NightStar
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu May 09, 2019 11:17 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun May 12, 2019 5:41 am

WingsOfLove wrote:
NightStar wrote:
https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/04/13/boeing-crushes-airbus-q1-aircraft-orders-737-max.aspx

Airbus has lost more orders this year than Boeing has


"The net order total is even worse for Boeing (NYSE: BA) which, after cutting more than 200 orders from its books in relation to the suspended operations of India’s Jet Airways, saw its official net order total fall to a deficit of 119 jets through the first quarter."

https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/new ... april.html

Airbus is negative 58 through April. Boeing has only reported cancellations for 1Q.


It's still interesting to see that despite Boeing's woes, Airbus doesn't seem to be capitalizing on it. They both are doing abysmally bad this year.
 
fabian9
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 5:27 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture

Sun May 12, 2019 6:03 am

smartplane wrote:
Airlines and military, raise your acceptance standards for the benefit of crews and passengers, and OEM's are sure to follow.


I disagree wholeheartedly with this - a company’s quality department should always set a higher standard than the customer expects. Don’t turn the customer into the quality inspector...
 
WIederling
Posts: 8681
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun May 12, 2019 6:44 am

morrisond wrote:
So Airbus is the first loser then?

your reasoning is difficult to grasp.

Airbus -58 over 4 month vs Boeing -119 for 3 month ( and not really touched by the ET crash yet )
( linear extrapolation (to 4 month ) would set B net order loss numbers ~3times higher than Airbus.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 8681
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun May 12, 2019 6:52 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
Your point on the Camero/Mustang/Corvette - they are hot cars with amazing performance.

The excellence is in US Trucks and SUV's.


Guy I worked with got a Corvette here in Germany. Nice, flashy on the outside. A girl mover.
Under the hood though .. and looking at finishing quality...
Same seems to go for Tesla. Bit like medieval cathedrals: flashy religious statement sitting on roman foundations.

US small trucks ( and thus SUVs ) need and get protection from chicken tax.

The lower midrange of in Japan produced cars seem to go above EU ( or DE ) quality of production.
( i.e. types like the Yaris show superior reliability relative the Aygo ( or Peugeot 107/8, Citroen C1 ) )
Murphy is an optimist
 
1989worstyear
Posts: 616
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:53 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun May 12, 2019 7:12 am

morrisond wrote:
A3801000 wrote:
They use fuel like they don't care about future generations, they can't really be driven any faster then let's say 120 km/h etc. Cheapest to design, cheapest to build but still ok. Kind of a 'That'll do'.
Problem is that other countries can produce such cars too, but much cheaper. And again other countries decided to build high quality cars, advanced engines, no big difference if driven 120 or 240 km/h.
It seems that Boeing is going the 'cheap' way too. Not intentionally designing or building 'cheap' planes but 'that'll do' planes. The battery problems in the 787? Could have easily been solved earlier, but would have taken more money and more time. MCAS in the MAX, same. Flutter and software problems in the 748, again the same. And also the reduction of costs in production seems to show: FOD problems during manufacturing for the 787 and the 767 Tanker seems to show that.
Is it 'safety culture'? Or is it 'maximum profit' culture?
IMO Boeing needs to turn around for the long term and start designing and building highest quality again. 'Cheap' planes are or will be available soon from other countries (China/Russia).
I hope the do turn around but I have my doubts.


I'm Canadian but I'm going to defend my American Cousins. Please stop with the American bashing and attacks. Not all Americans are the same.

American cars can't be driven beyond 120km/h and can't go 240 km/h? You obviously do not know much about American Vehicles like the Camaro/Mustang/Corvette or the Chrysler/JEEP SRT models - even there generic cars are safe at high speeds and in general can get to high speeds and safe highway speeds easier anyways as they don't have puny motors like some of the European Cars base cars.

BTW - Most American small cars are based off Cars designed for Europe by Ford or Fiat. Even Gas guzzling Full size SUV's and trucks are perfectly stable at 160 km/h - although I don't know why you need to go faster than that - Fuel Economy goes in the Toilet and how good is that for the Environment and BTW I believe the highest limit in North America is 130 km/h.

Yes I remember now - Europe has brought the world the oh so clean diesel engine. How much damage has been done to the Environment due to all the emissions cheating. I'm sure Diesels are super clean above 160km/h.

If Tesla hadn't been funded by American Capitalism Electric Cars would not be where there are either. Where was Europe's leadership on this?

In terms of Boeing's hyper focus on Profitability - they are not building cheap planes. The Carbon technology on the 787 cost billions to develop - The battery system on the 787 was very expensive to design - it did not save money - it was meant to be lighter to save Airlines money.

Part of their focus on Profitability has been directly related to Airbus and there predatory pricing practises in their quest to get market share. Combined with Large bags of cash (I'm sure Boeing hands out bags of cash as well but Airbus seems to have taken it to a new level) to win orders.

Finally let me remind you - Boeing was ready to spend billions developing a clean sheet for the 737 back in 2011 - but the airlines voted no and wanted a re-enginged version of what they have. They got what they ordered. Albeit with one bad system.

They will most likely launch a new State of the are NMA/NSA soon that will cost billions with probably unprecedented safety and I would bet Airbus will respond with warmed over versions of the A320 which will be 50 years old at that point.


Don't forget that "fuel efficient and superior European" A320 wing is already 30.5 years old.

Regarding the NSA - all I can say is, what a missed opportunity (much like throwing a legal fit with BBD and letting Airbus get the C Series) :banghead:
Stuck at age 15 thanks to the certification date of the A320-200 and my parents' decision to postpone having a kid by 3 years. At least there's Dignitas...
 
axio
Posts: 252
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:44 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun May 12, 2019 8:36 am

greendot wrote:
And, assuming there were software problems in the future, is the FAA really set up to regulate a high technology industry such as software? One day the problem really will be software and the FAA will not be adequate to regulate something it has no idea about. This isn't about just the FAA. We have similar problems with the FDA and EPA. Government agencies that are politically manipulated, not subject to public scrutiny, littered with people favoring a political party, and often led by people who came from or go to the very industry they are supposed to regulate.


Frankly, we are also looking at the consequence of decades of being told 'big government is a bad thing'. 'Big government', a.k.a. an apolitical professional civil service, is how you provide enough oversight that people don't get lead poisoning from their water pipes, can breathe air without wearing face masks, and stop 346 people dying in air crashes because of design shortcuts. If, as a society, we're prepared to wear all those 'negative consequences', then sure, we don't need big government, but the uproar over these crashes suggests we do. Put another way (and thus keeping on topic :)), Boeing's alleged safety culture is perhaps quite in-line with wider culture.

FluidFlow wrote:
If you want to check the "cost" of a life, check out your car insurance. Where I am from you can add a accident insurance (covers health costs of you and your passengers). This is limited in case of death do 20'000. So the insurance will actually put a price on a life and the same is done in for airline insurance. It will be stated how much life is worth.

