Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 8
 
IADCA
Posts: 2418
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:18 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
afgeneral wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
As of right now, from what I can find, aircraft manufacturers are only banned from owning an airline, not an engine manufacturer. So, legally, Boeing could buy GE.


antitrust is different from "legal"

antitrust authorities don't want airframe manufacturers owning engine makers; they don't want a situation where Boeing owns GE and GE does not want to supply engines to Airbus or gets priority of some kind

apart from that Boing could be manufacturing everything

There are 4 main engine manufacturers (GE, PW, RR & CFM); should Airbus snatch one and Boeing another, there would still be 2 left to supply both. Meaning, each airframer could have access to 3 engine manufacturers at least; not sure where the antitrust issue is.


4-to-3 deals are routinely challenged by antitrust authorities, and that setup would be especially likely to be challenged because that structure would be highly likely to reduce innovation and raise prices to any non-B/A competitor, such as RJ manufacturers or anyone looking to break into the mainline market besides B or A. Additionally, the second of those deals - whichever of A or B bought an engine manufacturer second - would not be a 4 to 3 from the agency's perspective. It'd be a 3 to 2 in terms of independent suppliers, and functionally less: CFM is a JV and GE is one of its parents. And that is a virtual guarantee of them suing to block your deal in an industry like this.

I don't even understand why any authority would care how many engine manufacturers would be available to B or A: they'd literally have an in-house engine division. And by "I don't understand why," I mean "you are viewing this all wrong; that's not how antitrust regulators view vertical foreclosure deals." Of freaking course the buyer in the merger has sufficient options post-transaction: that's why it's doing the deal!
Last edited by IADCA on Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:36 pm, edited 3 times in total.
 
BEG2IAH
Posts: 1037
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:42 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:21 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
There are 4 main engine manufacturers (GE, PW, RR & CFM); should Airbus snatch one and Boeing another, there would still be 2 left to supply both. Meaning, each airframer could have access to 3 engine manufacturers at least; not sure where the antitrust issue is.


When we work on mergers that result in four-to-three major players, the agencies (the DoJ and the FTC) tend to play a very hard ball and it takes a lot of work by teams of lawyers and economists to justify such integrations. The newly released vertical merger guidelines are on the chopping block by the FTC. Vertical foreclosure is a very big deal and things are not simple at all.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27047
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:25 pm

2175301 wrote:
Boeing is going through a culture change right now. Those take time.

I wish I was more convinced that a change was happening. Here we have the suggestion that Boeing management pushed for a solution not supported by its employees, presumably the FAA designated representatives. We had similar suggestions on 777X where Boeing was pushing to start 777X flight testing knowing it had not delivered key documents to FAA that were needed to do a readiness review. It seems Boeing can't/won't figure out how to do things the right way, even after the MCAS debacle should have made it clear what the cost of not getting things the right way was. It seems they expect to be given the benefit of the doubt, when it's clear they haven't earned such a benefit. They should be prepared for their work to be heavily scrutinized, yet it seems they are not and instead just hope to wear FAA down. So far it isn't working.
Last edited by Revelation on Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
IADCA
Posts: 2418
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:28 pm

BEG2IAH wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
There are 4 main engine manufacturers (GE, PW, RR & CFM); should Airbus snatch one and Boeing another, there would still be 2 left to supply both. Meaning, each airframer could have access to 3 engine manufacturers at least; not sure where the antitrust issue is.


When we work on mergers that result in four-to-three major players, the agencies (the DoJ and the FTC) tend to play a very hard ball and it takes a lot of work by teams of lawyers and economists to justify such integrations. The newly released vertical merger guidelines are on the chopping block by the FTC. Vertical foreclosure is a very big deal and things are not simple at all.


Sounds like you and I likely know some of the same people. Good to see someone else from this not-very-big world on here.
 
BEG2IAH
Posts: 1037
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:42 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:32 pm

IADCA wrote:
Sounds like you and I likely know some of the same people. Good to see someone else from this not-very-big world on here.


:) I thought the same when I read your words of wisdom.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2725
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 5:48 pm

Revelation wrote:
Scotron12 wrote:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/boeings-delivery-of-new-787-dreamliners-may-not-be-delivered-till-late-oct-wsj/ar-AAO7Xra?ocid=BingNewsSearch

Targeting late October. FAA rejected Boeing proposal of 3 aircraft represntative of all 787s parked.

Interesting, but I'm not seeing where your linked article details Boeing's proposals in the way you are suggesting.

What it does say is troubling, though:

In August, Boeing met with the FAA and requested the agency approve an inspection method that would speed deliveries with targeted checks rather than nose-to-tail teardowns.

However, the regulators flagged internal company disagreements over the aircraft sample size and repeated that Boeing's employee group, which acts as an in-house regulator, needs to concur with the company's proposals.

So it seems Boeing's designated representatives (i.e. "Boeing employee group") do not concur with the company's proposals (presumably management driven).

It seems brazen for the management side to go ahead and submit a proposal without concurrence of the in-house group.

I have to admit Boeing is not covering itself in glory these days.


