Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2558
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 6:16 pm

Boeing needs to kick every single Manager/board member/senior position that were in similar rolls at McD out. They ran McD into the ground with their way of doing business. And now they're doing the same at Boeing. From a simplistic point of view.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27393
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 6:45 pm

garpd wrote:
Boeing needs to kick every single Manager/board member/senior position that were in similar rolls at McD out. They ran McD into the ground with their way of doing business. And now they're doing the same at Boeing. From a simplistic point of view.

From a simplistic point of view, the Boeing-McDD merger happened in August 1997, so it's probably a good assumption that anyone who was in a leadership role at McDD has aged out by now.

I agree with those who suggest the company was more modeled after GE rather than McDD. Stonecipher ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Stonecipher ) spent his formative years at GE, as did his successor, McNearney ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_McNerney ).

It is tragic seeing both Boeing and GE circling the toilet these days. The main constant is the executives lined their pockets with outrageous pay packages.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10616
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 6:49 pm

Opus99 wrote:
airbazar wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
100%. It’s the shareholder value focus. Like I don’t understand the obsession. They have the talent, they just need the re focus like you’ve pointed out

Do they really have the talent tho?
Over the years they have either offered buyouts to their most senior engineers in order to replace them with younger, cheaper ones, or have outsourced just about everything they could, all in the name of cutting costs and meeting Wall Street expectations.

Boeing’s aircraft have been plagued by execution not design might I add. If they didn’t have the talent they wouldn’t be dominating the wide body market.

Both of those statements are very debatable. Both the 787 and MAX were plagued by design flaws, the latter of which led to actual loss of lives. Granted, with so many components being outsourced we can't really attribute the design flaws entirely to Boeing. The 777X is just a warmed up version of an airplane designed during much better times at Boeing. Bottom line is this: there has been a brain drain at Boeing over the last decade or so.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6750
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 6:59 pm

airbazar wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
[...]
That is the cultural change need to drive Boeing out of the cesspit they're caught in; the rest will follow.

100%. It’s the shareholder value focus. Like I don’t understand the obsession. They have the talent, they just need the re focus like you’ve pointed out

Do they really have the talent tho?
Over the years they have either offered buyouts to their most senior engineers in order to replace them with younger, cheaper ones, or have outsourced just about everything they could, all in the name of cutting costs and meeting Wall Street expectations.


Yes, they have the talent. While many seasoned engineers have retired, in my area I have never seen such a good crop of talented young engineers in my entire career.

In my many years at Boeing, I think the average quality and work ethic of employees is higher now than it was 30 years ago.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6750
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 7:05 pm

airbazar wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
airbazar wrote:
Do they really have the talent tho?
Over the years they have either offered buyouts to their most senior engineers in order to replace them with younger, cheaper ones, or have outsourced just about everything they could, all in the name of cutting costs and meeting Wall Street expectations.

Boeing’s aircraft have been plagued by execution not design might I add. If they didn’t have the talent they wouldn’t be dominating the wide body market.

Both of those statements are very debatable. Both the 787 and MAX were plagued by design flaws, the latter of which led to actual loss of lives. Granted, with so many components being outsourced we can't really attribute the design flaws entirely to Boeing. The 777X is just a warmed up version of an airplane designed during much better times at Boeing. Bottom line is this: there has been a brain drain at Boeing over the last decade or so.


You seek to have an ax to grind and much of what you say is factually inaccurate.

Please educate us on how the 777X is just a warmed up version of the legacy 777. I’m guessing you know little to nothing about the systems and architecture of the 777X. In fact that’s an incorrect statement.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 11044
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:27 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
Please educate us on how the 777X is just a warmed up version of the legacy 777.

...for purposes of competing with the A350 it is a warmed over design, for purposes of being delayed by EASA and the FAA due to the numerous changes and grand fathering issues it is almost a new a/c.
Take your pick, its a wolf in sheep's clothing.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6750
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:38 pm

par13del wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
Please educate us on how the 777X is just a warmed up version of the legacy 777.

...for purposes of competing with the A350 it is a warmed over design, for purposes of being delayed by EASA and the FAA due to the numerous changes and grand fathering issues it is almost a new a/c.
Take your pick, its a wolf in sheep's clothing.


I’m on the 777X program. I’m well aware of the design features - probably a bit more than armchair quarterbacks. Much of it, such as Flight Controls and the backup Air Data system, use the 787 architecture and functionality. There are quite a few new features that are even more advanced than the 787.

It’s not inferior in technology to the A350. It isn’t a warmed up 1994-era 777.
Last edited by BoeingGuy on Wed Mar 10, 2021 8:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
diverdave
Posts: 742
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 1:00 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 9:40 pm

sxf24 wrote:
Second, we have a cultural problem when the response to any issue is to fire people who made mistakes. Boeing’s board and management knows there was a problem and are taking steps to fix it. Firing them all and bringing in new people would only create new risks and problems. It also fails to give people a chance to admit to their mistakes and takes steps to redeem themselves: would you like to loose your job every time you messed up?


Great point! The Atlanta Falcons fired some coaches they blamed for losing the Super Bowl in 2017.

Problem solved as the Falcons have not lost a Super Bowl since. Also the Falcons have not been to a Super Bowl since then, and finally just collapsed this year.
 