Your car insurance cost-of-life is based on providing funeral expenses and is quite different from the cost-of-life considered by an economist. In cost-benefit-analyses for road safety, for instance, the cost of a fatality is in the order of several million dollars (http://bca.transportationeconomics.org/ ... -accidents).
Time for a new viewing deck at AKL!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 9777
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun May 12, 2019 8:40 am

axio wrote:
Frankly, we are also looking at the consequence of decades of being told 'big government is a bad thing'. 'Big government', a.k.a. an apolitical professional civil service, is how you provide enough oversight that people don't get lead poisoning from their water pipes, can breathe air without wearing face masks, and stop 346 people dying in air crashes because of design shortcuts. If, as a society, we're prepared to wear all those 'negative consequences', then sure, we don't need big government, but the uproar over these crashes suggests we do. Put another way (and thus keeping on topic :)), Boeing's alleged safety culture is perhaps quite in-line with wider culture.


You seem to forget that it isn't just the Americans whom grant an air worthy certificate, it is every rogatory body in the world.

As far as Boeing's safety culture, yes perhaps, it is difficult to say. I have been fortunate enough to have PM's from several of Boeing employees, so that was quite interesting.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
WIederling
Posts: 8681
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun May 12, 2019 8:56 am

Dutchy wrote:
You seem to forget that it isn't just the Americans whom grant an air worthy certificate, it is every rogatory body in the world.


In an environment of US preference for strong arming others for their own gain than accepting reasonable arguments as the presented facade would suggest. What changed is that US institutions and corporations today show their objectives much more openly.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2928
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun May 12, 2019 1:43 pm

WIederling wrote:
an environment of US preference for strong arming others for their own gain than accepting reasonable arguments as the presented facade would suggest.


Strong arm, perhaps. But the game is played on both sides. If they desires stronger regulations, it is their perogative. As all are negotiable.

Aside, even though we live in the States, my wife would trust food product made in the EU more than the US, and Japanese, Singapore, and Korean more than Chinese . . . Why? It's her trust in their regulations and the enforcement there of.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2289
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Thu May 16, 2019 10:21 am

Its not just a Boeing problem.

It is endemic across the world and going far back in history - decision makers not qualified to make those decisions force experts down routes they don't want to go - but for whatever reason, pushback by those who do know what they are doing is discouraged or ignored.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6311
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Thu May 16, 2019 3:43 pm

WIederling wrote:
planecane wrote:
I don't give this whistleblower much credence unless somebody can explain why making MCAS less likely to fail, relying on 2 sensors, would require simulator training. It doesn't make sense.


Handling AoA disagree would have turned into mandatory curriculum.
( not any longer a bespoke customer option where the customer is responsible for training/using that feature.)
No way around mentioning MCAS as (safety) dependent on AoA disagree ... tin of worms. $1m per plane. humans are only $60k per :-)

[list=][/list]

Again, you are distorting the truth. The AOA Disagree alert was intended to be a baseline feature of the 737. It was tied to another option due to a supplier software error and it was in the process of being fixed before the accidents.

That reality just doesn’t make a good story for Boeing bashers.

I’ve already stated my opinion about the credibility of the Whistle Blower. I know the individual and have seen his “work” and his own lack of proper evaluation of MCAS, per his job assignment. Boeing bashers don’t like to hear this either, but he left Boeing angry and bitter and is way overdramatizing the Issues, and is not credible.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 256
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Thu May 16, 2019 3:54 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
WIederling wrote:
planecane wrote:
I don't give this whistleblower much credence unless somebody can explain why making MCAS less likely to fail, relying on 2 sensors, would require simulator training. It doesn't make sense.


Handling AoA disagree would have turned into mandatory curriculum.
( not any longer a bespoke customer option where the customer is responsible for training/using that feature.)
No way around mentioning MCAS as (safety) dependent on AoA disagree ... tin of worms. $1m per plane. humans are only $60k per :-)

[list=][/list]

Again, you are distorting the truth. The AOA Disagree alert was intended to be a baseline feature of the 737. It was tied to another option due to a supplier software error and it was in the process of being fixed before the accidents.

That reality just doesn’t make a good story for Boeing bashers.

I’ve already stated my opinion about the credibility of the Whistle Blower. I know the individual and have seen his “work” and his own lack of proper evaluation of MCAS, per his job assignment. Boeing bashers don’t like to hear this either, but he left Boeing angry and bitter and is way overdramatizing the Issues, and is not credible.


Did Boeing still deliver the aircraft even tho the fault was known? And if so, was the fault disclosed to the buyers and they were aware of the fact that they get faulty aircrafts delivered? Or were only the early deliveries faulty?

Also as the whistle blower was working on MCAS and did a evaluationaccording to you, someone had to check his work and reevaluate it. Shouldnt the new guy have raised questions about the not ideal design of the software and the possible safety risk it posed?
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6311
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Thu May 16, 2019 4:07 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
WIederling wrote:

Handling AoA disagree would have turned into mandatory curriculum.
( not any longer a bespoke customer option where the customer is responsible for training/using that feature.)
No way around mentioning MCAS as (safety) dependent on AoA disagree ... tin of worms. $1m per plane. humans are only $60k per :-)

[list=][/list]

Again, you are distorting the truth. The AOA Disagree alert was intended to be a baseline feature of the 737. It was tied to another option due to a supplier software error and it was in the process of being fixed before the accidents.

That reality just doesn’t make a good story for Boeing bashers.

I’ve already stated my opinion about the credibility of the Whistle Blower. I know the individual and have seen his “work” and his own lack of proper evaluation of MCAS, per his job assignment. Boeing bashers don’t like to hear this either, but he left Boeing angry and bitter and is way overdramatizing the Issues, and is not credible.


Did Boeing still deliver the aircraft even tho the fault was known? And if so, was the fault disclosed to the buyers and they were aware of the fact that they get faulty aircrafts delivered? Or were only the early deliveries faulty?

Also as the whistle blower was working on MCAS and did a evaluationaccording to you, someone had to check his work and reevaluate it. Shouldnt the new guy have raised questions about the not ideal design of the software and the possible safety risk it posed?


Yes, I don’t know why the software error wasn’t disclosed. Remember we are talking about two different things. I’m referring to the AOA Disagree light, not MCAS itself.

Keep in mind that no other Boeing airplanes have an EICAS message for AOA Disagree.

I said the Whistle Blower didn’t properly evaluate MCAS. He should have flagged it as needing more evaluation, per his job, but was clueless.

I don’t agree with everything Boeing leadership does either, although I’ve never seen anyone knowingly and intentionally disregard safety. However, it makes a lot of people sick and angry seeing the Whistle Blower out bashing Boeing in the press when in fact he himself could have helped find the issues if he ever actually did any useful work. There’s a reason why he was laid off.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 256
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Thu May 16, 2019 4:13 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
[list=][/list]

Again, you are distorting the truth. The AOA Disagree alert was intended to be a baseline feature of the 737. It was tied to another option due to a supplier software error and it was in the process of being fixed before the accidents.

That reality just doesn’t make a good story for Boeing bashers.