I see this as a good sign, because the Boeing Employee Group might represent a change within the company. Looking at this from the outside, it can be hard to tell where the problem really lies, but it seems to me whoever approved this proposal to FAA are the problem.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27047
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 6:01 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
I see this as a good sign, because the Boeing Employee Group might represent a change within the company. Looking at this from the outside, it can be hard to tell where the problem really lies, but it seems to me whoever approved this proposal to FAA are the problem.

Personally, I would have thought the change would have happened a long time ago, yet we still see evidence that employees have to fight management to get them to do the right thing.

Remember this from less than a month ago?

The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating whether Boeing employees who are supposed to flag safety problems with aircraft are being pressured by the company not to raise concerns, according to a letter the agency sent to the aircraft maker.
The FAA depends on Boeing (BA) employees to carry out the agency's safety oversight functions during the design and construction of aircraft, a process known as "delegated authority."
The letter from the FAA to Boeing said the employees designated with those oversight responsibilities must have "sufficient authority to perform the authorized functions" without inference from the company. But it said a survey the agency conducted with some of those Boeing employees found "35% of people voicing concerns and sharing experiences that indicate the environment does not support independence."
"Boeing's company culture appears to hamper members of the [safety oversight] unit from communicating openly with the FAA," said the letter from the agency. The letter was first reported by the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday.

Ref: https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/24/business ... index.html

Seems to me that there has not been a "come to Jesus" moment within Boeing, and they're still focusing more on finding shortcuts rather than doing the work. They don't seem to have internalized that the "four second rule" shortcut that led them to avoid doing a full Safety Analysis is likely the reason that the MCAS snafu got out the doors. Instead they seem to be looking for even more shortcuts such as only sampling a small number of 787s to declare the rest of them safe.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27724
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 6:41 pm

Revelation wrote:
Seems to me that there has not been a "come to Jesus" moment within Boeing, and they're still focusing more on finding shortcuts rather than doing the work. They don't seem to have internalized that the "four second rule" shortcut that led them to avoid doing a full Safety Analysis is likely the reason that the MCAS snafu got out the doors. Instead they seem to be looking for even more shortcuts such as only sampling a small number of 787s to declare the rest of them safe.


It appears that Management is still clearly focused on results (delivering planes ASAP) and not process (delivering planes correctly).
 
JonesNL
Posts: 483
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 7:29 pm

Revelation wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
I see this as a good sign, because the Boeing Employee Group might represent a change within the company. Looking at this from the outside, it can be hard to tell where the problem really lies, but it seems to me whoever approved this proposal to FAA are the problem.

Personally, I would have thought the change would have happened a long time ago, yet we still see evidence that employees have to fight management to get them to do the right thing.

Remember this from less than a month ago?

The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating whether Boeing employees who are supposed to flag safety problems with aircraft are being pressured by the company not to raise concerns, according to a letter the agency sent to the aircraft maker.
The FAA depends on Boeing (BA) employees to carry out the agency's safety oversight functions during the design and construction of aircraft, a process known as "delegated authority."
The letter from the FAA to Boeing said the employees designated with those oversight responsibilities must have "sufficient authority to perform the authorized functions" without inference from the company. But it said a survey the agency conducted with some of those Boeing employees found "35% of people voicing concerns and sharing experiences that indicate the environment does not support independence."
"Boeing's company culture appears to hamper members of the [safety oversight] unit from communicating openly with the FAA," said the letter from the agency. The letter was first reported by the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday.

Ref: https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/24/business ... index.html

Seems to me that there has not been a "come to Jesus" moment within Boeing, and they're still focusing more on finding shortcuts rather than doing the work. They don't seem to have internalized that the "four second rule" shortcut that led them to avoid doing a full Safety Analysis is likely the reason that the MCAS snafu got out the doors. Instead they seem to be looking for even more shortcuts such as only sampling a small number of 787s to declare the rest of them safe.


Good catch on the last couple of articles. Quite a concerning revelation, pun intended. What I really don’t understand is that they are not internally aligned towards a outside party. It’s business one o one to at least tell a consistent story to the outside world, especially when its a regulator. I just can’t imagine a management team that is so glib that they don’t understand this concept…
 
2175301
Posts: 2245
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 7:48 pm

Revelation wrote:
2175301 wrote:
Boeing is going through a culture change right now. Those take time.

I wish I was more convinced that a change was happening. Here we have the suggestion that Boeing management pushed for a solution not supported by its employees, presumably the FAA designated representatives. We had similar suggestions on 777X where Boeing was pushing to start 777X flight testing knowing it had not delivered key documents to FAA that were needed to do a readiness review. It seems Boeing can't/won't figure out how to do things the right way, even after the MCAS debacle should have made it clear what the cost of not getting things the right way was. It seems they expect to be given the benefit of the doubt, when it's clear they haven't earned such a benefit. They should be prepared for their work to be heavily scrutinized, yet it seems they are not and instead just hope to wear FAA down. So far it isn't working.



The toughest part of any culture change is always getting all levels of Management on board. Employees tend to quickly follow once Management is aligned properly. It seems Management is having a hard time coming to grips with this. They will get there.