889091
Posts: 405
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2019 7:56 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:00 pm

So how come this 'rot' that everyone's been referring to doesn't seem to have affected the Defense side of Boeing that badly? Yes, of course there's the KC-46 debacle, but compared to the MAX issue, it's peanuts.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 9100
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 11:04 pm

Tim Clark is also a contributor to present Boeing situation. He made everyone(Boeing, Airbus, airlines) believe bigger the better and the airline with the biggest plane wins.

Boeing just drank too much of Emirates Kool-Aid.

I think 787 will do fine, early 788s may retire at the end of first cycle, but if Boeing and its suppliers can fix the CFRP issues, 787-9 and 789-10 will do just fine.

Boeing didn't spend time and money on MAX because they were deep into 777X and couldn't decide which way to go smaller types.

Tim is definitely a contributing factor.
 
tomcat
Posts: 853
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2000 4:14 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Wed Mar 10, 2021 11:39 pm

Opus99 wrote:

I am also wondering what clark means by planes that don't work?

He only received the 300ERs from Boeing? Which he also praises all the time, maybe he's referring to flydubai


This has been one of his recurring punch line since somewhere in 2019. He is mostly after the lack of reliability of the engines at entry into service of new aircraft and more broadly after the lack of maturity of said aircraft at entry into service. But its critic of the aircraft industry is even broader. Here are some quotes from 2019:

The business is sick and tired of taking engines and aircraft that are not mature at entry into service.


The engine manufacturers overpromised. They have gone too far with their understanding and belief (about) what technology will be delivering to them at the time they need to have it in place. When they say in 2025 they will have a revolutionary bypass engine, which will do this and that, is that wishful thinking – or can they demonstrate that they are able to get there with the technology available? For many years propulsion manufacturers did nothing. They sat fat, dumb and happy with CFM56s, Trents and single-aisle orders kept coming, there was no business case, no imperative to start doing new things.


Even the metallurgical suppliers have not really bothered to do any R&D because nobody told them to. Since they introduced titanium [I'm pretty sure he meant lithium] into aluminum, it lightened up, increased the tensile strength of the aircraft and it became a competitor to composites. But why didn’t they do it all those years ago?


A lot of people, a lot of entities, have become very rich on the back of the airline industry. I am not content with the way the distribution of this wealth we are responsible for is taking place.


I am saying two things to the B2B people: We will not accept your products if they don’t perform as it affects our customer relationship and then we are in trouble with the regulators, not you. Second we will not pay the prices you are asking for before you give us a product that is reliable. Then we’ll have a happy partnership. And that includes the lessors.


I want 12,500 to 14,000 hours on wing for an engine, which is a minimum of 5,000 to 6,000 cycles before a shop visit. Today it is a lot less. The A330neo was offered to us at 300 cycles before the first intervention, an inspection by borescope. What we demanded was 4,000 cycles.
(interesting quote about the A330neo, I wonder if this can explain the lack of traction of this program)

All fair points I must say. There is clearly a lack of competition in the aerospace industry and it's not just about the Airbus/Boeing duopoly, it's going up in their supply chain as well. By comparison, the airline industry remains extremely fragmented. This unbalance may explain this quote from STC:
Other airlines, A320 operators, told me: At last somebody stood up and said it. Strange that nobody else stood up. Maybe people just got used to it or it is a kind of acceptance that this is the way things are.


https://www.airlineratings.com/news/emirates-manufacturers-lift-game-wont-accept-products/
 
Antarius
Posts: 3434
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:15 am

par13del wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
Please educate us on how the 777X is just a warmed up version of the legacy 777.

...for purposes of competing with the A350 it is a warmed over design, for purposes of being delayed by EASA and the FAA due to the numerous changes and grand fathering issues it is almost a new a/c.
Take your pick, its a wolf in sheep's clothing.


Heck, the 77W was just a warmed up 777-200. The a320neo is a warmed up version of the legacy a320. Or the 737 NG was a warmed up version of the 737-200. Everything doesn't have to be new and shiny to be successful.

Boeing has enough issues on it's own. There isn't a need to stretch and find esoteric ones when the main ones are right there with a neon sign and flares going off.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6750
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:43 am

Antarius wrote:
par13del wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
Please educate us on how the 777X is just a warmed up version of the legacy 777.

...for purposes of competing with the A350 it is a warmed over design, for purposes of being delayed by EASA and the FAA due to the numerous changes and grand fathering issues it is almost a new a/c.
Take your pick, its a wolf in sheep's clothing.


Heck, the 77W was just a warmed up 777-200. The a320neo is a warmed up version of the legacy a320. Or the 737 NG was a warmed up version of the 737-200. Everything doesn't have to be new and shiny to be successful.

Boeing has enough issues on it's own. There isn't a need to stretch and find esoteric ones when the main ones are right there with a neon sign and flares going off.


Not to mention that he has little or no apparent knowledge of the 777-9 and is making factually incorrect statements about it anyway.
 