I’ve already stated my opinion about the credibility of the Whistle Blower. I know the individual and have seen his “work” and his own lack of proper evaluation of MCAS, per his job assignment. Boeing bashers don’t like to hear this either, but he left Boeing angry and bitter and is way overdramatizing the Issues, and is not credible.


Did Boeing still deliver the aircraft even tho the fault was known? And if so, was the fault disclosed to the buyers and they were aware of the fact that they get faulty aircrafts delivered? Or were only the early deliveries faulty?

Also as the whistle blower was working on MCAS and did a evaluationaccording to you, someone had to check his work and reevaluate it. Shouldnt the new guy have raised questions about the not ideal design of the software and the possible safety risk it posed?


Yes, I don’t know why the software error wasn’t disclosed. Remember we are talking about two different things. I’m referring to the AOA Disagree light, not MCAS itself.

Keep in mind that no other Boeing airplanes have an EICAS message for AOA Disagree.

I said the Whistle Blower didn’t properly evaluate MCAS. He should have flagged it as needing more evaluation, per his job, but was clueless.

I don’t agree with everything Boeing leadership does either, although I’ve never seen anyone knowingly and intentionally disregard safety. However, it makes a lot of people sick and angry seeing the Whistle Blower out bashing Boeing in the press when in fact he himself could have helped find the issues if he ever actually did any useful work. There’s a reason why he was laid off.


Thank you for the clarification that helps to understand the situation.

About the AoA disagree alert failure and not disclosing it, do you think there will be any lawsuits following? Customers might be able to file a fraud lawsuit as I would not be really happy if I buy an aircraft that has an issue that is actually known beforehand.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1702
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture

Thu May 16, 2019 4:18 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
Not to discount the issues, but it's also possible that all this surfaces now due to the MAX issues. It seems all eyes are on Boeing right now, and every single issue gets blown out of proportion (i.e., the media found they needed to add "Miami Air International is a charter airline operating a fleet of the Boeing 737-800, different from the 737 MAX 8 aircraft that has been grounded following two fatal crashes involving that plane", which is irrelevant to that specific incident).

Eh? The MAX issue blown out of proportion? You are kidding right? This isn't a simple "tire blowout on landing" on a MAX aircraft.
This fiasco should not have even made it past the design review stage let alone construction, Quality Assurance and Certification stage. Any engineer however inexperienced would tell you that
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1165
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture

Thu May 16, 2019 4:46 pm

747megatop wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Not to discount the issues, but it's also possible that all this surfaces now due to the MAX issues. It seems all eyes are on Boeing right now, and every single issue gets blown out of proportion (i.e., the media found they needed to add "Miami Air International is a charter airline operating a fleet of the Boeing 737-800, different from the 737 MAX 8 aircraft that has been grounded following two fatal crashes involving that plane", which is irrelevant to that specific incident).

Eh? The MAX issue blown out of proportion? You are kidding right? This isn't a simple "tire blowout on landing" on a MAX aircraft.
This fiasco should not have even made it past the design review stage let alone construction, Quality Assurance and Certification stage. Any engineer however inexperienced would tell you that

Can you please point out where I said the MAX issue was blown out of proportion?
I said that, due to the MAX issue, every single problem affecting a Boeing aircraft (which cannot be a 737MAX since they are grounded worldwide) is getting blown out of proportion... Just a "tiny" little difference...
 
747megatop
Posts: 1702
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture

Thu May 16, 2019 10:46 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
747megatop wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Not to discount the issues, but it's also possible that all this surfaces now due to the MAX issues. It seems all eyes are on Boeing right now, and every single issue gets blown out of proportion (i.e., the media found they needed to add "Miami Air International is a charter airline operating a fleet of the Boeing 737-800, different from the 737 MAX 8 aircraft that has been grounded following two fatal crashes involving that plane", which is irrelevant to that specific incident).

Eh? The MAX issue blown out of proportion? You are kidding right? This isn't a simple "tire blowout on landing" on a MAX aircraft.
This fiasco should not have even made it past the design review stage let alone construction, Quality Assurance and Certification stage. Any engineer however inexperienced would tell you that

Can you please point out where I said the MAX issue was blown out of proportion?
I said that, due to the MAX issue, every single problem affecting a Boeing aircraft (which cannot be a 737MAX since they are grounded worldwide) is getting blown out of proportion... Just a "tiny" little difference...

Sorry. Apologies my friend. I stand corrected as i completely misread your post.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1702
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Thu May 23, 2019 6:19 pm

greendot wrote:
747megatop wrote:
greendot wrote:


Keep in mind that Capitalism is not the real problem. It's merely a financial model. Capitalism is NOT a form of government nor is it the way to make decisions. Capitalism merely gives one person the freedom to deliver a service for compensation at an agreed upon rate. Capitalism says absolutely nothing about the need to have publicly traded companies, laws governing corporations, and government benevolent management of capitalism. Also, Capitalism was never intended to be used exclusively without regard to morality and ethics. The corporate legal framework gives the corporation the ability to run itself poorly or well. A company can choose to run its operations with morals and ethics or it can do so only using spreadsheets. Take a guess which one was relevant here. There are plenty of corporations, small businesses, and self-employed people who run their businesses with the highest standards and morals and ethics. Unfortunately people blame capitalism when in fact they need to blame individual people.

Also, we don't have true capitalism in the USA - we have corporatism. It's a combination of Capitalism plus government intervention, both good and bad. One of the worst examples of corporatism is the vaccine industry where you can't sue vaccine makers by law. Again, this was never something prescribed by capitalism. Quite simply, capitalism says nothing about this configuration of market forces and government.


Which is why i said RUNWAWAY capitalism. Anyways, I don't want to get drawn into capitalism or capitalism vs socialism etc. etc.


Even the phrase Runaway Capitalism is inaccurate. This has nothing to do with capitalism. It's about human greed, arrogance, complacency, lies, government, etc. Even using the word capitalism is akin to blaming Algebra. Runaway Algebra.


Which is why RUNAWAY capitalism is actually accurate. Capitalism by itself is fine. A framework/system (whatever you want to call it) by which companies raise capital and build products/services to sell and turn a profit (an oversimplified explanation if you will). Now; this is where regulation & enforcement steps in to keep in check unscrupulous individuals/entities/actors (CEOs, management, employees, the people doing the policing etc. etc.) from derailing/scamming the system for their personal gains and benefits. So, this is a classic case of RUNAWAY capitalism where every regulatory framework was thrown out the window - the Boeing board not doing their job; the boeing management not doing their job [both fall under corporate governence]; the FAA not doing their job and being in bed with Boeing; the congress not doing their job in letting this happen in the 1st place (how can both congress and FAA be asleep at the wheel and allow FAA just be a rubber stamp to whatever Boeing dishes out? The argument that FAA does not have the expertise nor the manpower to certify a complex machine such as an aircraft is NO EXCUSE).
 
