khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:31 am

CHICAGO — The Boeing Co. (BA) has agreed to pay $15 million to settle federal allegations that it broke the law by selling commercial airplanes equipped with a small chip that has military applications.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,191050,00.html
 
FlagshipAZ
Posts: 3192
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 12:40 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:38 am

Oh well, what's else is new? Everything can have "military applications" in an commercial jetliner. Boeing can get its $15 million back merely by selling one 737. The fine's nothing but a slap on the ass for Boeing. Regards.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:53 am

Quoting FlagshipAZ (Reply 1):
The fine's nothing but a slap on the ass for Boeing

I know $15M is not much (though it's more than I've got), but I think it's interesting considering how much support the company is alledged to receive. Just shows that when it comes to crossing t's and dotting i's, Boeing is under a magnifying glass.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 9:02 am

Quoting FlagshipAZ (Reply 1):
Oh well, what's else is new? Everything can have "military applications" in an commercial jetliner. Boeing can get its $15 million back merely by selling one 737. The fine's nothing but a slap on the ass for Boeing. Regards.

This was a bullshit fine in the first place. Boeing is just paying this shakedown to get it behind them.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3177
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 9:07 am

Boeing executives had argued that a military enemy seeking the chip would have alternatives to buying a $60 million jet and taking apart the flight box.

That about sums it up.
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
airwave
Posts: 1105
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 3:42 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 9:32 am

Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 4):
Boeing executives had argued that a military enemy seeking the chip would have alternatives to buying a $60 million jet and taking apart the flight box.

That about sums it up.

 checkmark 

Heck, the 747 has military applications...it's called Air Force One. By this logic, Boeing owes Uncle Sam something like $3.5 billion in fines going back to airframe no. 1. It's unfortunate that there are now so many tarriffs and regulations and whatnot on the books that it becomes unwieldy to maintain 100% compliance, even for a company as large and international as Boeing.

Airwave  eyebrow 
When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
 
Korg747
Posts: 502
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 5:18 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 9:41 am

Good job, now the enemy will be interested in finding those 94 jets thanks to making this public....whoever the enemy is?(Osama knows what a QRS-11 gyrochip is?)
Please excuse my English!
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 11:54 am

Quoting Airwave (Reply 5):
Heck, the 747 has military applications...it's called Air Force One

Air Force One is a VC-25, a 747-200B modified for military use. I think the difference is the gold toilet seats.  Wink

For anyone wondering: http://www.systron.com/pro_QRS11.asp
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13762
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 11:58 am

It's some kind of gyroscope on a chip, IIRC, that allows for very small applications in missiles and such. Unless it's a different part than this, but I think that was the part.

I guess Boeing since then has been forced to use a larger and heavier gyroscope device?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:03 pm

Doesn't military technology go into the private/corporate sectors before trickling down into commercial aviation, i.e. HUD's, digital flight deck, etc? Composite use didn't start in commercial aviation.

Quoting N328KF (Reply 3):
This was a bullshit fine in the first place

Why do you regard it as such? I would figure if a technology has use in both military and commercial, then it should be advertised/manufactured as such by the company that designed it. If Boeing choose a military-targeted product, they should answer for it. Why not use a commercial version of the product? Was it not available? If that was the case, they should have made their case with the company and whoever such a product affects before ordering. I'm not saying if they have or have not, but had they followed the proper procedure for accuiring this technology, this would not have happened.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:06 pm

Quoting Lehpron (Reply 9):
Why do you regard it as such? I would figure if a technology has use in both military and commercial, then it should be advertised/manufactured as such by the company that designed it. If Boeing choose a military-targeted product, they should answer for it.

Because Boeing was singled out for this one item. It's an item that can be readily gotten through other sources. Someone wanted to make an example of Boeing. And it's part of the same shit that is causing trouble for the F-35 and P-8.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:42 pm

Quoting N328KF (Reply 10):
It's an item that can be readily gotten through other sources.

The impression I got from your reply was that Boeing either cannot make a mistake or the fine was a way to thrust authority over Boeing. If there were other sources of this technology, was there any reason Boeing couldn't have gotten it?

Quoting N328KF (Reply 10):
Someone wanted to make an example of Boeing.

Who? If it doesn't matter who, then why do you infer it? My point is that there isn't anyone that makes examples of companies. No person or company should be above the law.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
robsawatsky
Posts: 477
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 7:07 am

RE: Boeing Fined $15M

Mon Apr 10, 2006 1:58 pm

Quoting N328KF (Reply 10):
Because Boeing was singled out for this one item. It's an item that can be readily gotten through other sources.

Since the chip is US made, an export license trail would have to follow it no matter who the eventual exporter was, including those potential "other sources".