yes, it appears cost-cutting managers overruled the engineers.

[rick130]

Wasn't it one of the pilots on here that suggested in the past upper management were promoted internally from engineers, now they are MBA's brought in from outside?

[JDNSW]

Yes - combined with moving headquarters from Seattle to Chicago, outsourcing a lot of engineering, putting MBAs in charge. One result was no long term career path for engineers in the company, with obvious results in retention of good engineers.

[cripesamighty]

So not only do you lose senior engineers, but along with that goes your 'corporate memory', which is what prevents these foul-ups in the first place. Well done Boeing, you dingalings...

[JDNSW]

It seems the change was the result of the merger with McDonnell-Douglas.

[superquag]

Found this link and story - on a Country Doctor's blog, of all places ! I suspect he has more than a smattering of aeronautical interest, as he was aligning the (US) Naval training philosophy of encouraging learner pilots to indulge in developing 'Airmanship' - and his desire for Doctors to nurture the Healing parallel quality.

Anyway, there's some valuable background here, and as always, 'Devil lives in the detail'. (rarely revealed)

What Really Brought Down the Boeing 737 Max? - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-737-max-crashes.html'smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share)

[BradC]

outsourcing a lot of engineering, putting MBAs in charge.

This has been the ruin of many, many organisations globally.

The process of increasing efficiency happens at the expense of expertise. Companies cease being about product, quality and family and start worshiping at the grail of shareholder returns.

[JDNSW]

Found this link and story - on a Country Doctor's blog, of all places ! I suspect he has more than a smattering of aeronautical interest, as he was aligning the (US) Naval training philosophy of encouraging learner pilots to indulge in developing 'Airmanship' - and his desire for Doctors to nurture the Healing parallel quality.

Anyway, there's some valuable background here, and as always, 'Devil lives in the detail'. (rarely revealed)

What Really Brought Down the Boeing 737 Max? - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-737-max-crashes.html'smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share)

This article falls into the same trap as the assumption that the fault is entirely Boeing's, or the FAA's - accidents do not have a single "cause".

While it is quite clear that one of the major factors is the culture of the airlines involved, it is also quite clear that a major factor is the culture of the aircraft manufacturer.

This article is another attempt to put all the blame on the "foreigners" for not being more like the Americans, the same as the Indonesian and Ethiopian authorities are trying to put all the blame on Boeing. As with all accidents, there is plenty of blame to go round.

[JDNSW]

This has been the ruin of many, many organisations globally.

The process of increasing efficiency happens at the expense of expertise. Companies cease being about product, quality and family and start worshiping at the grail of shareholder returns.

To a large extent it is a matter of time scale - and with MBAs it is all the next quarter's bottom line. Whether this is really to the benefit of shareholders is another matter!

As I have repeatedly pointed out to previous employees, if you outsource any of your organisation's key functions, you will probably save money, at least initially, but you are also effectively giving the supplier the experience that would previously be given to your employees, so that special expertise derived from this expertise will also be available to your competitors. And if you keep this up, in a relatively short time, you will not even have enough in house expertise to know whether your supplier knows what they are doing, or whether they are taking you for a ride!

[DiscoMick]

Yes, I was thinking something similar recently when I read the NSW Government is still planning to privatise its forestry operations for short term gain. All those foresters with their expertise and fire fighting skills lost to some private profit maker. Have they learnt nothing from the disaster of electricity privatisation?

[superquag]

That privatisations and/or 'Public-Private Partnership debacles are so predominantly Epic Failures, one could be forgiven for imagining an underlying Conspiracy.. driven by faceless overseas bankers business or even governments.

Airbus is driven more by "Designing Engineers" with MBA's than Boeing used to be. until recently. Yes, Boeing is indeed a victim of it's recent 'culture change', but when national / racial / religious culture impacts the cockpit, it needs to be illuminated.

IMHO, at worst, that article illustrated how the Swiss Cheese slices came together.

[superquag]

Yes, I was thinking something similar recently when I read the NSW Government is still planning to privatise its forestry operations for short term gain. All those foresters with their expertise and fire fighting skills lost to some private profit maker. Have they learnt nothing from the disaster of electricity privatisation?

No.