SEU
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:21 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:18 pm

Ok, so lets summarise the recent issues that have happened with Boeing

- 787 Batteries and grounding, followed by whistle blowing about the safety culture around the manufacturing process of this plane. Including falsified records for delivered planes.
- KC-46 USAF sent them back due Category-1 deficiencies and debris found in closed compartments
- 737 MAX *clears throat* - Optional safety hardware, training simulators not able to replicate scenarios, knowing about issues beforehand but hiding them from all regulators, airlines and pilots, training manuals not showing critical systems, MCAS and flight control systems with only one sensor, Floppy disk operating systems, Hardware too slow, Autopilot not switching off when emergency situations, improperly manufactured parts for the leading-edge slat track, biggest aviation grounding in history, 360 people dead in 2 crashes. Ive missed stuff I am sure.

Some people saying Boeing too big to fall, too much cash reserve, too much anything to go under. I wouldnt be so sure.
 
snasteve
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 1:58 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:17 am

SEU wrote:
Ok, so lets summarise the recent issues that have happened with Boeing

- 787 Batteries and grounding, followed by whistle blowing about the safety culture around the manufacturing process of this plane. Including falsified records for delivered planes.
- KC-46 USAF sent them back due Category-1 deficiencies and debris found in closed compartments
- 737 MAX *clears throat* - Optional safety hardware, training simulators not able to replicate scenarios, knowing about issues beforehand but hiding them from all regulators, airlines and pilots, training manuals not showing critical systems, MCAS and flight control systems with only one sensor, Floppy disk operating systems, Hardware too slow, Autopilot not switching off when emergency situations, improperly manufactured parts for the leading-edge slat track, biggest aviation grounding in history, 360 people dead in 2 crashes. Ive missed stuff I am sure.

Some people saying Boeing too big to fall, too much cash reserve, too much anything to go under. I wouldnt be so sure.


You kind of lost me when you said ‘floppy disk’. I don’t see how this affects safety? Yes that is a question. I don’t presume to know, perhaps you can tell me?
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6311
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:02 am

SEU wrote:
Ok, so lets summarise the recent issues that have happened with Boeing

- 787 Batteries and grounding, followed by whistle blowing about the safety culture around the manufacturing process of this plane. Including falsified records for delivered planes.
- KC-46 USAF sent them back due Category-1 deficiencies and debris found in closed compartments
- 737 MAX *clears throat* - Optional safety hardware, training simulators not able to replicate scenarios, knowing about issues beforehand but hiding them from all regulators, airlines and pilots, training manuals not showing critical systems, MCAS and flight control systems with only one sensor, Floppy disk operating systems, Hardware too slow, Autopilot not switching off when emergency situations, improperly manufactured parts for the leading-edge slat track, biggest aviation grounding in history, 360 people dead in 2 crashes. Ive missed stuff I am sure.

Some people saying Boeing too big to fall, too much cash reserve, too much anything to go under. I wouldnt be so sure.


Agree there are some issues, but half of what you say is not factually accurate.

Only thing not disclosed was the AOA Disagree light. It was planned to be fixed and was not and is not the issue. Nothing about MCAS was known to be a safety issue or intentionally hidden. Never let facts get in the way of constant anti-Boeing posts though.

This bit about Autopilots not switching off is purely made up. Please provide some actual facts to support your claim.

Same with the leading edge slat issue. You seemingly just made up stuff to support your usual anti-Boeing agenda. Please provide some actual facts.

While it’s correct that MCAS only used one sensor, that isn’t inconsistent with much 737 architecture. No corners were intentionally cut just for MCAS. It’s a 1967 design. A lot of systems use one sensor. Not saying that’s good, but not like they decided just to cut corners on MCAS.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6311
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:03 am

snasteve wrote:
SEU wrote:
Ok, so lets summarise the recent issues that have happened with Boeing

- 787 Batteries and grounding, followed by whistle blowing about the safety culture around the manufacturing process of this plane. Including falsified records for delivered planes.
- KC-46 USAF sent them back due Category-1 deficiencies and debris found in closed compartments
- 737 MAX *clears throat* - Optional safety hardware, training simulators not able to replicate scenarios, knowing about issues beforehand but hiding them from all regulators, airlines and pilots, training manuals not showing critical systems, MCAS and flight control systems with only one sensor, Floppy disk operating systems, Hardware too slow, Autopilot not switching off when emergency situations, improperly manufactured parts for the leading-edge slat track, biggest aviation grounding in history, 360 people dead in 2 crashes. Ive missed stuff I am sure.

Some people saying Boeing too big to fall, too much cash reserve, too much anything to go under. I wouldnt be so sure.


You kind of lost me when you said ‘floppy disk’. I don’t see how this affects safety? Yes that is a question. I don’t presume to know, perhaps you can tell me?


He doesn’t know either. He makes stuff up and distorts facts to attack Boeing.
 
Yossarian22
Posts: 158
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:25 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:04 am

747megatop wrote:
greendot wrote:
747megatop wrote:

Which is why i said RUNWAWAY capitalism. Anyways, I don't want to get drawn into capitalism or capitalism vs socialism etc. etc.


Even the phrase Runaway Capitalism is inaccurate. This has nothing to do with capitalism. It's about human greed, arrogance, complacency, lies, government, etc. Even using the word capitalism is akin to blaming Algebra. Runaway Algebra.


Which is why RUNAWAY capitalism is actually accurate. Capitalism by itself is fine. A framework/system (whatever you want to call it) by which companies raise capital and build products/services to sell and turn a profit (an oversimplified explanation if you will). Now; this is where regulation & enforcement steps in to keep in check unscrupulous individuals/entities/actors (CEOs, management, employees, the people doing the policing etc. etc.) from derailing/scamming the system for their personal gains and benefits. So, this is a classic case of RUNAWAY capitalism where every regulatory framework was thrown out the window - the Boeing board not doing their job; the boeing management not doing their job [both fall under corporate governence]; the FAA not doing their job and being in bed with Boeing; the congress not doing their job in letting this happen in the 1st place (how can both congress and FAA be asleep at the wheel and allow FAA just be a rubber stamp to whatever Boeing dishes out? The argument that FAA does not have the expertise nor the manpower to certify a complex machine such as an aircraft is NO EXCUSE).


Yep, this sums up the global economy pretty well.

Boeing wanted to rush a plane that never should have been built, to complete with their top competitor, and nobody properly regulated Boeing, and 300 people are dead. There should be manslaughter charges.
 
1989worstyear
Posts: 616
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:53 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 5:27 am

snasteve wrote:
SEU wrote:
Ok, so lets summarise the recent issues that have happened with Boeing

- 787 Batteries and grounding, followed by whistle blowing about the safety culture around the manufacturing process of this plane. Including falsified records for delivered planes.
- KC-46 USAF sent them back due Category-1 deficiencies and debris found in closed compartments
- 737 MAX *clears throat* - Optional safety hardware, training simulators not able to replicate scenarios, knowing about issues beforehand but hiding them from all regulators, airlines and pilots, training manuals not showing critical systems, MCAS and flight control systems with only one sensor, Floppy disk operating systems, Hardware too slow, Autopilot not switching off when emergency situations, improperly manufactured parts for the leading-edge slat track, biggest aviation grounding in history, 360 people dead in 2 crashes. Ive missed stuff I am sure.

Some people saying Boeing too big to fall, too much cash reserve, too much anything to go under. I wouldnt be so sure.