IADFCO
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 4:20 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:00 am

The recent passing of Allan McDonald https://www.npr.org/2021/03/07/974534021/remembering-allan-mcdonald-he-refused-to-approve-challenger-launch-exposed-cover made me think about how few (if any) Boeing engineers stepped forward to warn about the potential dangers of MCAS, especially after the first accident. Of course, the situation was not quite the same. Also, it's easy for me to pontificate, anonymous behind a keyboard and not risking my career. Still, perhaps I was hoping for a bit more from fellow engineers. Maybe someone did speak up and I'm not aware of them, or did so with investigators. This goes to the issue of rebuilding trust, which is the topic of this thread.
 
oldJoe
Posts: 765
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:04 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:09 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
Antarius wrote:
par13del wrote:
...for purposes of competing with the A350 it is a warmed over design, for purposes of being delayed by EASA and the FAA due to the numerous changes and grand fathering issues it is almost a new a/c.
Take your pick, its a wolf in sheep's clothing.


Heck, the 77W was just a warmed up 777-200. The a320neo is a warmed up version of the legacy a320. Or the 737 NG was a warmed up version of the 737-200. Everything doesn't have to be new and shiny to be successful.

Boeing has enough issues on it's own. There isn't a need to stretch and find esoteric ones when the main ones are right there with a neon sign and flares going off.


Not to mention that he has little or no apparent knowledge of the 777-9 and is making factually incorrect statements about it anyway.


Who besides the biggest customer has more knowledge about the current status ???
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6750
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:09 am

IADFCO wrote:
The recent passing of Allan McDonald https://www.npr.org/2021/03/07/974534021/remembering-allan-mcdonald-he-refused-to-approve-challenger-launch-exposed-cover made me think about how few (if any) Boeing engineers stepped forward to warn about the potential dangers of MCAS, especially after the first accident. Of course, the situation was not quite the same. Also, it's easy for me to pontificate, anonymous behind a keyboard and not risking my career. Still, perhaps I was hoping for a bit more from fellow engineers. Maybe someone did speak up and I'm not aware of them, or did so with investigators. This goes to the issue of rebuilding trust, which is the topic of this thread.


Engineers started working on a fix days after the first accident with management direction. Unfortunately a huge software redesign on an airplane Flight Controls isn’t something you do quickly and the second accident occurred. If the only thing that had happened was the LionAir incident the day before the accident, I believe it still would have been fixed.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6750
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:10 am

oldJoe wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
Antarius wrote:

Heck, the 77W was just a warmed up 777-200. The a320neo is a warmed up version of the legacy a320. Or the 737 NG was a warmed up version of the 737-200. Everything doesn't have to be new and shiny to be successful.

Boeing has enough issues on it's own. There isn't a need to stretch and find esoteric ones when the main ones are right there with a neon sign and flares going off.


Not to mention that he has little or no apparent knowledge of the 777-9 and is making factually incorrect statements about it anyway.


Who besides the biggest customer has more knowledge about the current status ???


I’m not clear what you are referring to. Please elaborate.
 
oldJoe
Posts: 765
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:04 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:37 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
oldJoe wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:

Not to mention that he has little or no apparent knowledge of the 777-9 and is making factually incorrect statements about it anyway.


Who besides the biggest customer has more knowledge about the current status ???


I’m not clear what you are referring to. Please elaborate.


I understand your concern as a BoeingGuy but Sir TC is no newcomer to the industry and probably knows more than we all would like to admit
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6750
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:50 am

oldJoe wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
oldJoe wrote:

Who besides the biggest customer has more knowledge about the current status ???


I’m not clear what you are referring to. Please elaborate.


I understand your concern as a BoeingGuy but Sir TC is no newcomer to the industry and probably knows more than we all would like to admit


Yeah, except I’m directly involved with development, testing, and certification of the 777-9. Darned if I don’t know just a little bit about the airplane. His statements that the 777-9 is no different from a legacy 777, other than the engines, is blatantly false.
 
sxf24
Posts: 1498
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:56 am

oldJoe wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
oldJoe wrote:

Who besides the biggest customer has more knowledge about the current status ???


I’m not clear what you are referring to. Please elaborate.


I understand your concern as a BoeingGuy but Sir TC is no newcomer to the industry and probably knows more than we all would like to admit


Tim Clark knows a lot. While reporters and the public are not entitled to technical program details, customers are. That’s why you need to think about his motivation for the interview. Like Al Baker, he’s attempting to negotiate in the press, throwing mud at Boeing knowing they can’t say anything back.
 
User avatar
ElroyJetson
Posts: 1109
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:04 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 3:44 am

asuflyer wrote:
On the heels of ALC telling Boeing to get their house in order, Sir Tim Clark, EK Chairman, is also expressing his frustration with Boeing essentially blaming the board for failing to sort out their internal problems, and saying they need to focus better on repairing trust with customers, suppliers and passengers.

https://theaircurrent.com/industry-stra ... 7-max-787/


Airlines will bitch about suppliers, it's what they do. How many times has Al Baker or Tim Clark bitched about Airbus or refused to take delivery of Airbus aircraft due to "quality issues.".

Boeing is vulnerable right now due to the MAX fiasco so I guess Sir Tim feels it's the time to publicly pile on maybe to wrangle some deferments on the 77X or swap orders for some 787's? Guaranteed Sir Tim has an angle. That is the only logical explanation for the public comments.

