Even Boeing Engineers Don't Trust Boeing...

[@watchdealer11]

All this being said, and and I totally agree that Boeing has lost its mind, Hari, I think you should have added a note saying that it's still extremely safe to travel on pretty much any modern plane and air travel is still extremely safe and safer than driving, taking the bus or walking or pretty much any means of transport.

[@LogicallyAnswered]

Ah yeah, this is very true :)

[@8088I]

Boeing, is the Seinfeld Newman of the Airline Industry!

[@watchdealer11]

@@8088I 😂😂😂

[@andyx7488]

one thing brakes in a plane and you are dead . in other transport 99% of the time you are alive.

[@TehPoet]

@@andyx7488 a shit load of things can go wrong on a plane before you're dead :) and serious things are hundreds of times less likely than in a car

[@wanr5701]

That's what happen when boardroom of engineering companies are run by businessmen and not engineers.

[@charlie7mason]

Every fucking time. Bean counters are the bane of humanity, civilization, and the planet. Every single one of them.

[@benf3996]

everytime i see a boeing video, it infuriates me. what boils my blood is those useless boeing board of directors are still there.

[@memethief4113]

happened at Intel, happened at Boeing, businessmen breed complacence and negligence, while the engineers take the blame for it

[@thecalham]

Not only that not having machinists in your engineering department helping the engineers know whats atucally possible helps a long way in production and quality

[@insertcognomen]

it really seems to be the lifecycle of any successful company. Passionate experts start it. It gains success. And then they bring in bean counters to manage that success. Bean counters eventually take over and manage that success into the ground

[@SubvertTheState]

"Safety is our highest priority" You need to start worrying when a large company feels the need to constantly reassure it's customers that their product will not kill them.

[@cptrikester2671]

Think vaccines. 🤔

[@kremepye3613]

"Safe and effective"

[@Onyx408]

You’d rather they didn’t say anything?? 🤡 😂

[@stone_pilot]

@@Onyx408 you don’t need to remind people your planes are safe and effective if they haven’t killed anybody. You only have to say it after two of your planes have blown up hundreds of people and the obvious fact is that your planes are not safe. What they should have done is said “We messed up. We valued our stock as worth more than human life. We knew about the issue with the MCAS system and actively ignored it. We were negligent.” Then they should have retired and let the engineers take their jobs. But even after the planes blew up they cared more about the money then the safety of the planes which is why even after they were forced into retirement the leadership received hefty severance packages and bonuses worth millions, not even including the value of their stock holdings. Congrats you killed 500 people here’s $8 million. I doubt they even learned anything from this. I guess they learned you can get away with murder as long as you obfuscate responsibility onto the legal entity known as a corporation

[@danharold3087]

Only because there is too much hype? The cars in our driveways are far more dangerous.

[@frederickrcole1403]

I worked as a design engineer for Boeing. I found that management was only concerned with being as cheap as possible. Getting rid of engineers who had years of experience in favor of new hires with zero experience was the norm. Even our chief engineer was more interested in real estate than engineering.

[@j.f.fisher5318]

This was what the door plug failure told me loud and clear. The consequences of the autopilot problem cost them a lot of money, and they had a choice. They could have sucked it up and prioritized repairing their reputation. Or they could cut corners like crunch time at the circle factory to make up for those losses. The door plug failure says they did the latter and there's going to be more and more problems with at least Max. Scary stuff.

[@santhosht9872]

Usually Indians throughout the world always behind real estate easy money..they create housing expensive wherever they go..

[@aycc-nbh7289]

@@j.f.fisher5318Let’s not forget those with Airbus’s aircraft. Flying is the safest mode of travel, but is it as safe as it could theoretically be?

[@mikerobinson8734]

@@j.f.fisher5318To politely correct you, the fatal crashes had nothing to do with “autopilot “ but the MCAS system. The system is a separate program designed to take over the horizontal trim to correct a stall. The aircraft used input from the AOA Vane (angle of attack) and Pitot static systems to send the MCAS airspeed and pitch data. This system was a bandaid to correct the flaw with the new more powerful engines mounted higher and farther forward than previously designed. This addition increased the thrust angle of the aircraft and upon takeoff power the aircraft had a tendency to pitch upwards. The MCAS corrected this by trimming the nose down unbeknownst to the crew. No additional training was provided for this new system and many 737 pilots jumped right into the Max assuming it was the same plane with simply more power and updated avionics.