You kind of lost me when you said ‘floppy disk’. I don’t see how this affects safety? Yes that is a question. I don’t presume to know, perhaps you can tell me?


If you're scared of floppy disk operating systems, be sure to also avoid the following:

- 777
- A320 (the big 5 inchers were still very common in 1988)
- A330


:faint:
Stuck at age 15 thanks to the certification date of the A320-200 and my parents' decision to postpone having a kid by 3 years. At least there's Dignitas...
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3885
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:07 am

Nothing wrong with their Safety culture other than letting "Bean counters" Determine they can get the SAME safety with Low PAID personnel by Out sourcing it!
 
bgm
Posts: 2134
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:37 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:16 am

strfyr51 wrote:
Nothing wrong with their Safety culture other than letting "Bean counters" Determine they can get the SAME safety with Low PAID personnel by Out sourcing it!


You're contradicting yourself there, by saying there's nothing wrong with their safety culture, except what is precisely wrong with their safety culture.
████ ███ █ ███████ ██ █ █████ ██ ████ [redacted]
 
snasteve
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 1:58 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:22 am

@BoeingGuy

I have a cousin who works at JPL. I quizzed him why all the low tech stuff goes into orbit and beyond. He told me the lower the tech the better, less to go wrong and radiation passes more easily through 1990 era processors without causing problems than trying to squeeze through the tight tolerances of the sort like we stuff into our phones.

So when I hear that the processor on my mobile is faster than whatever is on Mars, I don’t think negatively. It’s that way for good reason.
 
SEU
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:21 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:09 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
SEU wrote:
Ok, so lets summarise the recent issues that have happened with Boeing

- 787 Batteries and grounding, followed by whistle blowing about the safety culture around the manufacturing process of this plane. Including falsified records for delivered planes.
- KC-46 USAF sent them back due Category-1 deficiencies and debris found in closed compartments
- 737 MAX *clears throat* - Optional safety hardware, training simulators not able to replicate scenarios, knowing about issues beforehand but hiding them from all regulators, airlines and pilots, training manuals not showing critical systems, MCAS and flight control systems with only one sensor, Floppy disk operating systems, Hardware too slow, Autopilot not switching off when emergency situations, improperly manufactured parts for the leading-edge slat track, biggest aviation grounding in history, 360 people dead in 2 crashes. Ive missed stuff I am sure.

Some people saying Boeing too big to fall, too much cash reserve, too much anything to go under. I wouldnt be so sure.


Agree there are some issues, but half of what you say is not factually accurate.

Only thing not disclosed was the AOA Disagree light. It was planned to be fixed and was not and is not the issue. Nothing about MCAS was known to be a safety issue or intentionally hidden. Never let facts get in the way of constant anti-Boeing posts though.

This bit about Autopilots not switching off is purely made up. Please provide some actual facts to support your claim.

Same with the leading edge slat issue. You seemingly just made up stuff to support your usual anti-Boeing agenda. Please provide some actual facts.

While it’s correct that MCAS only used one sensor, that isn’t inconsistent with much 737 architecture. No corners were intentionally cut just for MCAS. It’s a 1967 design. A lot of systems use one sensor. Not saying that’s good, but not like they decided just to cut corners on MCAS.



Agreeing that there is "some issues" is like saying murdering someone is "a little bit bad of you".

The only thing boeing didnt disclose was the warning light? How about the actual MCAS....
https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-reason- ... -8-crashes - MCAS itself
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/travel ... n-n1002211 - The Alert you mentioned.

If the "This bit about Autopilots not switching off is purely made up" - then why have regulators around the world have asked boeing to fix this very issue before they allow it to fly?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... -fly-again
https://samchui.com/2019/07/10/easa-ide ... lot-fault/

"Same with the leading edge slat issue"-
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/02/busi ... index.html
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ap-458645/

Maybe the floppy disk operating system just seems ancient to me and maybe I am overreacting to that.

I love how you focused on the stuff you thought I wrong about, completely disregarding the points I made that you couldnt argue against.

I am not a fan boy of Airbus by the way, however I do dislike boeing currently for what they have done with the MAX, which to me, is horrific, no matter which way you put it.

Can you provide facts for your counter arguments that I was wrong then?
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6311
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:29 pm

SEU wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
SEU wrote:
Ok, so lets summarise the recent issues that have happened with Boeing

- 787 Batteries and grounding, followed by whistle blowing about the safety culture around the manufacturing process of this plane. Including falsified records for delivered planes.
- KC-46 USAF sent them back due Category-1 deficiencies and debris found in closed compartments
- 737 MAX *clears throat* - Optional safety hardware, training simulators not able to replicate scenarios, knowing about issues beforehand but hiding them from all regulators, airlines and pilots, training manuals not showing critical systems, MCAS and flight control systems with only one sensor, Floppy disk operating systems, Hardware too slow, Autopilot not switching off when emergency situations, improperly manufactured parts for the leading-edge slat track, biggest aviation grounding in history, 360 people dead in 2 crashes. Ive missed stuff I am sure.

Some people saying Boeing too big to fall, too much cash reserve, too much anything to go under. I wouldnt be so sure.


Agree there are some issues, but half of what you say is not factually accurate.

Only thing not disclosed was the AOA Disagree light. It was planned to be fixed and was not and is not the issue. Nothing about MCAS was known to be a safety issue or intentionally hidden. Never let facts get in the way of constant anti-Boeing posts though.

This bit about Autopilots not switching off is purely made up. Please provide some actual facts to support your claim.

Same with the leading edge slat issue. You seemingly just made up stuff to support your usual anti-Boeing agenda. Please provide some actual facts.

While it’s correct that MCAS only used one sensor, that isn’t inconsistent with much 737 architecture. No corners were intentionally cut just for MCAS. It’s a 1967 design. A lot of systems use one sensor. Not saying that’s good, but not like they decided just to cut corners on MCAS.



Agreeing that there is "some issues" is like saying murdering someone is "a little bit bad of you".

The only thing boeing didnt disclose was the warning light? How about the actual MCAS....
https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-reason- ... -8-crashes - MCAS itself
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/travel ... n-n1002211 - The Alert you mentioned.

If the "This bit about Autopilots not switching off is purely made up" - then why have regulators around the world have asked boeing to fix this very issue before they allow it to fly?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... -fly-again
https://samchui.com/2019/07/10/easa-ide ... lot-fault/

"Same with the leading edge slat issue"-
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/02/busi ... index.html
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ap-458645/

Maybe the floppy disk operating system just seems ancient to me and maybe I am overreacting to that.

I love how you focused on the stuff you thought I wrong about, completely disregarding the points I made that you couldnt argue against.

I am not a fan boy of Airbus by the way, however I do dislike boeing currently for what they have done with the MAX, which to me, is horrific, no matter which way you put it.

Can you provide facts for your counter arguments that I was wrong then?


I don’t get the Autopilot thing. No details are provided either. If you click the disconnect switch it disconnects. If not you can manually override it. We know how poorly the media reports on some of this stuff.