Both Boeing and Airbus are struggling right now, the entire industry is struggling. EK vastly over expanded and then got stuck with a huge fleet of A380's and 77W's they cannot fill. So lets beat up on Boeing and see if we can shake 'em down. It's worth a try, right?
 
JonesNL
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:44 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
par13del wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
Please educate us on how the 777X is just a warmed up version of the legacy 777.

...for purposes of competing with the A350 it is a warmed over design, for purposes of being delayed by EASA and the FAA due to the numerous changes and grand fathering issues it is almost a new a/c.
Take your pick, its a wolf in sheep's clothing.


I’m on the 777X program. I’m well aware of the design features - probably a bit more than armchair quarterbacks. Much of it, such as Flight Controls and the backup Air Data system, use the 787 architecture and functionality. There are quite a few new features that are even more advanced than the 787.

It’s not inferior in technology to the A350. It isn’t a warmed up 1994-era 777.

There was even an picture that the 777x is 90% different compared to the baseline. It is anything but warmed up, but I did get the impression that it was attempted to certify it as an warmed up version. But then Max accidents happened and the rest is history...
 
smartplane
Posts: 1814
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 9:58 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
oldJoe wrote:
I understand your concern as a BoeingGuy but Sir TC is no newcomer to the industry and probably knows more than we all would like to admit


Yeah, except I’m directly involved with development, testing, and certification of the 777-9. Darned if I don’t know just a little bit about the airplane. His statements that the 777-9 is no different from a legacy 777, other than the engines, is blatantly false.

You may or may not be involved with development, testing and certification of the 777-9, but doubt very much you are involved in the commercial negotiations, including performance guarantees and penalties being offered by Boeing and GE.

What EK and other prospective customers are demanding is production performance, confidence and resilience from the get go, backed by cast iron guarantees, and at least $ for $ compensation with low cost, neutral arbitration. Seems Boeing and GE are only guaranteeing 300ER performance plus 1-2%, and initially sub 300ER for the rest.

Boeing, and Airbus, GE and RR too, have to understand there has been a paradigm shift in the market. Customers with finance now have the power, unless the OEM's are in a position to provide or underwrite the finance.
 
Opus99
Posts: 2997
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 10:09 am

smartplane wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
oldJoe wrote:
I understand your concern as a BoeingGuy but Sir TC is no newcomer to the industry and probably knows more than we all would like to admit


Yeah, except I’m directly involved with development, testing, and certification of the 777-9. Darned if I don’t know just a little bit about the airplane. His statements that the 777-9 is no different from a legacy 777, other than the engines, is blatantly false.

You may or may not be involved with development, testing and certification of the 777-9, but doubt very much you are involved in the commercial negotiations, including performance guarantees and penalties being offered by Boeing and GE.

What EK and other prospective customers are demanding is production performance, confidence and resilience from the get go, backed by cast iron guarantees, and at least $ for $ compensation with low cost, neutral arbitration. Seems Boeing and GE are only guaranteeing 300ER performance plus 1-2%, and initially sub 300ER for the rest.

Boeing, and Airbus, GE and RR too, have to understand there has been a paradigm shift in the market. Customers with finance now have the power, unless the OEM's are in a position to provide or underwrite the finance.

What does 300ER plus 1-2% mean? In terms of what exactly
 
Sokes
Posts: 2773
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 10:12 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
If you want to see a commercial aircraft manufacturer that existed not to provide shareholder returns, but 'prestige' and jobs, look at Bombardier. How'd that turn out?

With interest rates dropping close to zero Bombardier had to shift their equity, which wasn't trivial, to retirement funds. IIRC it was 6 billion $, don't remember if US or Canadian. So they started the C-Series with around zero equity. Bombardier should have issued new shares.
That's the problem if a family has a stake that is (usually) enough to control the company. They will rather gamble the company than diluting their stake with the risk to loose control.
At the same time such families more often than not make sure that management has more in mind than quarterly results and bonuses, e.g. in case of BMW.

If Bombardier teaches anything, it's that retirement financing shouldn't be the task of a company. At least not with unpredictable central banks.
 
Noshow
Posts: 2955
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 10:16 am

Clark has ordered billions and billions of Boeings. He is no Boeing "enemey" but a big customer and user. He is open minded but fair. It's valuable to have customers like him speaking up.
 
tomcat
Posts: 853
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2000 4:14 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 10:58 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
oldJoe wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:

I’m not clear what you are referring to. Please elaborate.


I understand your concern as a BoeingGuy but Sir TC is no newcomer to the industry and probably knows more than we all would like to admit


Yeah, except I’m directly involved with development, testing, and certification of the 777-9. Darned if I don’t know just a little bit about the airplane. His statements that the 777-9 is no different from a legacy 777, other than the engines, is blatantly false.


One point needs to be clarified: BoeingGuy is not referring to Tim Clark but to someone upthread who claimed that the 777X is just a warmed up version of the legacy 777.
 
kalvado
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:34 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
IADFCO wrote:
The recent passing of Allan McDonald https://www.npr.org/2021/03/07/974534021/remembering-allan-mcdonald-he-refused-to-approve-challenger-launch-exposed-cover made me think about how few (if any) Boeing engineers stepped forward to warn about the potential dangers of MCAS, especially after the first accident. Of course, the situation was not quite the same. Also, it's easy for me to pontificate, anonymous behind a keyboard and not risking my career. Still, perhaps I was hoping for a bit more from fellow engineers. Maybe someone did speak up and I'm not aware of them, or did so with investigators. This goes to the issue of rebuilding trust, which is the topic of this thread.