[@hanochkodnaik8832]

Very true of all engineering fields !

[@PerfectZeroMusic_]

For the people who were saying that safety has gone out of the window, you were right! It's just that the window, or in this case the door, has gone with it

[@gravitycore1]

Holy crap they called it 😮😮😮

[@nathansharma87]

Please see yourself out.

[@MaiAolei]

Good one! Gave me nice chuckle, thank you.

[@philipambler3825]

Perfect Zero your comment music to my ears!

[@kalbogwapo1536]

you got proof? or facts?

[@TheBooban]

So the problem is pretty much every company does. Expect their workers to comply with 1000 rules, policies, rest, and laws and still demands you deliver 1000 pizzas, bolts or whatever per minute. Whatever happens, it’s your fault.

[@LogicallyAnswered]

Yep basically

[@snegik]

Sounds like communism occasionally

[@BuddyLee23]

I think the airline industry does a good job with Human Factors Accident Analysis in understanding the role of systemic factors, such as inadequate management, operations, and working conditions. Almost never does it come down to just one individual.

[@TheBooban]

@@BuddyLee23 You don't count Boeing as part of the airline industry?

[@QuantumWaveMaster]

That is also the case here in Germany. I have been wondering for a while if this is the same in other countries/companies... I guess you come from the US...

[@daviddibble1338]

My father worked for Boeing for 36 years as an engineer. I remember him telling me that the purchase of MD was going to be 'the death of Boeing'. At the time, I though he exagerated a great deal. But it is hard to argue the poor maufacture, leadership, and engineering today. It is sad. As a side note my father told me that one time while working in Renton Wa, the president of Boeing came down and started asking lots of questions. My father said that he was a 'real engineer who knew his stuff'. He listened to what my dad had to say, and others, then left. Some of the concerns and ideas they brought up ended up changing the way they designed the aircraft. I think my dad loved those days a lot. He was so sad to see the HQ leave Seattle, and the closure of the plant in Wichita. Boeing could really build a plane back in the day.

[@F-14_Jockey]

Condit started the move toward the company being run like a bank, not MDC, although MDC's Stoncipher was actually worse than Condit. The Board also became toxic and has made one mistake after another since then. One big problem with the Board was, and is the installation of former GE executives in Boeing's upper management. McNerney was a complete disaster and stepping on Mullaly was an obvious move that had the entire Boeing engineering community wondering what happened to the Board. Muilenburg was an attempt to assuage the Boeing engineering community, but he was ineffective and actually not too smart given his education and background, he walked away from Boeing with 62 million dollars which angered beyond belief the rank and file of the company.

[@timsmith1292]

Bet your dad had some great stories. Men in suites kill anything and everything it just takes time!

[@catsupchutney]

Yeah, I get that the highest level corporate officers should pay 90 percent of their attention to the so called big picture, but that ten percent is perhaps essential; to talk to the line workers and ask them about their experiences and opinions.

[@daviddibble1338]

He had millions of stories. Mostly years after retirement. I think a lot of the programs were classified. But he loved going to white sands, and edwards AFB. He also worked in Morgantown, WV on a people mover thing. Our time in WV was amazing. And as a boy, I was able to do some fun stuff with my dad. My Dad always wore a tie. When he retired he got a watch. It was a casio... a nice watch but nothing fancy. He wore that thing every day, rain or shine. When he died it was all scratched and worn. @@timsmith1292

[@brianacuff274]

Back in the day I worked for the law department at Seafirst Dealer Finance ("Dealer finance" groups are the part of a bank that finances the inventory at car dealerships) and we had the conversations and thoughts your dad did.....only about Mercedes Benz buying Chrysler.. Mercedes was unable to recover from that mistake until they sold Chrysler to the Cerberus Group.......for $1.00.

[@rawlincrasto7851]

This aged like fine wine

[@RdTrpBrgr]

not the plane tho

[@barbecueman6352]

Unfortunately

[@jimmartin8853]

Hahahahahaha, what else can I say. After a door panel fell off while in flight a week ago, this video from a year ago shows they don't care.