If you’ve read some of my other posts, I’ve been very critical with how bad the company has been mismanaged for over 20 years. However. I also push back when I feel that misinformation is posted.
 
bgm
Posts: 2134
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:37 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 6:34 pm

The 737 MAX illustrates exactly what is wrong with Boeing’s safety culture.
████ ███ █ ███████ ██ █ █████ ██ ████ [redacted]
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6311
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:03 pm

bgm wrote:
The 737 MAX illustrates exactly what is wrong with Boeing’s safety culture.


It’s not a “safety” culture. It’s a beancounter culture. The fact that short term cost savings for one person’s budget is rewarded. That’s the problem. Ironically, Dennis’ new Boeing Behaviors call for a paradigm shift that you will be rewarded to decisions that benefit the overall company, not someone’s individual business unit. That’s been a lot of the problem.

A lot of times the employees have to fight against clueless mid-level managers who have their own agendas to get them to do the right thing. How some of these people get to those positions is beyond me.

However, there is a rigorous Safety Review process. What you don't see is all the in service reports that results on design improvements on other models because leaders did want to uphold the highest level of safety.

There seemed to be less focus on improvements to 737 though due to the sheer number being produced.

Another thing coming out of the MCAS issue is a shift in assumptions of how much you can rely on crews to handle an emergency. In the Asiana and Turkish accidents, the crews lacked even the most basic of skills and ability to monitor airspeed and fly manually if needed.

I know people like to put all the blame on Boeing, and that’s justified. But remember, Lion Air dispatched an unairworthy airplane with an improperly installed and tested AOA Vane. Ethiopian inexplicably stayed at full takeoff thrust which inhibited their ability to recover the airplane. When you have customers doing stuff like that, some design assumptions need to be changed.

MCAS was a mistake, but it was not an intentional disregard for safety. Right or wrong, it was expected the crews would recognize and perform the Runaway Stab procedure. That turned out to be an incorrect analysis, but not a lack of “safety culture”.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1432
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 8:31 pm

I may have missed some reports but it seems hard to understand how a faulty AOA sensor and the MCAS was not found in certification or in service a whole number of times. Many AOA sensors have been replaced, what didn't cause the trim issues a bunch of times and reports of the sensor issues. I read somewhere that AOA sensors get damaged far more than other sensors due to bird strikes and icing. It like there should have been a number of reports issued on this problem.

A huge safety issue is the planes these days are flying such a high proportion in autopilot that many pilots do not get enough manual flight time to be proficient. The Russian SSJ crash earlier this year, I saw it was noted that the pilots were not allowed to practice in what I think they called "Direct Law" because the breaker had to be pulled to have the system drop down to the basic level. So the pilot may not have practiced that in months and months.
 
SEU
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:21 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 8:56 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
bgm wrote:
The 737 MAX illustrates exactly what is wrong with Boeing’s safety culture.


It’s not a “safety” culture. It’s a beancounter culture. The fact that short term cost savings for one person’s budget is rewarded. That’s the problem. Ironically, Dennis’ new Boeing Behaviors call for a paradigm shift that you will be rewarded to decisions that benefit the overall company, not someone’s individual business unit. That’s been a lot of the problem.

A lot of times the employees have to fight against clueless mid-level managers who have their own agendas to get them to do the right thing. How some of these people get to those positions is beyond me.

However, there is a rigorous Safety Review process. What you don't see is all the in service reports that results on design improvements on other models because leaders did want to uphold the highest level of safety.

There seemed to be less focus on improvements to 737 though due to the sheer number being produced.

Another thing coming out of the MCAS issue is a shift in assumptions of how much you can rely on crews to handle an emergency. In the Asiana and Turkish accidents, the crews lacked even the most basic of skills and ability to monitor airspeed and fly manually if needed.

I know people like to put all the blame on Boeing, and that’s justified. But remember, Lion Air dispatched an unairworthy airplane with an improperly installed and tested AOA Vane. Ethiopian inexplicably stayed at full takeoff thrust which inhibited their ability to recover the airplane. When you have customers doing stuff like that, some design assumptions need to be changed.

MCAS was a mistake, but it was not an intentional disregard for safety. Right or wrong, it was expected the crews would recognize and perform the Runaway Stab procedure. That turned out to be an incorrect analysis, but not a lack of “safety culture”.


Still on the blame the pilots and airlines noise - most people realised a while back that this wasnt the case and moved on by now.... even some of the hardcore Boeing fans on this site stopped spouting that rubbish when more information came out.

You sound like someone with Boeing tinted glasses on, you disregard the severity of the actions (or non actions) of Boeing by saying "I know people like to put the blame on Boeing" (Really!?!?!?) "and that is justified" like there is a case somewhere in your mind that that there could be a scenario that boeing is faultless..... do you not realise how that comes across. Its ridiculous.

You should be saying and I will type this out for you "Boeing is completely at fault, boeing should have the book thrown at them and anyone making the important decisions should be seriously considering time in jail, how dare they rush this plane through certification, how dare they hide stuff from regulators, pilots and airlines, how dare they know about most the issues months before the ET crash and say nothing, any blame for the pilots and airlines is minimal because Boeing should never have put them in that position in the first place as the pilots and Airlines put the trust in them to buy a product that doesnt have any known issues or flaws, yet boeing sold them anyway" - Something like that.

And as for saying there isnt a safety culture issue- have you read the articles that have been coming out again and again? you type in "Boeing" on google every week and something new comes up, all pointing to a safety culture whereby the need to sell the planes on time, is more important, than making sure the plane is safe.

The reason I may come across anti-boeing is because I just get mad at people just completely ignoring the issues and spouting rubbish like "yeah but this" to defend boeing, who in my eyes , negligently killed 360 people.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6311
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 9:37 pm

SEU wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
bgm wrote:
The 737 MAX illustrates exactly what is wrong with Boeing’s safety culture.


It’s not a “safety” culture. It’s a beancounter culture. The fact that short term cost savings for one person’s budget is rewarded. That’s the problem. Ironically, Dennis’ new Boeing Behaviors call for a paradigm shift that you will be rewarded to decisions that benefit the overall company, not someone’s individual business unit. That’s been a lot of the problem.

A lot of times the employees have to fight against clueless mid-level managers who have their own agendas to get them to do the right thing. How some of these people get to those positions is beyond me.

However, there is a rigorous Safety Review process. What you don't see is all the in service reports that results on design improvements on other models because leaders did want to uphold the highest level of safety.

There seemed to be less focus on improvements to 737 though due to the sheer number being produced.

Another thing coming out of the MCAS issue is a shift in assumptions of how much you can rely on crews to handle an emergency. In the Asiana and Turkish accidents, the crews lacked even the most basic of skills and ability to monitor airspeed and fly manually if needed.

I know people like to put all the blame on Boeing, and that’s justified. But remember, Lion Air dispatched an unairworthy airplane with an improperly installed and tested AOA Vane. Ethiopian inexplicably stayed at full takeoff thrust which inhibited their ability to recover the airplane. When you have customers doing stuff like that, some design assumptions need to be changed.