They are just stupid, lazy, treasonous, True Believers or worse. Chuck a dart.[bigwhistle]

[Hugh Jars]

Airbus philosophy is keep the pilot out of the loop, the computers know better.
Think of the Paris Air Show and the introduction of the A320.

Boeing’s is the pilot has the final decision.

As a pilot, I know what I prefer.

[superquag]

....
Think of the Paris Air Show and the introduction of the A320.

Boeing’s is the pilot has the final decision.

As a pilot, I know what I prefer.


Whatever our armchair viewpoint of that Pilot's low speed / altitude profile, it was fly-able.

But AFAIK, required (rate?) throttle increase not permitted by the software. [bigsad]

I'm not looking forward to 'auto-drive' cars...

[4bee]

Vaguely recall that J.. Weren't the Flight Deck Crew apparently showing off & left it too late for the engines to spool up & finished up in a Forest near the Airport?

[superquag]

Vaguely recall that J.. Weren't the Flight Deck Crew apparently showing off & left it too late for the engines to spool up & finished up in a Forest near the Airport?


Absolument !

EDIT:- (late) Not quite, Better = "Oui & non", 'showing off' - yes as in Officially demonstrating a feature of the computers...and 'No' as in being egotistically stupid.

Taking WIKI with a pinch of salt, - it's a starting point for further links.
Air France Flight 296 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_296)

One of the links:- AirDisaster.Com: Investigations: Air France 296 (https://web.archive.org/web/20050805082440/http://www.airdisaster.com/investigations/af296/af296.shtml) - suggests deception at a high (?)level.

Just as two large US auto manufacturers found out the hard way, public perception of their product-safety can savage sales... before the damning evidence surfaces...at which point it's all over for that item. Another reason to blame the Pilot not the plane.

[Hugh Jars]

Vaguely recall that J.. Weren't the Flight Deck Crew apparently showing off & left it too late for the engines to spool up & finished up in a Forest near the Airport?

Won’t go into the showing off, but the computers thought better of going into TOGA and instead went into Alpha Floor protection and prevented the elevators from responding to crew commands. From then on the crew were just passengers into the trees.

There is some conjecture about the engines being at flight idle immediately before the attempted go-around. Any pilot with half a brain knows the engines need to be spooled up in case of a go-around, as they are very slow to accelerate from idle. In the B737, we are at around 54% N1 for flaps 30, and around 61% N1 at flaps 40. Idle is around 35%. To go from idle to TOGA can take several seconds. From 54% to TOGA is almost instantaneous.

Boeing gives the crew full authority over the flight controls. In a Boeing, they could have done a normal go-around, or a terrain escape manoeuvre if they so wished.

That’s the difference between the two philosophies...

Glad I fly Boeing.

[4bee]

"Glad I fly Boeing."

I see what you mean, that could become a New Airline Slogan. Well, sort of. [smilebigeye]


Maybe it might have been a case of a tad too much bubbly, & also I guess controls are difficult to reach with a Stewardess on each knee. We are talking about the French here.

Vive la something...

[BradC]

"Glad I fly Boeing."

I see what you mean, that could become a New Airline Slogan. Well, sort of. [smilebigeye]

I believe it's "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going".

My favourite ughmerican double negative came from a knuckle dragger I met one day who was having a crack at my bike. He confidently asserted "if it ain't from Milwaukee, it ain't ****". I agreed with him.

[Hugh Jars]

Maybe it might have been a case of a tad too much bubbly, & also I guess controls are difficult to reach with a Stewardess on each knee. We are talking about the French here.

Vive la something...

Airbus flight deck. It has a brilliant dinner table for those longer sectors [biggrin]

156962

[4bee]

[biggrin][biggrin] Thanks J. I bet Design costs were high for that little layout but I notice there is no French equivalent for an ESKY.[bigsad]

[superquag]

Airbus flight deck. It has a brilliant dinner table for those longer sectors [biggrin]

156962

Which Airbus ? - how many engines ? - what verson of Photoshop? [bighmmm]

[Hugh Jars]

Most likely an A340.

[trout1105]

Ukrainian Boeing 737 crashes in Iran, all 170 aboard killed: Iranian state TV (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/ukrainian-boeing-737-crashes-in-iran-all-170-aboard-killed-iranian-state-tv/ar-BBYJ0GY?li=AAgfYrC&ocid=spartanntp)

[JDNSW]

737-800 apparently. Initial reports suggest an in flight engine fire followed by loss of control, shortly after takeoff.

Cause is pure speculation, but although only hours after the Iran missile strikes against US bases in Iraq, it is difficult to see how it could be related to Iran-US tension. I have no knowledge of the airline, but the first thought would be maintenance!

[superquag]

I really, really need to get out more... [tonguewink]

My CDO ( OCD for those who don't have it....) finally beat me.

- Dodgy A 380, Not the exact same pic used, but close enough. Both side sticks have been injured during the Photoshopping.

Airbus may scrap the world's largest passenger plane, the A380 - Geek.com (https://www.geek.com/news/airbus-may-scrap-the-worlds-largest-passenger-plane-the-a380-1611568/)

157001

[bob10]

Boeing internal documents crucify Boeing.

" A plane designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" . Boeing internal document.

Boeing 737 MAX: Internal documents reveal staff mocking regulators, management | News | DW | 10.01.2020 (https://www.dw.com/en/boeing-737-max-internal-documents-reveal-staff-mocking-regulators-management/a-51950981'maca=en-newsletter_en_bulletin-2097-html-newsletter)

[bob10]

Nice work if you can get it.






View in browser (https://nl.nytimes.com/f/newsletter/BuyaUgFaQcn1DREQjsVXww~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRf-4FfP0ToaHR0cDovL3d3dy5ueXRpbWVzLmNvbS8yMDIwLzAxLzE wL2J1c2luZXNzL2JvZWluZy1kZW5uaXMtbXVpbGVuYnVyZy1zZ XZlcmFuY2UuaHRtbD9lbWM9ZWRpdF9uYV8yMDIwMDExMCZyZWY 9Y3RhJm5sPWJyZWFraW5nLW5ld3M_Y2FtcGFpZ25faWQ9NjAma W5zdGFuY2VfaWQ9MCZzZWdtZW50X2lkPTIwMjM3JnVzZXJfaWQ 9MzhiNjUzZjU5ZDhhNzg4ZDJiODAyOWQzNDlmYjA1ZjEmcmVna V9pZD04NDUzNDY2OVcDbnl0QgoALF_8GF6xf8D9Uhlyb2JlcnR sYWtlNDI5NDNAZ21haWwuY29tWAQAAAAA) | nytimes.com (https://nl.nytimes.com/f/a/4YSVbtoGY3vSJDZKlUHnWw~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRf-4FfP0StaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubnl0aW1lcy5jb20vP2NhbXBhaWd uX2lkPTYwJmluc3RhbmNlX2lkPTAmc2VnbWVudF9pZD0yMDIzN yZ1c2VyX2lkPTM4YjY1M2Y1OWQ4YTc4OGQyYjgwMjlkMzQ5ZmI wNWYxJnJlZ2lfaWQ9ODQ1MzQ2Njkmbmw9YnJlYWtpbmctbmV3c y1hbGVydHMmZW1jPWVkaXRfbmFfMjAyMDAxMTBXA255dEIKACx f_BhesX_A_VIZcm9iZXJ0bGFrZTQyOTQzQGdtYWlsLmNvbVgEA AAAAA~~)


https://ci6.googleusercontent.com/proxy/69YSixEF6txmEcq5Mh7113EMmjy34RCNwfHgQ7gooGVt7iAp_r qOEtvSuu_rGKC_sK0oH4smr-pmt04QqN_2TgcmNnhHV2s1c16D1H2nRgzS1cmr_xCHnw=s0-d-e1-ft#https://static01.nyt.com/email-images/New%20Headers/NYT-WMK-W-RGB.png







BREAKING NEWS



Dennis Muilenberg, who ran Boeing during two deadly crashes, will leave the company with $62.2 million in stock and pension awards. (https://nl.nytimes.com/f/newsletter/N6r5dbfMfl4LLSz6O0crww~~/AAAAAQA~/RgRf-4FfP0TtaHR0cDovL3d3dy5ueXRpbWVzLmNvbS8yMDIwLzAxLzE wL2J1c2luZXNzL2JvZWluZy1kZW5uaXMtbXVpbGVuYnVyZy1zZ XZlcmFuY2UuaHRtbD9lbWM9ZWRpdF9uYV8yMDIwMDExMCZyZWY 9aGVhZGxpbmUmbmw9YnJlYWtpbmctbmV3cz9jYW1wYWlnbl9pZ D02MCZpbnN0YW5jZV9pZD0wJnNlZ21lbnRfaWQ9MjAyMzcmdXN lcl9pZD0zOGI2NTNmNTlkOGE3ODhkMmI4MDI5ZDM0OWZiMDVmM SZyZWdpX2lkPTg0NTM0NjY5VwNueXRCCgAsX_wYXrF_wP1SGXJ vYmVydGxha2U0Mjk0M0BnbWFpbC5jb21YBAAAAAA~)


Friday, January 10, 2020 5:33 PM EST



Dennis A. Muilenburg will not receive any additional severance or separationpayments in connection with his departure, and Boeing said he had forfeitedstock units worth some $14.6 million.
But the value of the other stock andpension awards he is contractually entitled to receive is worth $62.2 million,the company said.

[superquag]

Incompetence and/or arrogance are always rewarded... [bigwhistle]

IMHO, Boeing management went off-course when they amalgamated...

[4bee]

Glad to see he will have sufficient for his Golf Club fees.[bigsad]

[bob10]

Now, Boeing dreamliner under attack from a former manager.


Boeing Dreamliner production problems threaten the aircraft's safety (https://thenewdaily.com.au/life/travel/2020/01/28/boeing-dreamliner-safety-latest/?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Morning%20News%20-%2020200129)

[ozscott]

Quality Manager no less.

Good story about him on ABC's 7.30 Report.

The old saying was If it's not Boeing I'm not going is no longer being trotted out.by frequent fliers I know.

It's a shame the A380.has ceased production.

Cheers

[JDNSW]

....
It's a shame the A380.has ceased production.

Cheers

I rather like the A380, but the simple fact is that eliminating restrictions on over water flights by twin engined aircraft, together with the relatively few routes that demand aircraft of this size means that there are very few routes where the large four engined plane makes sense - the fuel and maintenance costs per passenger are inevitably higher for the four engined plane, and in most cases outweigh the other savings gained from the larger size.

[BradC]

It's a shame the A380.has ceased production.

I was working in and around Emirates for the first couple of years they brought the 380 into service. The quality issues with those aircraft were every bit as bad as those being bandied about in the reports of the Dreamliner. Sure, the wings didn't fall off, but swarf in the switch boards, potable water leaks into the electrical systems (one so big it "rained" on the lower deck). Some big ones, lots of little ones. They were kept pretty quiet.

Not saying Boeing isn't bad, but some of the Airbus issues were pretty severe also.

[ozscott]

Bugger. In some ways I would rather not know, having flown the A380 a few times.

The 767 seems like a reliable long hauler...But who knows under the skin?

Cheers

[BradC]

Bugger. In some ways I would rather not know, having flown the A380 a few times.

The 767 seems like a reliable long hauler...But who knows under the skin?

Cheers

I stick to airlines who tend to maintain their aircraft and train their crew. If you read the list of near misses, they're almost entirely due to the boys up the front with the big hats being able to aviate, navigate and communicate with a damaged aircraft underneath them.

There is zero substitute for experience when it turns to soup. None.

[ozscott]

I stick to airlines who tend to maintain their aircraft and train their crew. If you read the list of near misses, they're almost entirely due to the boys up the front with the big hats being able to aviate, navigate and communicate with a damaged aircraft underneath them.

There is zero substitute for experience when it turns to soup. None.That's how I have always seen it. I always like seeing grey hair in the hot seats. Qantas still have the best overall balance of best pilots and maintenance. Emirates are impressive also for newest fleet and still plenty of grey foxes although they could not get enough captains to meet the number of aircraft they were purchasing and so they dropped their min flight hour requirement down considerably so I read. Pitty about that.

Cheers

[Hugh Jars]

Qantas still have the best overall balance of best pilots and maintenance.

Sorry Scott, I have to disagree. Having flown (worked) in both Qantas and Virgin Australia operations (over 10 years in each), I have to say QF is no better or worse, flight standards-wise.

Virgin hired a huge number of highly experienced Ansett (and other reputable airlines') pilots over the years, and this knowledge has been (and continues to be) passed down to the next generation of VA crew.

Both airlines achieve equal training outcomes, but achieve it in different ways.

John R.

[4bee]

I stick to airlines who tend to maintain their aircraft and train their crew.


........and why wouldn't they? They have probably Billions at stake not to mention getting a bad reputation, but I take your point.

[Hugh Jars]

There are a bunch of foreign airlines that fly into Australia that I would never consider flying with.

But some people will always take the cheaper fare without a second thought.

Caveat emptor.

[ozscott]

Sorry Scott, I have to disagree. Having flown (worked) in both Qantas and Virgin Australia operations (over 10 years in each), I have to say QF is no better or worse, flight standards-wise.

Virgin hired a huge number of highly experienced Ansett (and other reputable airlines') pilots over the years, and this knowledge has been (and continues to be) passed down to the next generation of VA crew.

Both airlines achieve equal training outcomes, but achieve it in different ways.

John R.Hi John I didn't have Virgin in mind. Cheers

Ps. I did fly a Brasilia via Virgin from Cairns a while ago and both guys on the cockpit were very young. Good to know though that there is a fair bit of grey hair in VA.

[4bee]

I see Airbus are in the news big time with a "couple[bigwhistle]" of shonky corruption deals worth Billions.



Airbus resolves global bribery scandal for record $4B | Article | Compliance Week (https://www.complianceweek.com/anti-bribery/airbus-resolves-global-bribery-scandal-for-record-4b/28387.article)


I wonder whether the Wright Bros. ever had these problems?:rolleyes:

[JDNSW]

I see Airbus are in the news big time with a "couple[bigwhistle]" of shonky corruption deals worth Billions.



Airbus resolves global bribery scandal for record $4B | Article | Compliance Week (https://www.complianceweek.com/anti-bribery/airbus-resolves-global-bribery-scandal-for-record-4b/28387.article)


I wonder whether the Wright Bros. ever had these problems?:rolleyes:

Wright brothers seem to have spent most of their effort in the early days suing all and sundry for patent infringement. The major result of this was that when the US entered WW1 in 1917, their military had perforce to equip with British and French aircraft, albeit mostly made under licence in the US.

[4bee]

Wright brothers seem to have spent most of their effort in the early days suing all and sundry for patent infringement. The major result of this was that when the US entered WW1 in 1917, their military had perforce to equip with British and French aircraft, albeit mostly made under licence in the US.



perforce

Now there is a word one doesn't hear much of these days John. You must be an olde fashion dude like me? [biggrin]

[JDNSW]

Now there is a word one doesn't hear much of these days John. You must be an olde fashion dude like me? [biggrin]

No, just old!

[JDNSW]

Wright Brothers contribution to flying was mainly that unlike everyone else at the time, they understood (by 1903, anyway), that the key was pilot skill and controlability. The first they covered by becoming competent glider pilots before attempting powered flight, and the second by their invention of wing warping to provide roll control and, together with the well understood rudder, enable coordinated turns.
The wrights patented wing warping, and Curtiss invented ailerons to circumvent this patent. These seem to have been independently invented in Europe, although it is difficult to tell, because nearly all the early aviators were in good communication with each other, whether in France, UK, USA, Russia, Australia, or Brazil. Wrights' attempts to use their patent to cover all aircraft with roll control (i.e. anything practical) meant that the centre of aviation advance moved to Europe and especially France, where the courts were less supportive of patents.

By 1913, when Wrights were trying to sell a little modified version of their 1903 flyer to the US army and suing their competitors, Avro was selling their 504 to the RFC (which remained in service to 1930), Junker in Germany was building the first all metal aeroplane, and Sikorsky had already flown the first four engined aircraft, with closed accommodation for sixteen, electric light, toilet etc in St Petersburg, Bleriot in France was selling multiple types and developing military aircraft used in WW1.

[bob10]

Another software flaw found in the 737 MAX. This time, just an indicator light. Not sure if 'just ' is appropriate.

Boeing finds new 737 MAX software flaw | The New Daily (https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/world/2020/02/07/boeing-737-max-software-flaw/?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Copy%20of%20PM%20Extra%20-%2020200207)

[bob10]

damning report shows Boeing did not pass on key changes to deadly planes.

Boeing kept federal regulator in the dark on key changes (https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/world/2020/07/01/boeing-flight-control-system/?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PM%20Extra%20-%2020200701)

[JDNSW]

Nothing new - this was extensively reported months ago. I suppose what this report is adding is the acknowledgement by the FAA that they were kept in the dark. Or perhaps in Boeing's pocket.

[bob10]

House report condemns Boeing and FAA in 737 MAX disasters.

House Report Condemns Boeing and F.A.A. in 737 Max Disasters - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/16/business/boeing-737-max-house-report.html?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20200916&instance_id=0&nl=breaking-news&ref=cta&regi_id=84534669&segment_id=38230&user_id=38b653f59d8a788d2b8029d349fb05f1)

[bob10]

Scrutiny intensifies on the Boeing board after the 737max crashes

Nearly two dozen current and former Boeing officials and board members are named in a recent lawsuit that depicts the board as passive toward operational problems on earlier Boeing models and overly trusting of former chief executive Dennis Muilenburg's explanations for the disasters.


Scrutiny intensifies on Boeing board after 737 MAX crashes (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/us/scrutiny-intensifies-on-boeing-board-after-737-max-crashes/ar-BB19qtru?ocid=msedgdhp)

[4bee]

Scrutiny intensifies on the Boeing board after the 737max crashes

Nearly two dozen current and former Boeing officials and board members are named in a recent lawsuit that depicts the board as passive toward operational problems on earlier Boeing models and overly trusting of former chief executive Dennis Muilenburg's explanations for the disasters.


Scrutiny intensifies on Boeing board after 737 MAX crashes (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/us/scrutiny-intensifies-on-boeing-board-after-737-max-crashes/ar-BB19qtru?ocid=msedgdhp)


So, just when they thought they had left their work problems at work this is going to smack them in the head & not just the head either.

I bet the Shredders have been running hot.

[JDNSW]

Boeing's problems originated from the board decision to isolate management from engineering, highlighted by the move of HQ from Seattle to Chicago, and the gradual replacement of all the engineers in management by MBAs.

While this gave them good headline results for the next ten or more years, it also set them up for the 737-MAX disasters and for being beaten by SpaceX in the race to provide a US manned space vehicle. If the company survives this it will be only because of massive government support - which is likely, regardless of who wins the presidential race, as it is probably unthinkable for the USA to be left without a viable airliner producer. (The field is wider for space and defence)

[bob10]

The 737Max poised for a comeback ?

Boeing′s troubled 737 MAX poised for a comeback? | Business| Economy and finance news from a German perspective | DW | 17.11.2020 (https://www.dw.com/en/boeings-troubled-737-max-poised-for-a-comeback/a-55623409'maca=en-newsletter_en_bulletin-2097-xml-newsletter&r=2716467880229367&lid=1678067&pm_ln=62006)

[bob10]

First paying flight of a 737 Maxi since the grounding.

A Boeing 737 Max plane just flew paying passengers for the first time since its worldwide grounding in March 2019 (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/a-boeing-737-max-plane-just-flew-paying-passengers-for-the-first-time-since-its-worldwide-grounding-in-march-2019/ar-BB1bMwas?ocid=msedgntp)

[bob10]

Boeing 'inappropriately coached' pilots in 737 MAX testing, US Senate report says - ABC News (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-19/boeing-inappropriately-coached-pilots-in-737-max-testing-report/13000928)

[Old Farang]

FAA to audit Boeing's 'minor' design changes after latest MAX issue


FAA to audit Boeing's 'minor' design changes after latest MAX issue (bangkokpost.com) (https://www.bangkokpost.com/world/2108395/faa-to-audit-boeings-minor-design-changes-after-latest-max-issue)

NEW YORK: US air safety regulators are auditing Boeing's procedures for making "minor" design changes to planes in the wake of the latest problem with its troubled 737 MAX, regulators said Thursday.

The Federal Aviation Administration's review aims to help Boeing identify "areas where it can improve its processes," an agency spokeswoman said.

"These initiatives are part of our commitment to continually evaluating and improving our oversight of all aspects of aviation safety, recognizing that catching errors at the earliest possible point enhances what is already the world's safest form of transportation."

The audit is in addition to the agency's ongoing investigation into the issue that led to grounding of more than 100 MAX planes after Boeing earlier this month alerted 16 airlines of an electrical problem with some of the planes.