[@StatusFX3]

Holy shit

[@medo_0x00]

i was looking for this comment 💀

[@edwardjohannes360]

Boeing used to be a company run by engineers. Then the bean counters took over and safety went out the window.

[@crissto8591]

It's the Douglas Aircraft Company executives that were put in charge when it was acquired. Boeing was ran by a technical guy that didn't like managing so he let them take care of it.

[@dorianvedrashko9172]

That's why I call them Douglass. "Boeing" is the public name that hides the true reality.

[@MaticTheProto]

That’s kind of how it often goes. Same with Mercedes really. All iconic Mercedes cars were made by engineers with little restrictions. Even the EQXX. However, engineers rarely consider affordability. What use is a great plane (like the Concorde) or car (like the EQXX) if nobody can afford using or buying it?

[@techtutorial9050]

@@MaticTheProto but that’s the way new things should goes, it should be expensive at first, and then the the same engineer that made them should streamline the process to make it cheaper, not the excessive corner cutting, cost cutting, rushing unready product to market as seen with company with bean counter executives these days

[@michaelosgood9876]

Keep hearing this

[@bbellefson]

"Safety is our highest priority." No, maximizing shareholder value and management compensation packages are your highest priority.

[@joeshmoe7967]

bbellefson, 100% correct. shareholder value and exec bonuses/options the ONLY priority. We see it time and time again.

[@user-rb3pk2bx7f]

They screwed themselves with their greed.

[@anonanon1604]

@user-rb3pk2bx7f no, they screwed everyone else and got filthy rich along the way there will be no actual consequence or punishment for the people whose decisions are directly responsible for these injuries and deaths

[@Inkompetent]

@@user-rb3pk2bx7f Problem is that no one who caused the problem will suffer from it. They still have a boatload of new money in their bank accounts and don't give a shit about if the company goes down. It's only the employees of Boeing, the subcontractors, and the people flying in Boeing-made planes that will suffer.

[@EpyonRoyal]

Margins are at the core of who we are at Boeing

[@LogicallyAnswered]

😂

[@aurorajones8481]

YES... what business sells safety? I hate stupid statements like that. Clearly lies to sooth the public. Which make ppl like me and you furious.

[@EpyonRoyal]

@@aurorajones8481 bruh, my back hurts from the stupidity

[@nautical6825]

@@aurorajones8481 companies that sell traffic cones

[@prashobh216]

What is you margin now with all the billions in losses?

[@guilegameche3810]

I coincidentally watched Downfall : The Case Against Boeing for the first time last night; this is just as heartbreaking as it is terrifying.

[@LogicallyAnswered]

Truly quite a shame

[@guilegameche3810]

The motto I got from the movie in order to travel safely : If the plane is built by Boeing, there is no way I'm "goeing".

[@jtjames79]

@@guilegameche3810 If it's Boeing, I'm not going.

[@jamesdellaneve9005]

The book that it was based on was pretty accurate. I work at the old McDonnell Douglas which is now Boeing Defense. I work on corporate project and know the culture across Boeing. The book talked about the mercenaries from St Louis who took over the company after the merger. This was accurate. These guys were always cheap skates. Boeing is still a great company, but we don’t have our Elon. A leader who loves the customers and the products that we make for them. The 737 is a warmed over airplane. It’s been safe, but it seems that the basic design of the for the Max was unsound. I don’t have internal info and wouldn’t share it if I had, but the basic architecture for Max seemed poor. I just can figure out how this was approved and then once approved, not identified during flight test.

[@Crunch_dGH]

@@LogicallyAnswered Down hill since moving authority is away from Seattle engineers to Chicago bean counters. Doesn’t look good for two years late & $billions over SLS, neither.

[@nonamewanderer]

This door ripping off issue happened again on Boeing 737 with Alaska airlines. That's what brought me here. Alask Airlines has grounded all their Boeing 737-9 Max.