MCAS was a mistake, but it was not an intentional disregard for safety. Right or wrong, it was expected the crews would recognize and perform the Runaway Stab procedure. That turned out to be an incorrect analysis, but not a lack of “safety culture”.


Still on the blame the pilots and airlines noise - most people realised a while back that this wasnt the case and moved on by now.... even some of the hardcore Boeing fans on this site stopped spouting that rubbish when more information came out.

You sound like someone with Boeing tinted glasses on, you disregard the severity of the actions (or non actions) of Boeing by saying "I know people like to put the blame on Boeing" (Really!?!?!?) "and that is justified" like there is a case somewhere in your mind that that there could be a scenario that boeing is faultless..... do you not realise how that comes across. Its ridiculous.

You should be saying and I will type this out for you "Boeing is completely at fault, boeing should have the book thrown at them and anyone making the important decisions should be seriously considering time in jail, how dare they rush this plane through certification, how dare they hide stuff from regulators, pilots and airlines, how dare they know about most the issues months before the ET crash and say nothing, any blame for the pilots and airlines is minimal because Boeing should never have put them in that position in the first place as the pilots and Airlines put the trust in them to buy a product that doesnt have any known issues or flaws, yet boeing sold them anyway" - Something like that.

And as for saying there isnt a safety culture issue- have you read the articles that have been coming out again and again? you type in "Boeing" on google every week and something new comes up, all pointing to a safety culture whereby the need to sell the planes on time, is more important, than making sure the plane is safe.

The reason I may come across anti-boeing is because I just get mad at people just completely ignoring the issues and spouting rubbish like "yeah but this" to defend boeing, who in my eyes , negligently killed 360 people.


Sorry you have trouble accepting reality but in each case the pilots and/or maintenance had some contribution to the accidents.

Having said that, I’ve been very clear about how poorly Boeing has been managed for so many years. Maybe you should take your glasses off and read and comprehend my posts.

Ironically, I think Dennis and Kevin are the best leaders that Boeing has had in 30 years. Jim McSlimeball got the stock price up but did irreparable damage to the company.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3947
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Sun Jul 14, 2019 10:57 pm

OK, I'm a known Boeing retiree.. and yes Boeing screwed up on the MAX and is learning some tough lessons on the Charleston ramp-up. But where is the blame... I see charges pointing at bean counters, but those are just the cost measurement guys.. and really have little say in design, manufacturing or test. Others say it's the MBA's.. well there are good MBAs and barrel scrapings.. unfortunately too many barrel scrapings ended up in the Boeing process. Yes good MBAs would attempt to learn the processes before interfering, barrel scrapings start trying to prove how great they are and go to their proverbial knees trying to advance up the ladder to their point of greatest incompetence. Yes, I had major reservations in the 1990's when a Golden Handshake purged much of the historical knowledge only to have vacancies filled with just graduated barrel scrapings. What we see today is some of those barrel scrapings have endured (probably by transferring from job to job when ever they were challenged.

However Boeing was long managed by the procedures and processes documented and ingrained into the factory floor culture. When the FAA visits that's what they look at.. are the planes built according to established processes and procedures. Now for those on the outside changing any of those documents is not a single "I have a better idea" situation, but a separate process where all affected organizations (including sometimes the FAA) review and comment on the proposals. Anyone caught unilaterally changing or circumventing the processes and procedures faces disciplinary action. Example, a manager decided that recording serial numbers on life limited parts was a waste of time. Someone turned him in, money was spent recovering the data, he became a line manager in building maintenance and quit. I believe there is a similar story concerning the skipping of the debar and clean steps when drilling titanium on the 787.. Note these and many others were caught internally and corrected.. much before the intrusion of electronic social media and losers seeking their 15 seconds of fame by broadcasting things of which they have incomplete knowledge. I'm not saying that they don't happen.. like the wrong wings being positioned for installation on a 757 that wasn't caught until the correct engines arrived and it was obvious the struts were wrong. Like an barrel bottom scraper MBA who wanted to eliminate manufacturing plan references to the process specifications related to the task being performed. Like a Materiel buyer who was smuggling parts into the line that were modified without engineering concurrence... The processes and procedural checks caught them all and still do.

However sometimes, like the MAX, all the processes and procedures were followed but the basic Engineering was bad. I have heard the the Flight Test Pilots complained but evidently did not write up their concerns, or some MBA bottom scraper sat on them.. If the Flight Test VP that I worked with was still there you're see heads decorating the pointed tops of the flag poles. OK shit happens and when it hits Boeing it's very noticeable.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1702
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:20 pm

bgm wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
Nothing wrong with their Safety culture other than letting "Bean counters" Determine they can get the SAME safety with Low PAID personnel by Out sourcing it!


You're contradicting yourself there, by saying there's nothing wrong with their safety culture, except what is precisely wrong with their safety culture.

The Low PAID personnel with Outsourcing it is not the issue here. It is being used as a very convenient excuse and a scapegoat. Highly paid executives and engineers got basic things wrong and messed it up big time with the MAX.
 
maint123
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:10 am

Kanban and 747megatop, you guys have got it right.
It was a badly engineered plane as it was a rush job, meant to compete with a new airbus plane.
Trying to software control a unstable mechanical system does not work well, as electronics tend to fail. And then you are left with all mechanical.
The plane has to be safe in a wide band not in a very narrow band. This sounds vague, but factor of safety is the first principle of design.
Boeing is best placed to understand the shortcomings of Max and they have to be brutally honest about the fixes if possible , else we are just postponing trouble.
 
greendot
Posts: 214
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2017 6:08 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:40 am

axio wrote:
greendot wrote:
And, assuming there were software problems in the future, is the FAA really set up to regulate a high technology industry such as software? One day the problem really will be software and the FAA will not be adequate to regulate something it has no idea about. This isn't about just the FAA. We have similar problems with the FDA and EPA. Government agencies that are politically manipulated, not subject to public scrutiny, littered with people favoring a political party, and often led by people who came from or go to the very industry they are supposed to regulate.


Frankly, we are also looking at the consequence of decades of being told 'big government is a bad thing'. 'Big government', a.k.a. an apolitical professional civil service, is how you provide enough oversight that people don't get lead poisoning from their water pipes, can breathe air without wearing face masks, and stop 346 people dying in air crashes because of design shortcuts. If, as a society, we're prepared to wear all those 'negative consequences', then sure, we don't need big government, but the uproar over these crashes suggests we do. Put another way (and thus keeping on topic :)), Boeing's alleged safety culture is perhaps quite in-line with wider culture.


Big government is a bad thing. Government is necessary but only if it is completely accountable to citizens. The problem with increasingly large government, is that it begins to exempt itself from citizen oversight. Right now, you can't really do anything against the FAA if their actions cause harm.

Interesting you should mention lead poisoning in water pipes since it WAS government that was solely to blame in Flint, Michigan. Again, it's the same old recipe of unaccountable government.

Likewise, MCAS and Boeing's self-certification is a government created monster. Did the FAA make the process more open to scrutiny from citizens? No. Quite the opposite. This is similar to the FAA's Safety Management System (SMS). It makes it impossible for the average citizen to audit an airline's safety performance because documents created in SMS are protected from discovery and from FOIA disclosures. This was addressed during Allegiant's rash of problems almost 2 yrs ago.