Unfortunately, the FAA does not seem to have the power - or the boldness - as what the Nuclear Regulatory Agency (NRC) has and does. Here is a story I was told by a person who worked at a US Nuclear Plant that had a really major issue in the past (decades ago); to the point that the NRC shut the plant down (like the FAA grounding an Airplane Model). I will note that I have seen the early stages of this process play out many times.

Nuclear Power Plant is shut down over major issue involving nuclear safety and as the extent of the issue is discovered and the causes. 1st the Plant Manager resigns; to be replaced by someone who says that they will not make the same mistake. The NRC says: Not Enough as the problem goes higher. The Company Chief Nuclear Officer resigns... The NRC Says: Not Enough as the problem goes higher. The CEO of the Power Company resigns. The NRC says: Not Enough as the problem goes higher. The entire Board of Directors resigns as the Company will go bankrupt without being able to operate that Nuclear Power Plant (will hold positions until replaced). NRC says we want to meet with the new Board and CEO before authorizing restart.

NRC meets with new Board of Directors, CEO, Chief Nuclear Officer, and Plant Manager and tells them what their expectations are... and that it likely that the Company will cease to exist if their are any more major issues like what happened. Note that as per the regulations the Primary Purpose of the Management and Staff of a Nuclear Facility is: "To Protect The Health And Safety Of The Public." It's nice if you can make a profit while doing so; but the NRC will never accept that generating electricity, producing products, and profit is a reason to not protect the health and safety of the public.

The ex employee of that Nuclear Power plant told me that you would not believe how fast the Corporate Culture changed, especially after the Board of Directors was changed. and how a really good Safety Culture was at that plant.

I've personally seen 3 Plant Managers, 1 Site Vice President, and 1 Chief Nuclear Officer resign due to much less serious issues than what that plant had. It comes with those jobs that your out the door if there is a significant issue involving Nuclear or Plant Safety.

I'm not sure why the FAA does not have similar authority. So many of the base structure and regulations are actually the same between the FAA and NRC (its like they copy each other).

Have a great day,
 
smartplane
Posts: 1767
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 7:52 pm

Stitch wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Seems to me that there has not been a "come to Jesus" moment within Boeing, and they're still focusing more on finding shortcuts rather than doing the work. They don't seem to have internalized that the "four second rule" shortcut that led them to avoid doing a full Safety Analysis is likely the reason that the MCAS snafu got out the doors. Instead they seem to be looking for even more shortcuts such as only sampling a small number of 787s to declare the rest of them safe.


It appears that Management is still clearly focused on results (delivering planes ASAP) and not process (delivering planes correctly).

Could start by using customers that undertake meticulous pre-delivery checks, to set the bar, with financial penalties for every defect 'discovered' by customers, and rewards for Boeing QA staff identifying issues.

In contrast, some customers have contributed to the malaise by accepting new aircraft based on what the paperwork states, rather than physical and flight inspections.

Could QR be contracted to run Boeing QA? Or EK-style, who do a great job of on line QA, reducing (but not eliminating) the need for QR style ready for delivery inspections?
 
JonesNL
Posts: 483
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 8:09 pm

2175301 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
2175301 wrote:
Boeing is going through a culture change right now. Those take time.

I wish I was more convinced that a change was happening. Here we have the suggestion that Boeing management pushed for a solution not supported by its employees, presumably the FAA designated representatives. We had similar suggestions on 777X where Boeing was pushing to start 777X flight testing knowing it had not delivered key documents to FAA that were needed to do a readiness review. It seems Boeing can't/won't figure out how to do things the right way, even after the MCAS debacle should have made it clear what the cost of not getting things the right way was. It seems they expect to be given the benefit of the doubt, when it's clear they haven't earned such a benefit. They should be prepared for their work to be heavily scrutinized, yet it seems they are not and instead just hope to wear FAA down. So far it isn't working.



The toughest part of any culture change is always getting all levels of Management on board. Employees tend to quickly follow once Management is aligned properly. It seems Management is having a hard time coming to grips with this. They will get there.

Unfortunately, the FAA does not seem to have the power - or the boldness - as what the Nuclear Regulatory Agency (NRC) has and does. Here is a story I was told by a person who worked at a US Nuclear Plant that had a really major issue in the past (decades ago); to the point that the NRC shut the plant down (like the FAA grounding an Airplane Model). I will note that I have seen the early stages of this process play out many times.

Nuclear Power Plant is shut down over major issue involving nuclear safety and as the extent of the issue is discovered and the causes. 1st the Plant Manager resigns; to be replaced by someone who says that they will not make the same mistake. The NRC says: Not Enough as the problem goes higher. The Company Chief Nuclear Officer resigns... The NRC Says: Not Enough as the problem goes higher. The CEO of the Power Company resigns. The NRC says: Not Enough as the problem goes higher. The entire Board of Directors resigns as the Company will go bankrupt without being able to operate that Nuclear Power Plant (will hold positions until replaced). NRC says we want to meet with the new Board and CEO before authorizing restart.

NRC meets with new Board of Directors, CEO, Chief Nuclear Officer, and Plant Manager and tells them what their expectations are... and that it likely that the Company will cease to exist if their are any more major issues like what happened. Note that as per the regulations the Primary Purpose of the Management and Staff of a Nuclear Facility is: "To Protect The Health And Safety Of The Public." It's nice if you can make a profit while doing so; but the NRC will never accept that generating electricity, producing products, and profit is a reason to not protect the health and safety of the public.

The ex employee of that Nuclear Power plant told me that you would not believe how fast the Corporate Culture changed, especially after the Board of Directors was changed. and how a really good Safety Culture was at that plant.

I've personally seen 3 Plant Managers, 1 Site Vice President, and 1 Chief Nuclear Officer resign due to much less serious issues than what that plant had. It comes with those jobs that your out the door if there is a significant issue involving Nuclear or Plant Safety.

I'm not sure why the FAA does not have similar authority. So many of the base structure and regulations are actually the same between the FAA and NRC (its like they copy each other).

Have a great day,

Ironically, the change of entire management structure would have probably prevented the dragging discussions with the 787 and 777x…
 
dc10lover
Posts: 1690
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 6:11 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 8:15 pm

I don't have a subscription but the Seattle Times headline said deliveries are delayed until "late October".
 
kalvado
Posts: 3410
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 8:37 pm

smartplane wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Seems to me that there has not been a "come to Jesus" moment within Boeing, and they're still focusing more on finding shortcuts rather than doing the work. They don't seem to have internalized that the "four second rule" shortcut that led them to avoid doing a full Safety Analysis is likely the reason that the MCAS snafu got out the doors. Instead they seem to be looking for even more shortcuts such as only sampling a small number of 787s to declare the rest of them safe.


It appears that Management is still clearly focused on results (delivering planes ASAP) and not process (delivering planes correctly).

Could start by using customers that undertake meticulous pre-delivery checks, to set the bar, with financial penalties for every defect 'discovered' by customers, and rewards for Boeing QA staff identifying issues.

In contrast, some customers have contributed to the malaise by accepting new aircraft based on what the paperwork states, rather than physical and flight inspections.

Could QR be contracted to run Boeing QA? Or EK-style, who do a great job of on line QA, reducing (but not eliminating) the need for QR style ready for delivery inspections?

You don't really want to give customers authority to go into bullshit mode for a hefty reward.
Personal and corporate integrity is part of the deal in such situations. There needs to be a balance between strong authority being able and willing to take drastic measures and same authority understanding of important things vs bullshit.
FAA may have tons of authority, but little common sense in using that. At least that was demonstrated over years. QR will be willing to find microscratches in paint and carpet discoloration. None of them seem to be capable of analyzing engineering, and more so - doing so honestly and without bias or prejudice.
 
Scotron12
Posts: 592
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:13 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 10:00 pm

At a meeting on August 2, between QA at Boeing and the FAA, Boeing told the FAA that 3 787s of the 106 undelivered, were REPRESENTATIVE of how the entire batch were produced.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/deliv ... 1630884959
 
oschkosch
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 10:11 pm

Scotron12 wrote:
At a meeting on August 2, between QA at Boeing and the FAA, Boeing told the FAA that 3 787s of the 106 undelivered, were REPRESENTATIVE of how the entire batch were produced.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/deliv ... 1630884959
And then there's the Boeing employee, who has called BS on that statement, as one can read in the linked story.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
 
Eiszeit
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2019 8:50 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Thu Sep 09, 2021 10:21 pm

oschkosch wrote:
Scotron12 wrote:
At a meeting on August 2, between QA at Boeing and the FAA, Boeing told the FAA that 3 787s of the 106 undelivered, were REPRESENTATIVE of how the entire batch were produced.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/deliv ... 1630884959
And then there's the Boeing employee, who has called BS on that statement, as one can read in the linked story.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


Never heard of him/her... BACs management needs a fundamental change (the BOD might need 1*100 too...)
Maybe our whole system has a need for that...
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27047
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 1:48 am

dc10lover wrote:
I don't have a subscription but the Seattle Times headline said deliveries are delayed until "late October".

Actual headline: "Boeing 787 deliveries reportedly delayed until late October".

WSJ headline: "Deliveries of Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner likely delayed until late October".

I guess its just me, but words like "reportedly" and "likely" matter to me.

ST report is just a reprint of a Bloomberg article which says:

Boeing’s deliveries of its 787 Dreamliner will likely remain halted until at least late October as the industry regulator rejected the company’s recent inspection proposal, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

The plane maker has been unable to persuade the Federal Aviation Administration to approve its proposal, after Boeing employees who represent the agency didn’t support the plan, the people told the newspaper.

Ref: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... e-october/

So it does seem the designated representatives did not approve the proposal, but management presented it anyways.

MarketWatch (linked above) has a copy/paste of part of the WSJ article:

At an Aug. 2 meeting, Boeing’s quality-assurance specialists told their FAA counterparts that three aircraft were representative of how Boeing workers put together 106 completed aircraft awaiting delivery, the people familiar with the matter said. It was part of a broader, monthslong effort to persuade the agency to approve an inspection method that would speed deliveries with targeted checks rather than nose-to-tail teardowns.

However, at least one other Boeing engineer told the regulator he didn’t support that assessment, these people said. He disagreed that the trio of planes reflected how the rest of the undelivered planes were built. The engineer is among a group of Boeing employees who represent the FAA internally at the company, one of these people said.

According to the ST piece Boeing said it wants it's employees to speak their minds so it's all good, yet 100 787s still sit undelivered.
 
Chemist
Posts: 963
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 4:46 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 5:56 am

Francoflier wrote:
I'd note that the current troubles with the 787 do not stem from outsourcing or subcontracting this time, but from assembly... The one thing that Boeing actually does itself.

To me, the root of all this mess is the SC plant and its ostensible goal to cut costs, corners and bypass unions. It has been a source of trouble from the very beginning, as illustrated by multiple quality complaints from customers since the early days.


Plenty of problems with 737, 767 tanker, and Starliner CST-100. Endemic through the company, not just a S.C. problem.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 2563
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 1:54 pm

2175301 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
2175301 wrote:
Boeing is going through a culture change right now. Those take time.

I wish I was more convinced that a change was happening. Here we have the suggestion that Boeing management pushed for a solution not supported by its employees, presumably the FAA designated representatives. We had similar suggestions on 777X where Boeing was pushing to start 777X flight testing knowing it had not delivered key documents to FAA that were needed to do a readiness review. It seems Boeing can't/won't figure out how to do things the right way, even after the MCAS debacle should have made it clear what the cost of not getting things the right way was. It seems they expect to be given the benefit of the doubt, when it's clear they haven't earned such a benefit. They should be prepared for their work to be heavily scrutinized, yet it seems they are not and instead just hope to wear FAA down. So far it isn't working.



The toughest part of any culture change is always getting all levels of Management on board. Employees tend to quickly follow once Management is aligned properly. It seems Management is having a hard time coming to grips with this. They will get there.

The funny thing is that, when Management decide of a culture change, lower-level Employees have no choice but to agree to those changes; now, try to make Management change, that's another story since a lot believe they cannot be wrong.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27047
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 1:59 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
The funny thing is that, when Management decide of a culture change, lower-level Employees have no choice but to agree to those changes; now, try to make Management change, that's another story since a lot believe they cannot be wrong.

As the old saying goes, a fish rots from its head.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27724
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 2:25 pm

2175301 wrote:
I'm not sure why the FAA does not have similar authority. So many of the base structure and regulations are actually the same between the FAA and NRC (its like they copy each other).


Because the FAA has two objectives: the first is safety and the second is promoting US commercial aviation.

The NRC is only focused on safety. If they were equally focused on promoting the construction of US nuclear powerplants worldwide, they might not be so stringent on how those plants are operated.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27724
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 2:26 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
The funny thing is that, when Management decide of a culture change, lower-level Employees have no choice but to agree to those changes; now, try to make Management change, that's another story since a lot believe they cannot be wrong.


The major stockholders (investment firms) are the ones who impose change on management and as long as that management is making them money, they have a(n in)vested interest in keeping the culture and the people promoting said culture in place.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27047
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 3:24 pm

Stitch wrote:
2175301 wrote:
I'm not sure why the FAA does not have similar authority. So many of the base structure and regulations are actually the same between the FAA and NRC (its like they copy each other).

Because the FAA has two objectives: the first is safety and the second is promoting US commercial aviation.

The NRC is only focused on safety. If they were equally focused on promoting the construction of US nuclear powerplants worldwide, they might not be so stringent on how those plants are operated.

https://www.faa.gov/about/mission/activities/ suggests FAA sees itself somewhat differently:

We're responsible for the safety of civil aviation. The Federal Aviation Act of 1958 created the agency under the name Federal Aviation Agency. We adopted our present name in 1967 when we became a part of the Department of Transportation. Our major roles include:
  • Regulating civil aviation to promote safety
  • Encouraging and developing civil aeronautics, including new aviation technology
  • Developing and operating a system of air traffic control and navigation for both civil and military aircraft
  • Researching and developing the National Airspace System and civil aeronautics
  • Developing and carrying out programs to control aircraft noise and other environmental effects of civil aviation
  • Regulating U.S. commercial space transportation

Safety first. Encouraging and developing rather than promoting. Civil aeronautics rather than commercial. I think there actually was legislation removing the "promoting commercial aviation" language from their mission statement, but it's been gone for a while now.

Whether they live up to their mission statement is a different issue.

I ran into a ST article on the "Aircraft Certification, Safety, and Accountability Act" passed after the MCAS tragedy.

Some quotes of interest on what it is *supposed* to do:

The bill provides that the Boeing engineers assigned to work on behalf of the FAA must be approved or removed not by the company, as is the case now, but by the federal agency. And each will have a direct line of communication with an FAA safety inspector acting as an adviser and overseer of the work.
...
The bill also provides that an individual supervisor at Boeing or another manufacturer who exerts undue pressure on staff doing the certification work, or who fails to disclose safety critical information to the FAA, can be held personally liable and subject to heavy civil penalties.
...
In response to internal FAA surveys that showed employees feared reprisal for raising safety issues, the bill provides anonymous reporting channels and whistleblower protections for front-line FAA engineers who wish to flag safety concerns.

Ref: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... x-crashes/

It seems the current situation might be evidence of two very different things, (1) that the designated representatives feel empowered to take a stand contrary to Boeing management's wishes, yet (2) Boeing itself still is looking for shortcuts and forces the designated representatives into uncomfortable positions. The fish rots from the head.

As for the legislation, the article goes on to say:

An FAA safety engineer, speaking on condition of anonymity to protect his job, welcomed the provisions in the bill as “a good step forward.”

“The tools are here to address a lot of what’s gone wrong,” he said.

However, he cautioned that in practice much will depend upon the FAA administrator shifting the agency’s culture away from a focus on giving industry what it wants, and robustly implementing these new safety protocols.

So, a lot of this falls into Steve Dickinson's lap.

I think we see evidence that FAA is more empowered than before, but also Boeing still pushes to get shortcuts past the FAA. We saw this with both 777X and this current 787 situation. I was hoping the later would change and they would just man up and do the work, but so far I don't see evidence of that. It seems they feel if they complain enough and exert enough pressure they can save money, and that's what seems to matter the most to them.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27724
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 3:32 pm

I just remember times when NTSB (whose job is directly and solely related to the safety of transportation) chafing at times to what they saw as FAA resistance to recommendations they generated during their safety investigations.

Anyway, it does seem clear that with two family groundings the FAA had to reactively enforce (787 and 737 MAX), the FAA does seem to - at least with Boeing Commercial - taking a closer and impartial look at their operations and holding them to a higher standard than they appear to have done in the past.
Last edited by Stitch on Fri Sep 10, 2021 3:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
sxf24
Posts: 1355
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 3:32 pm

Discussing proposals with FAA does not equal pushing shortcuts. There’s constant dialogue with OEMs and their regulators, rather than a scenario where final proposals are submitted for review. It benefits the entire industry to have give and take during the certification process with the regulator having the final say.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27724
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 3:35 pm

sxf24 wrote:
Discussing proposals with FAA does not equal pushing shortcuts. There’s constant dialogue with OEMs and their regulators, rather than a scenario where final proposals are submitted for review. It benefits the entire industry to have give and take during the certification process with the regulator having the final say.


The narrative that seems to be forming here, however, is that constant dialogue is not having a material effect on how BCA management is approaching dealing with these issues in a more proactive way. It still seems their policy towards non-critical issues remains "we'll fix it in post".
 
sxf24
Posts: 1355
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 3:37 pm

Stitch wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
Discussing proposals with FAA does not equal pushing shortcuts. There’s constant dialogue with OEMs and their regulators, rather than a scenario where final proposals are submitted for review. It benefits the entire industry to have give and take during the certification process with the regulator having the final say.


The narrative that seems to be forming here, however, is that constant dialogue is not having a material effect on how BCA management is approaching dealing with these issues in a more proactive way. It still seems their policy towards non-critical issues remains "we'll fix it in post".


Correction of non-critical deficiencies is deferred today. Why would a different standard be applied?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27724
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 3:56 pm

sxf24 wrote:
Correction of non-critical deficiencies is deferred today. Why would a different standard be applied?


I guess the issue now is the duration of that deferment. Boeing appears to (continue to) want a longer period than the FAA feels is appropriate and acceptable.
 
User avatar
WesternDC6B
Posts: 848
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:05 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 4:21 pm

Revelation said, "According to the ST piece Boeing said it wants it's employees to speak their minds so it's all good, yet 100 787s still sit undelivered."

How many would be foolish enough to actually DO so? Been there, done that, suffered the consequences.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27047
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 4:43 pm

WesternDC6B wrote:
Revelation said, "According to the ST piece Boeing said it wants it's employees to speak their minds so it's all good, yet 100 787s still sit undelivered."

How many would be foolish enough to actually DO so? Been there, done that, suffered the consequences.

I agree, caution must be exercised. The legislation provides various avenues and protections, but no guarantee that they will be invoked if you get the brown end of the stick. I also got myself on the troublemakers list at one job and IMO that plus some unmistakable ageism got me on the layoff list. Didn't matter, I got a severance and moved on to a new job in a more interesting and less stressful part of the industry after a few months of what was in essence paid vacation. Yet still it sucks that management can take revenge and the impact will be there immediately whereas it's unclear how effective the protection measures will be.
 
User avatar
WesternDC6B
Posts: 848
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 3:05 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 4:50 pm

Revelation wrote:
WesternDC6B wrote:
Revelation said, "According to the ST piece Boeing said it wants it's employees to speak their minds so it's all good, yet 100 787s still sit undelivered."

How many would be foolish enough to actually DO so? Been there, done that, suffered the consequences.

I agree, caution must be exercised. The legislation provides various avenues and protections, but no guarantee that they will be invoked if you get the brown end of the stick. I also got myself on the troublemakers list at one job and IMO that plus some unmistakable ageism got me on the layoff list. Didn't matter, I got a severance and moved on to a new job in a more interesting and less stressful part of the industry after a few months of what was in essence paid vacation. Yet still it sucks that management can take revenge and the impact will be there immediately whereas it's unclear how effective the protection measures will be.


One employer of mine put out "Anonymous" surveys. Turns out the pages of the surveys were encoded. Did they really think this could get past a room full of techies, geeks, and computer freaks? None of us filled it out.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27047
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Fri Sep 10, 2021 5:01 pm

WesternDC6B wrote:
One employer of mine put out "Anonymous" surveys. Turns out the pages of the surveys were encoded. Did they really think this could get past a room full of techies, geeks, and computer freaks? None of us filled it out.

To be fair, I knew I was being something of a troublemaker, openly pushing back on some party lines, yet I thought company culture would tolerate that. It largely did, I was there for 15 years, but in the end the corporate martinets took over and swung the axe. Again, it worked out OK for me. IMO it was their loss, they should have been looking for more people like me rather than purging them. A bunch of us took our talents elsewhere and all landed on our feet. Turns out that my skills were even better than I thought, the new company thought I was a genius when I'm sure I'm not.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 5154
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Sat Sep 11, 2021 1:07 pm

Hometown Boeing fan. But maintain the rights to criticize the home team. Here is my A versus B take on this. (even though we were not suppose to do that on this thread). Airbus was created by European governments to build civil air planes to challenge US monopolies. Their first and primary goal is to build great planes (and hire the people who build them). That used to be Boeing's goal. But they moved to Chicago and sold their soul to Wall Street. How can anyone doubt that Airbus is in a better environment to build great planes? I have hopes the Boeing will recover, even willing to hold my nose and see our state spend money to help make it happen. But last time we spent the money and got kicked in the groin, fell down and another kick in the face.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10993
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Sat Sep 11, 2021 1:43 pm

So the Boeing Employee Group, do we know that these are Boeing employees who are working under the FAA guidance and not Boeing management?
If they are, and they agreed with management decision on the inspections, what would the result have been, the new culture is kicking in or the old is continuing where they are continuing to rubber stamp?
Honestly, in my opinion, at least for a few years maybe 5 is sufficient, the FAA should have gone out and hired their own inspectors to as they say "Shun the very appearance of evil", until such time as the political masters believe that the train at Boeing and all its cars are back on the right track.
How much more time must be spent having Boeing verify its "decisions", then submit them to the Employee Group, who reviews then submits them to the FAA who in all likelyhood goes over them again with a fine tooth comb because the Group is embedded with Boeing, are paid by them and their loyalty is questionable.
 
airzona11
Posts: 1901
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Sat Sep 11, 2021 6:23 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Hometown Boeing fan. But maintain the rights to criticize the home team. Here is my A versus B take on this. (even though we were not suppose to do that on this thread). Airbus was created by European governments to build civil air planes to challenge US monopolies. Their first and primary goal is to build great planes (and hire the people who build them). That used to be Boeing's goal. But they moved to Chicago and sold their soul to Wall Street. How can anyone doubt that Airbus is in a better environment to build great planes? I have hopes the Boeing will recover, even willing to hold my nose and see our state spend money to help make it happen. But last time we spent the money and got kicked in the groin, fell down and another kick in the face.


How is Boeing’s structure any different than Apple for example? Same “Wall Street capitalist high stock compensation” plan as Boeing. Or replace Apple with countless other successful companies. The problem was Boeing’s commercial leadership (and some of their military).
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 5154
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Sat Sep 11, 2021 8:28 pm

Apple dictates to stockholders to a degree most companies would die for.
 
sxf24
Posts: 1355
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Sat Sep 11, 2021 9:12 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Apple dictates to stockholders to a degree most companies would die for.


To a large degree that’s because Apple doesn’t need its stock holders’ capital. Apple has enough cash and capacity for debt that it could easily go private and continue to operate without providing a return to its owners. Boeing and other companies is capital intensive industries don’t have the same ability.
 
LDRA
Posts: 425
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Sun Sep 12, 2021 12:08 am

airzona11 wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
Hometown Boeing fan. But maintain the rights to criticize the home team. Here is my A versus B take on this. (even though we were not suppose to do that on this thread). Airbus was created by European governments to build civil air planes to challenge US monopolies. Their first and primary goal is to build great planes (and hire the people who build them). That used to be Boeing's goal. But they moved to Chicago and sold their soul to Wall Street. How can anyone doubt that Airbus is in a better environment to build great planes? I have hopes the Boeing will recover, even willing to hold my nose and see our state spend money to help make it happen. But last time we spent the money and got kicked in the groin, fell down and another kick in the face.


How is Boeing’s structure any different than Apple for example? Same “Wall Street capitalist high stock compensation” plan as Boeing. Or replace Apple with countless other successful companies. The problem was Boeing’s commercial leadership (and some of their military).

Apple does not sell safety, Boeing does
 
Chemist
Posts: 963
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 4:46 am

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Sun Sep 12, 2021 6:02 am

Apple does sell security, however. Somewhat analogous to safety.
 
Vicenza
Posts: 408
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2020 3:21 pm

Re: FAA Confirms Boeing Halts 787 Deliveries

Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:25 pm

LDRA wrote:
Apple does not sell safety, Boeing does



In recent years that could be arguably debatable if it increases profits.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14785
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 787 Production/Delivery Thread - 2021

Thu Oct 14, 2021 7:17 pm

Further delays?

Boeing Co. is dealing with a new defect on its 787 Dreamliner, the latest in a series of production slip-ups that have delayed aircraft deliveries and drawn increased U.S. government scrutiny.

The new problem involves certain titanium parts that are weaker than they should be on 787s built over the past three years, people familiar with the matter said. The discovery is among other Dreamliner snafus that have left Boeing stuck with more than $25 billion of the jets in its inventory.


https://www-wsj-com.cdn.ampproject.org/ ... 1634209201

Titanium parts are often in high loaded, high temperature places. But also landing gears, engines. Hopefully in easy to reach, replace, maybe line replace.
 
MileHFL400
Posts: 892
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2015 11:42 am

Re: Boeing 787 Production/Delivery Thread - 2021

Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:20 pm

When will this end ?!
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 3331
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Boeing 787 Production/Delivery Thread - 2021

Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:23 pm

This company man, I just want all this bad stuff surrounding Boeing to just end already. Just when you think it's done something else comes up
Last edited by ikolkyo on Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
kanban
Posts: 4058
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:00 am

Re: Boeing 787 Production/Delivery Thread - 2021

Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:28 pm

According to Reuters, the issue is "The parts include fittings that help secure the floor beam in one fuselage section, as well as other fittings, spacers, brackets, and clips within other assemblies." https://finance.yahoo.com/news/boeing-d ... 40462.html

while the floor beam securing could be an issue, the other items may have no impact and are titanium merely for corrosion prevention.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27724
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing 787 Production/Delivery Thread - 2021

Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:32 pm

Be interesting to know where the QA chain lies with these parts. While it is de rigueur to blame the final OEM for all issues, if Leonardo SpA or MPS were charged with handling the QA, then it's not really fair, IMO, to call out this as "another Boeing mistake" if they were delegating QA to a sub-tier supplier.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 3331
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Boeing 787 Production/Delivery Thread - 2021

Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:34 pm

Stitch wrote:
Be interesting to know where the QA chain lies with these parts. While it is de rigueur to blame the final OEM for all issues, if Leonardo SpA or MPS were charged with handling the QA, then it's not really fair, IMO, to call out this as "another Boeing mistake" if they were delegating QA to a sub-tier supplier.


This is a very fair point, it's just not ideal for Boeing from all aspects no matter who is at fault. All people are going to see is more 787 issues in the headline, they don't care about who is actually at fault.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 1151
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 787 Production/Delivery Thread - 2021

Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:48 pm

Something is very strange here. 3 years ago something in the process must have changed. If the parts before were ok, either manufacturing changed and it was deemed ok from above (Boeing) that the parts were weaker then they should without informing regulators. Or the manufacturer never informed Boeing and actually just delivered faulty parts what would be a criminal act. It still would be concerning though that it took Boeing 3 years to figure that out. Or the third option is neither the manufacturer nor Boeing realised that the parts were not up to standards what is also really concerning.
Shipping one bad batch of parts can happen and that can have a lot of reasons but three years worth of parts?
 
User avatar
Momo1435
Posts: 1293
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 2:33 pm

Re: Boeing 787 Production/Delivery Thread - 2021

Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:56 pm

It's also the other issues that make this a headline, if production was going without any further troubles this would just have been a small story that would not have been discussed.

But yeah, Boeing obviously can't use this kind of news right now. But it's good that issue are not hidden from the public, that would be even worse.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27724
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Boeing 787 Production/Delivery Thread - 2021

Thu Oct 14, 2021 9:27 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
Something is very strange here. 3 years ago something in the process must have changed. If the parts before were ok, either manufacturing changed and it was deemed ok from above (Boeing) that the parts were weaker then they should without informing regulators. Or the manufacturer never informed Boeing and actually just delivered faulty parts what would be a criminal act. It still would be concerning though that it took Boeing 3 years to figure that out. Or the third option is neither the manufacturer nor Boeing realised that the parts were not up to standards what is also really concerning.


1) I would like to believe Boeing would not approve a specification change they knew would not meet criteria since that would open the company to possible civil and criminal liability if a failure led to a hull loss or a regulator later discovered the change and the intentional obfuscation thereof.

2) MPS is said to be "under scrutiny by (Italian) prosecutors" so if there is malfeasance, it could be on MPS' part and if they were the ones charged with doing QA, they could have indeed intentionally kept it hidden from Leonardo and Boeing. And if MPS did make an unapproved change three years ago and did hide that change, then it is possible this investigation by Italian prosecutors is what brought it to light and why three years worth of now suspect parts made it through the supply chain into airframes.

3) Leonardo stated MPS no longer supplies these parts so I would like to know if parts supplied by this new vendor to Leonardo are meeting specification. If they are, this further reinforces the possibility that MPS was the one who made a change and then hid it.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 8

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