Engineers started working on a fix days after the first accident with management direction. Unfortunately a huge software redesign on an airplane Flight Controls isn’t something you do quickly and the second accident occurred. If the only thing that had happened was the LionAir incident the day before the accident, I believe it still would have been fixed.

It was not a huge software redesign at that point. If prioritized by risk analysis, it would probably be done in hours - i. e. in a few weeks with all the hurdles.
What you effectively say is that management performed ways better than engineering...
 
sxf24
Posts: 1498
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 1:32 pm

kalvado wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
IADFCO wrote:
The recent passing of Allan McDonald https://www.npr.org/2021/03/07/974534021/remembering-allan-mcdonald-he-refused-to-approve-challenger-launch-exposed-cover made me think about how few (if any) Boeing engineers stepped forward to warn about the potential dangers of MCAS, especially after the first accident. Of course, the situation was not quite the same. Also, it's easy for me to pontificate, anonymous behind a keyboard and not risking my career. Still, perhaps I was hoping for a bit more from fellow engineers. Maybe someone did speak up and I'm not aware of them, or did so with investigators. This goes to the issue of rebuilding trust, which is the topic of this thread.


Engineers started working on a fix days after the first accident with management direction. Unfortunately a huge software redesign on an airplane Flight Controls isn’t something you do quickly and the second accident occurred. If the only thing that had happened was the LionAir incident the day before the accident, I believe it still would have been fixed.

It was not a huge software redesign at that point. If prioritized by risk analysis, it would probably be done in hours - i. e. in a few weeks with all the hurdles.
What you effectively say is that management performed ways better than engineering...


Nothing can be designed for aviation in hours, not even a plastic part in the cabin. You can’t expect this type of speed without compromising safety and quality.
 
LCDFlight
Posts: 1463
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:22 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 1:33 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
IADFCO wrote:
The recent passing of Allan McDonald https://www.npr.org/2021/03/07/974534021/remembering-allan-mcdonald-he-refused-to-approve-challenger-launch-exposed-cover made me think about how few (if any) Boeing engineers stepped forward to warn about the potential dangers of MCAS, especially after the first accident. Of course, the situation was not quite the same. Also, it's easy for me to pontificate, anonymous behind a keyboard and not risking my career. Still, perhaps I was hoping for a bit more from fellow engineers. Maybe someone did speak up and I'm not aware of them, or did so with investigators. This goes to the issue of rebuilding trust, which is the topic of this thread.


Engineers started working on a fix days after the first accident with management direction. Unfortunately a huge software redesign on an airplane Flight Controls isn’t something you do quickly and the second accident occurred. If the only thing that had happened was the LionAir incident the day before the accident, I believe it still would have been fixed.


You might have to break out of your corporate bubble a bit more. The CEO falsely claimed to global media that the 737 Max was safe. It wasn't. He staked Boeing's reputation on this. That reputation was lost.

This is as much about messaging as it is engineering. All the good engineering in the world is not going to help if you have garbage leaders. And even if you have good leaders (which I think Boeing hasn't), they need to understand how to message the 24/7 news cycle, about fixing their cultural and product issues. This will requires expert crisis leaders from outside the company. It probably needs to happen immediately. Just my 2c.
 
kalvado
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:07 pm

sxf24 wrote:
kalvado wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:

Engineers started working on a fix days after the first accident with management direction. Unfortunately a huge software redesign on an airplane Flight Controls isn’t something you do quickly and the second accident occurred. If the only thing that had happened was the LionAir incident the day before the accident, I believe it still would have been fixed.

It was not a huge software redesign at that point. If prioritized by risk analysis, it would probably be done in hours - i. e. in a few weeks with all the hurdles.
What you effectively say is that management performed ways better than engineering...


Nothing can be designed for aviation in hours, not even a plastic part in the cabin. You can’t expect this type of speed without compromising safety and quality.

That's why I am saying " few weeks with all the hurdles".
 
sxf24
Posts: 1498
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:37 pm

kalvado wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
kalvado wrote:
It was not a huge software redesign at that point. If prioritized by risk analysis, it would probably be done in hours - i. e. in a few weeks with all the hurdles.
What you effectively say is that management performed ways better than engineering...


Nothing can be designed for aviation in hours, not even a plastic part in the cabin. You can’t expect this type of speed without compromising safety and quality.

That's why I am saying " few weeks with all the hurdles".


Absolutely not.
 
Wacker1000
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2014 6:36 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 3:32 pm

Revelation wrote:
Teal, vice president and chief project engineer during development of the MAX, said he was not aware that the errant flight control software that brought down the two jets — the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) — was triggered by a single sensor.

He learned that only after the first crash, Lion Air flight JT610, he said, “Most likely through the press.”

He was also unaware that the system could activate repeatedly, as it did in the crash flights, relentlessly pushing down the noses of the jets each time the pilots pulled them up.

“I had no knowledge that MCAS had a repeat function in it during the development,” Teal told investigators. “The technical leaders well below my level would have gone into that level of detail.”

Where is the accountability?


This is very common in every industry - the higher you rise, the less you know about the small details and inner workings of your product. If one person at a very high level knows everything, they aren't doing their job. He should have been putting people and systems in place to make sure the correct decisions are made and clearly this didn't happen.

It also doesn't surprise me that someone at a lower level did not see an issue with a single sensor driving a system. We are at a point where there has been enough turnover that lessons learned and solid basic engineering have walked out the door and been replaced by know-nothing dweebs with advanced degrees. I once had an engineer suggest using a forklift to support an engine during some pylon work. This engineer also worked for an airline that had an engine fall off 40 years earlier because it was supported with a forklift during pylon work.
 
kalvado
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 3:38 pm

sxf24 wrote:
kalvado wrote:
sxf24 wrote:

Nothing can be designed for aviation in hours, not even a plastic part in the cabin. You can’t expect this type of speed without compromising safety and quality.

That's why I am saying " few weeks with all the hurdles".


Absolutely not.

Boeing originally promised RTS within 2 weeks after grounding. Assuming work was half done at that point - and I am not convinced work even started at that point - that gives a 4 week overall original estimate.
It was not about full redesign of FMS, it was about minor tweaks to a procedure.
What would your estimated timeline be? If that is your estimate for a single procedure, how long would you estimate for a full rewrite of software containing probably hundreds of such small procedures? Actual timeline for the later was about one year.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 5221
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 3:38 pm

One of the first and largest international corporations (and long before those words were used) was the East India Company. Read its history and its collapse. Largely because it became interested (again words not used at the time) only in huge profits, and not in the sustainability of India, its people, or even the reputation of the English government. Profits only. Long the downfall of corporations.

National laws enable the existence of corporations, and the citizens of those nations have the right and obligation to govern the rules by which corporations operate. That is why some companies stay private. But Wall Street, and even worse management, has captured the control of corporations and run them for their own benefit. (an exaggeration) The FAA, EASA, Security Exchange Commission and other governmental agencies need to do what is right by citizens. Running a country for the benefit of the 0.1% will always be destructive in the long run.

Boeing learned how to make commercial planes and make money after WWII. Perhaps 70 years is all a modern corporation, given greed and the push for short term profits, can do. I hope not.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27393
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 3:47 pm

Wacker1000 wrote:
This is very common in every industry - the higher you rise, the less you know about the small details and inner workings of your product. If one person at a very high level knows everything, they aren't doing their job. He should have been putting people and systems in place to make sure the correct decisions are made and clearly this didn't happen.

And then he got promoted to be Chief Engineer of the 777X. Like I said, no accountability.

frmrCapCadet wrote:
National laws enable the existence of corporations, and the citizens of those nations have the right and obligation to govern the rules by which corporations operate. That is why some companies stay private. But Wall Street, and even worse management, has captured the control of corporations and run them for their own benefit. (an exaggeration) The FAA, EASA, Security Exchange Commission and other governmental agencies need to do what is right by citizens. Running a country for the benefit of the 0.1% will always be destructive in the long run.

I'm with you, but given how pensions are funded in the US, it's a lot more than the 0.1% who are relying on corporations to keep generating "shareholder value".
Last edited by Revelation on Thu Mar 11, 2021 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Opus99
Posts: 2997
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 3:51 pm

Revelation wrote:
Wacker1000 wrote:
This is very common in every industry - the higher you rise, the less you know about the small details and inner workings of your product. If one person at a very high level knows everything, they aren't doing their job. He should have been putting people and systems in place to make sure the correct decisions are made and clearly this didn't happen.

And then he got promoted to be Chief Engineer of the 777X. Like I said, no accountability.

He wasn’t promoted. He was already 777X chief engineer long before the first crash
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 2655
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 3:52 pm

sxf24 wrote:
kalvado wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:

Engineers started working on a fix days after the first accident with management direction. Unfortunately a huge software redesign on an airplane Flight Controls isn’t something you do quickly and the second accident occurred. If the only thing that had happened was the LionAir incident the day before the accident, I believe it still would have been fixed.

It was not a huge software redesign at that point. If prioritized by risk analysis, it would probably be done in hours - i. e. in a few weeks with all the hurdles.
What you effectively say is that management performed ways better than engineering...


Nothing can be designed for aviation in hours, not even a plastic part in the cabin. You can’t expect this type of speed without compromising safety and quality.

You can design a part for aircraft in hours, engineers rely on what was done successfully in the past and don't re-invent the wheel every time; certifying it is a whole other story...
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27393
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 3:56 pm

Opus99 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Wacker1000 wrote:
This is very common in every industry - the higher you rise, the less you know about the small details and inner workings of your product. If one person at a very high level knows everything, they aren't doing their job. He should have been putting people and systems in place to make sure the correct decisions are made and clearly this didn't happen.

And then he got promoted to be Chief Engineer of the 777X. Like I said, no accountability.

He wasn’t promoted. He was already 777X chief engineer long before the first crash

Correct, but he'd already made all the key decisions on MAX when he was promoted to 777X Chief Engineer, such as no artificial AoA to act as a third AoA source due to cost pressure, and he still holds that title even after telling Congress he learned about MCAS's single AoA source via the media, which seems to be a contradiction. Bottom line: no accountability.
 
Sokes
Posts: 2773
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 4:12 pm

Wacker1000 wrote:
This is very common in every industry - the higher you rise, the less you know about the small details and inner workings of your product. If one person at a very high level knows everything, they aren't doing their job. He should have been putting people and systems in place to make sure the correct decisions are made and clearly this didn't happen.

In which case I wonder how one person can sign.

It also doesn't surprise me that someone at a lower level did not see an issue with a single sensor driving a system.

Hard to imagine that Boeing engineers don't know about redundancies. I would rather suspect bean counters.
 
kalvado
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 4:14 pm

Revelation wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
And then he got promoted to be Chief Engineer of the 777X. Like I said, no accountability.

He wasn’t promoted. He was already 777X chief engineer long before the first crash

Correct, but he'd already made all the key decisions on MAX when he was promoted to 777X Chief Engineer, such as no artificial AoA to act as a third AoA source due to cost pressure, and he still holds that title even after telling Congress he learned about MCAS's single AoA source via the media, which seems to be a contradiction. Bottom line: no accountability.

I am OK with no personal accountability. Deterrence is a nice concept, but it's not that idea of accountability can help too much in running simulations or machining bolts.
However, the key question for me is a different one: is there any assurance that key decisions on 777X have a chance of being better than such for MAX?
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6750
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 4:22 pm

smartplane wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
oldJoe wrote:
I understand your concern as a BoeingGuy but Sir TC is no newcomer to the industry and probably knows more than we all would like to admit


Yeah, except I’m directly involved with development, testing, and certification of the 777-9. Darned if I don’t know just a little bit about the airplane. His statements that the 777-9 is no different from a legacy 777, other than the engines, is blatantly false.

You may or may not be involved with development, testing and certification of the 777-9, but doubt very much you are involved in the commercial negotiations, including performance guarantees and penalties being offered by Boeing and GE.

What EK and other prospective customers are demanding is production performance, confidence and resilience from the get go, backed by cast iron guarantees, and at least $ for $ compensation with low cost, neutral arbitration. Seems Boeing and GE are only guaranteeing 300ER performance plus 1-2%, and initially sub 300ER for the rest.

Boeing, and Airbus, GE and RR too, have to understand there has been a paradigm shift in the market. Customers with finance now have the power, unless the OEM's are in a position to provide or underwrite the finance.


Where in any post did I comment in any way about the negotiation or any commercial aspect of the airplane? Don’t put words in my mouth. Do you just reply without actually reading the comment?

I was commenting on some posts that said or implied the 777-9 is just a warmed over 777 with new engines.
Last edited by BoeingGuy on Thu Mar 11, 2021 4:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6750
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 4:26 pm

LCDFlight wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
IADFCO wrote:
The recent passing of Allan McDonald https://www.npr.org/2021/03/07/974534021/remembering-allan-mcdonald-he-refused-to-approve-challenger-launch-exposed-cover made me think about how few (if any) Boeing engineers stepped forward to warn about the potential dangers of MCAS, especially after the first accident. Of course, the situation was not quite the same. Also, it's easy for me to pontificate, anonymous behind a keyboard and not risking my career. Still, perhaps I was hoping for a bit more from fellow engineers. Maybe someone did speak up and I'm not aware of them, or did so with investigators. This goes to the issue of rebuilding trust, which is the topic of this thread.


Engineers started working on a fix days after the first accident with management direction. Unfortunately a huge software redesign on an airplane Flight Controls isn’t something you do quickly and the second accident occurred. If the only thing that had happened was the LionAir incident the day before the accident, I believe it still would have been fixed.


You might have to break out of your corporate bubble a bit more. The CEO falsely claimed to global media that the 737 Max was safe. It wasn't. He staked Boeing's reputation on this. That reputation was lost.

This is as much about messaging as it is engineering. All the good engineering in the world is not going to help if you have garbage leaders. And even if you have good leaders (which I think Boeing hasn't), they need to understand how to message the 24/7 news cycle, about fixing their cultural and product issues. This will requires expert crisis leaders from outside the company. It probably needs to happen immediately. Just my 2c.


Another poster putting words in my mouth. Where did I comment in any way about how leadership handled the Max tragedy? I clearly responded in simple English to the question in the previous post.

Do some of you guys just post stuff without bothering to read the thread?
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6750
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 4:29 pm

kalvado wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
IADFCO wrote:
The recent passing of Allan McDonald https://www.npr.org/2021/03/07/974534021/remembering-allan-mcdonald-he-refused-to-approve-challenger-launch-exposed-cover made me think about how few (if any) Boeing engineers stepped forward to warn about the potential dangers of MCAS, especially after the first accident. Of course, the situation was not quite the same. Also, it's easy for me to pontificate, anonymous behind a keyboard and not risking my career. Still, perhaps I was hoping for a bit more from fellow engineers. Maybe someone did speak up and I'm not aware of them, or did so with investigators. This goes to the issue of rebuilding trust, which is the topic of this thread.


Engineers started working on a fix days after the first accident with management direction. Unfortunately a huge software redesign on an airplane Flight Controls isn’t something you do quickly and the second accident occurred. If the only thing that had happened was the LionAir incident the day before the accident, I believe it still would have been fixed.

It was not a huge software redesign at that point. If prioritized by risk analysis, it would probably be done in hours - i. e. in a few weeks with all the hurdles.
What you effectively say is that management performed ways better than engineering...


I effectively said what I said and nothing more. Sounds like you know little or nothing about implementing a critical software change on an airplane. It also has to be tested, validated with pilots, go through a human factors evaluation, and certified.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 9100
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 4:34 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
...
I was commenting on some posts that said or implied the 777-9 is just a warmed over 777 with new engines.


Are we still debating whether 777X is evolutionary and revolutionary?

Whenever the project cost question comes up, the argument is it is just evolutionary. Didn't cost much to develop.
Whenever the question is about performance 777X is revolutionary.

I will ask the same question I have been asking since 777X announcement.

If 77W's fair market price is $130 Million, how much premium 777X commands?

Does the incremental revenue for limited number copies sold, justify the program?

You can plug any numbers you like just for brainstorming.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27393
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 4:36 pm

kalvado wrote:
I am OK with no personal accountability. Deterrence is a nice concept, but it's not that idea of accountability can help too much in running simulations or machining bolts.

The system of having engineers sign documents is all about personal accountability. At least it is meant to be such.

kalvado wrote:
However, the key question for me is a different one: is there any assurance that key decisions on 777X have a chance of being better than such for MAX?

Assurance is a big word, but we do see 777X taking a two year program slip so if nothing else we can see there should be a lot more scrutiny of the decisions that have been made, and perhaps a reversal or modification of some.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6750
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 4:37 pm

Revelation wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
And then he got promoted to be Chief Engineer of the 777X. Like I said, no accountability.

He wasn’t promoted. He was already 777X chief engineer long before the first crash

Correct, but he'd already made all the key decisions on MAX when he was promoted to 777X Chief Engineer, such as no artificial AoA to act as a third AoA source due to cost pressure, and he still holds that title even after telling Congress he learned about MCAS's single AoA source via the media, which seems to be a contradiction. Bottom line: no accountability.


I’m not impressed with Teal, but for the opposite reason. On the 777X program he’s trying to overcompensate for his 737 Max failures by forcing all these new safety features. But he doesn’t have the working level expertise to know what he’s doing. Let the people who are actually experts in airplane alerting design the alerting and features. Not some executive who seems to not even understand the difference between various EICAS alert levels.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27393
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 5:03 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
...
I was commenting on some posts that said or implied the 777-9 is just a warmed over 777 with new engines.

Are we still debating whether 777X is evolutionary and revolutionary?

Whenever the project cost question comes up, the argument is it is just evolutionary. Didn't cost much to develop.
Whenever the question is about performance 777X is revolutionary.

I will ask the same question I have been asking since 777X announcement.

If 77W's fair market price is $130 Million, how much premium 777X commands?

Does the incremental revenue for limited number copies sold, justify the program?

You can plug any numbers you like just for brainstorming.

The premise is wrong.

The production thread shows us the last production 77W frame is coming soon.

This may be partially due to COVID19, but being honest, the 77W's run was coming to an end pre-COVID.

Boeing needed to do something to address the market void created by 77W's up-coming demise.

There was no appetite at the board level for a clean sheet replacement, so what we got was the 77X.

In an ideal world it would have been out the door in 2020, but we don't live in an ideal world.

Time will tell if that was the right way to go, but as of right now the die are cast, literally.

BoeingGuy wrote:
I’m not impressed with Teal, but for the opposite reason. On the 777X program he’s trying to overcompensate for his 737 Max failures by forcing all these new safety features. But he doesn’t have the working level expertise to know what he’s doing. Let the people who are actually experts in airplane alerting design the alerting and features. Not some executive who seems to not even understand the difference between various EICAS alert levels.

Seems like he's having something akin to PTSD.

Another reason why Boeing might have been better off pushing him aside to some other, less crucial position.

All of his testimony to Congress is online now, and he does not come across as an insightful leader.
 
CFBFrame
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 7:09 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 5:24 pm

Interesting thread, with a host of armchair quarterbacks. The points are Boeing was slapped recently by the evaluation system that had long been controlled internally with an iron fist. That evaluation system finally offered an honest assessment of the internal design process, and publicly documented Boeing's challenges. On top of that, the liability costs of that assessment may not be understood for some time. The company needs to get back in the business of making and selling planes in a quality and cost effective manner. The microscope is out on them, and now the board and management need to get their house in order, all while ensuring the stock price is not impacted. No they will not be delisted, and no they are not going to stop selling airplanes. Boeing is an industry, change is not easy, but time will tell whether the customers and the company come together to support each other in ensuring the company remains. GE has been hit recently, and others have also been hit with the impacts of institutional organizational operating systems. Will Boeing overcome? I say yes, but not in the same way it has done business the past five years.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 5221
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: EK Chairman says Boeing “not getting it” on 737MAX, 787

Thu Mar 11, 2021 5:41 pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_(corporate)

The terminology of corporation stakeholders seems to date to the 1980s. But the understanding that the privileges given to corporations was due to the perceived benefits to society as a whole is old. Copyrights and patents were granted not to enable cash cows, but to reward creativity. But all three have been co-opted in a variety of ways. Airbus acknowledges stakeholders and is succeeding.

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