The key is better protections is not with bigger government, it's with more transparency. Maybe government should have written laws that allow a questioning citizen to deny the certification rather than government pass laws that are self-serving, against the best interests of the citizen.
 
axio
Posts: 252
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:44 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 9:57 am

greendot wrote:
Big government is a bad thing. Government is necessary but only if it is completely accountable to citizens. The problem with increasingly large government, is that it begins to exempt itself from citizen oversight. Right now, you can't really do anything against the FAA if their actions cause harm.

Interesting you should mention lead poisoning in water pipes since it WAS government that was solely to blame in Flint, Michigan. Again, it's the same old recipe of unaccountable government.

Likewise, MCAS and Boeing's self-certification is a government created monster. Did the FAA make the process more open to scrutiny from citizens? No. Quite the opposite. This is similar to the FAA's Safety Management System (SMS). It makes it impossible for the average citizen to audit an airline's safety performance because documents created in SMS are protected from discovery and from FOIA disclosures. This was addressed during Allegiant's rash of problems almost 2 yrs ago.

The key is better protections is not with bigger government, it's with more transparency. Maybe government should have written laws that allow a questioning citizen to deny the certification rather than government pass laws that are self-serving, against the best interests of the citizen.


That's not the form in which I'm used to the phrase 'big government' being used. To me, it is normally used to imply unnecessary bureaucracy and regulation. In this instance I would take 'big government' used derisively (as it generally is) to imply that there is too much regulation, i.e. the FAA is unnecessary ("the company is the expert, let them police themselves"). Citizens are not typically experts and we thus rely on having professional civil servants who are experts to represent us in whatever duty they've been delegated, such as oversight of airline safety.

Regardless of some confusion over the use of terminology, I agree that any form of accountability should itself be accountable, and thus enable experts outside the bureaucracy to provide further oversight, and agree that is something best achieved by transparency. We have had similar issues in New Zealand of late with our Official Information Act (which I understand is similar to the FOIA), and there have also been some serious questions raised about the competency of our Civil Aviation Authority, questions which thus far have been fobbed off by its PR apparatus. That is not acceptable as such organizations are expected to be held accountable to the public. Such accountability is supposed to be via our elected officials but sadly the only time a politician is likely to lose their seat on account of their ministry is when something tragic has occurred.
Time for a new viewing deck at AKL!
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3064
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 1:31 pm

NTSB recently placed all the blame for a train wreck killing three in Washington State Amtrak/Cascades. The engineer seemed to escape almost all blame. He missed a speed reduction sign and left the track at 80 mph on a 30 mph curve. Now the fact that at about 10 minutes out of Tacoma the train needs to slow down to 30 mph was entirely not his fault. Hell, if I put my 10 year old grand son in the engine he would remember that the sharpest turn on the whole trip is 10 minutes south of Tacoma.

To continue the rant: all the blame for the deaths was put on the Talgo train construction. The US safety bureaucracy have always hated the European rail safety strategy. The mere fact that the train fell off a bridge at 80 mph down onto a freeway and unseatbelted passengers died would somehow have been safer had the cars only weighted twice as much.

My point: better piloting would have prevented both accidents. That does not take away Boeing's share. Blame (or better responsibility) multiplies amongst the various parties, it is not divided. In a sense all parties are 100% at fault. Pilot training and pilot training strategies is one of the parties That can actually be assigned to Boeing, the airline, and to the pilots.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1432
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:35 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
NTSB recently placed all the blame for a train wreck killing three in Washington State Amtrak/Cascades. The engineer seemed to escape almost all blame. He missed a speed reduction sign and left the track at 80 mph on a 30 mph curve. Now the fact that at about 10 minutes out of Tacoma the train needs to slow down to 30 mph was entirely not his fault. Hell, if I put my 10 year old grand son in the engine he would remember that the sharpest turn on the whole trip is 10 minutes south of Tacoma.

To continue the rant: all the blame for the deaths was put on the Talgo train construction. The US safety bureaucracy have always hated the European rail safety strategy. The mere fact that the train fell off a bridge at 80 mph down onto a freeway and unseatbelted passengers died would somehow have been safer had the cars only weighted twice as much.

My point: better piloting would have prevented both accidents. That does not take away Boeing's share. Blame (or better responsibility) multiplies amongst the various parties, it is not divided. In a sense all parties are 100% at fault. Pilot training and pilot training strategies is one of the parties That can actually be assigned to Boeing, the airline, and to the pilots.


Better piloting is very important. There has been discussion of going to single pilot cockpits or possibly autonomous planes. Well, when the autopilot drops out because of problems, the pilot needs to be more trained not less. Having a copilot that hasn't done a dozen real landings or 2 dozen in the simulator is not a good answer for the emergency condition. I suspect that the better piloting in the US and Europe (lots more experience, similar training) did prevent a number of accidents without publicity.

Boeing needs to correct the serious design issues of the Max software, but the industry needs to get where the pilot pools know how to fly the plane manually. I look to the SSJ crash in Russia as a good example, in the SSJ a breaker needs to be pulled to fly in direct law so no pilot has flown in direct to any meaningful extent. Hence, he had oscillation in his commands, more experience could have allowed a successful landing.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 3947
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

Re: Something wrong with Boeing's safety culture?

Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:53 pm

All this nonsense about making everything clear and transparent to the average citizen is hog wash... 98% of the citizens don't have either the knowledge or interest to look, they are led by talking heads.. They don't read information that's forced on them by government regs. How many still smoke??? How many eat bacon? How many don't exercise? Transparency and government regulations don't achieve much. maybe 0.5% of A-net-ers understand enough about the systems in question and none of those have access to the decision process within Boeing or the inclination to do more than bitch. Over the years I've discovered that most people make up their minds in a vacuum of facts and will not budge when they are wrong. The same is true of process transparency, if they don't find a smoking gun, then it's not transparent enough and someone is hiding something.

I've worked FAA audits and the FAA crews are good, no nonsense people. The claim that there should be a larger FAA presence is offset by nobody wanting to pay for one. There seems to be a notion that Boeing and other companies are run by loose cannons trying to get away with what ever they can or too lazy to do things right. Yet everyone who believes that seems to hold themselves up as an ideal of perfect virtue... while doing exactly that.

those who take short cuts or cheat are always caught eventually and the shortcuts are fixed. Look at the number if auto and other mass produced merchandise recalls.

If you're going to use the number of passengers who died in the two incidents as justification for your anger, it's only because they were concentrated in two incidents.. however compare that to the 100's dying weekly in intercity violence and hundreds of thousands in wars declared and undeclared each year... why is your righteous indignation there?

Boeing engineers screwed up, heads are rolling, the company still makes outstanding planes that fly millions safely.. so why the constant "let's kick 'em while they're down" mentality? They could have done a quick fix but they are taking the time to do it right. Do we know how? NO. I do know that it will be done correctly and tested correctly before passengers will be allowed on the planes.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos