Comorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4909 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 month 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7090 times:
I think it's an excellent article, especially helpful in pulling it all together after reading the various threads here. Posts and blogs only give a partial picture, and are no substitute for good journalism. I think Boeing execs have been candid in this piece, and the risk-sharing arrangment with vendors(and its pitfalls) is made very clear.
On non-political matters, both the WSJ and the NYT are examples of journalism at it's best.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 33112 posts, RR: 85
Reply 3, posted (6 years 1 month 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 6670 times:
Quoting Allegro (Reply 5): They said that the wing was Designed by the Japanese (Mistubishi), but wasn't it designed by Boeing with Mistubishi's help?
The original plan, at least, was to outsource the wing design to the Japanese. This caused a great amount of angst within SPEEA and Boeing's engineering community since the wings are considered part of the "crown jewels" of aircraft design. So it's possible that Boeing either took the design back in-house or they shared the design with the Japanese.
Boeing did design the wing/body join area that is the source of the current issue.