[@The_Angry_Medic]

It's the MAX 9 specifically grounded but yeah, this is another MAX variant that has proven a disaster

[@Satoshi9801]

I'm sure there was some cost reason behind it, but I really think Boeing should've cut out that bit of the fuselage only for the airlines who asked for the extra exit doors.

[@incubus_the_man]

​@@Satoshi9801the manufacturer of the door plug is also being blamed for the issue. I have also read that Airbus does the same thing. I'm guessing that they have to manufacture all the fuselages the same way for certification reasons? Idk.

[@nonamewanderer]

@incubus_the_man Boeing is responsible for what goes in their planes regardless of the part manufacturer.

[@Flightfest900]

oh really thanks genius

[@moistgoat8170]

Had a job interview awhile back where I was asked if I would be willing to take an experimental airplane across country for a fictional interview or miss out on the job. My response was "Not if it's Boeing"

[@이주연-x4x]

Lol

[@philoslother4602]

Of course you didn't say that :D (your employer here)

[@KennyMemester]

@@philoslother4602 Are you hiring at the moment? :) (Job seeker here...)

[@bigrunts9768]

did you get the job

[@mannegar7650]

I got the job, but I'm quitting

[@CGIEBERT]

It a sad truth not only at Boeing: when management become "business administration " technical companies are doomed.

[@matthew8153]

Same thing happened to Apple when they got rid of Steve Jobs, then went crawling back on their hands and knees. It’s starting to happen to them again now that he’s dead.

[@aronbijl4109]

@@matthew8153 Exactly!

[@petestevenson3317]

The downhill slide in quality at Boeing started with the McDonnell Douglas merger. The company increasingly became a culture of "bean counters" instead of engineers.

[@Kleinage]

True, though I saw it from the other side. My dad worked for MD in software engineering support. After the Boeing acquisition his job became increasingly bean-picky where he had to account for every minute, click in and out, and they were restricted from unpaid overtime even though some engineers wanted to do some extra time. The ULA spin-off was serious about rockets but had a similarly slow moving beaurocrstic culture from what I could see. At least ULA/ Delta has had some success in the rocket industry. It feels like the Boeing airline side has forgotten how to do what it did so well for many years.

[@panzerschiff9805]

Arguably worse than the corporate culture imported by MD was the fact that Boeing effectively became a monopoly that day, removing any pressure for Boeing to compete and always having federal backing by its side.

[@paulmakinson1965]

The Challenger space shuttle disaster was caused by the same thing: administrators having the last word over engineers at Morton -Thiokol, the company that built the solid rocket boosters. I see it happening all over the place. Managers believe that selling planes, rockets or consumer products is the same, it's just business. I see it at Turbomeca (Safran group, they build and maintain helicopter turbines). There are more people in management than in engineering jobs.

[@pride293]

The solid rocket boosters didn't down the Challenger. It was the fuel tank leaking, probably due to the cold weather. In fact, after the explosion, the solid rocket boosters kept going and had to be detonated by remote control so they didn't just fly randomly.

[@john1703]

@@pride293 Rubber O rings between sections of the SRBs failed because of very cold weather. Flames then impacted the shuttle fuel tanks. The SRBs were the location of the source of the problem. Engineers warned of this potential, but were overruled by management, to launch.

[@JohnnyRawks]

True. Even my Lexus is a piece of shit. Lexus! My 1992 Toyota Celica was a beautiful vehicle top to bottom. At some point in the mid to late nineties, things drastically changed, across the board. Greed has trumped quality, the environment, safety, workers, society... everything.

[@Google_Does_Evil_Now]

Parasitic shareholders are a huge problem. The business is doing well making and selling their product. The customers are happy and so are the staff. Along comes the parasite shareholder who insists on prices being raised to the market maximum as well as staff pay being cut. This leads to the customers looking for other suppliers and to the staff becoming unhappy because their wages have been cut. But the shareholder is happy because now they are taking even bigger dividends even though they are not the ones doing the work or buying the product. Then we see the typical product quality problems which we shared legally hold shareholders responsible for because they are the reason why the problems happen. So shareholders of aircraft manufacturers should be responsible for safety issues that lead to deaths.

[@JohnnyRawks]

@@Google_Does_Evil_Now Nailed it. Add to your wage reduction scenario, the typical staff reduction move. I see this all the time. It's actually the way they reduce labor costs. So now you have employees possibly being paid less, but more importantly, incurring the stress of doing the job of more than one person. Add to that mess the sales and marketing folks making unreachable sales promises to prospective customers. Now the people actually doing the work, and doing the work of more than one person, are trying to meet unreachable deadlines. More needs to be said about this. Much more! Unions used to solve many of these problems, but they eventually managed to remove that road block.

[@3adgamd3r]

The sad thing is that the CEO’s and board of directors who created this mess will have golden parachutes out of the company.

[@stanleykirkdoffer5338]

He needs a golden parachute into a prison cell for life.

[@cocosurgerow]

They need to show their ex ceo faces - walk of shame

[@cocosurgerow]

You can bet those ex ceos are not flying on those Boeing planes

[@dk2428]

Aviation is my passion and as an engineer for the EU Boeing counterpart i must say I'm deeply saddened by the Boeing story. From a cornerstone of aviation industry to a corrupted company, solely surviving on government aid. I truly wish they would've taken a different route.

[@kalbogwapo1536]

this is not true, this is coming from senior management in boeing, we found out that it's just a bad pr campaign.

[@rogerbartlet5720]

Engineering incompetency is the next big crisis. Outsourcing, non-technical managers overseeing engineers and "bean-counter", cost-cutting priorities will pose serious challenges. It's been a long time coming.

[@ic7481]

I work in manufacturing in the UK; engineering companies over here are bleeding all of the experienced engineers to retirement or better pay abroad (I mean engineers with +25yrs experience). You can have all the training and documentation you want, but, in the end, experience beats everything. Companies are beginning to realise their mistake of cutting down engineering departments for years, and are now beginning to hire again....but...they don't seem to take into account that, due to low pay, engineers these days tend to flit from job to job, which will create even more problems...

[@jamesocker5235]

No t mention deadlines and cronyism which is at the heart of some of these issues, boeing lying about max avionics package so companies would not see increased training costs, cost many lives and Boeing initial blaming pilots really needs to be examined. The complexity of todays products and time to production deadlines leave proper long term testing by the wayside. Much of these kinds of issues would have been solved if proper texting regimes were followed but that costs money so corporations put out barely tested products that kill even savy consumers. Stop paying ceo golden parachutes if they are found asleep on their watch. They are the captains and need to go down with their ships not get paid out to do poorly.

[@jamesocker5235]

Corpus christy bridge is case in point today as it stand poorly designed and incomplete. It should not be completed based on cost but on proper safety guidelines which FIGG ignored

[@233kosta]

I'm an engineer, the amount of sheer incompetence I have to deal with is staggering 😳

[@danharold3087]

@@jamesocker5235 Do you really think the decision to put a crippled MCAS in the MAXs came down from the board room? That does not seem likely. A more plausible narrative is that there was pressure to make the SW sale and an effort was headed by sales to make it happen. Upper management applied the pressure and failed to see what that pressure caused. Had MCAS gone through regular engineering channels it would not have been the disaster it was. This is just my take on it.

[@doffey01]

Side note, contracting outside companies to produce your parts and just assembling them in house isn't always bad, its bad when the inspection process is lacking. Gulfstream does this and we regularly scrap things or reject parts and slow our line down if it doesn't meet standards (ive seen whole wings scrapped). Outsourcing isn't inherently bad, its bad when its done incorrectly to cut major corners.

[@OneBiasedOpinion]

Agreed. Contracting out-of-house can be a huge benefit. You just need to do double-duty on inspecting the outsourced parts AND the companies you’re partnering with. If _their_ parts fail in _your_ machine, the bill comes back to you first.

[@Kalvinjj]

True and it's also the same in any industry whatsoever other than if you do something really simple, or you ARE the one they outsource to. You can spot several brands of components inside a circuit board, sometimes (quite often may I add) by competitors to the brand you're buying it from. In cars, there's a reason they even flaunt proudly, as an upgrade, another company's components. Brembo brakes are a great example, the manufacturer might offer those as an upgrade (big logo showing and all) in place of their own parts.

[@timsmith1292]

This is why new cars today are crap!

[@DCG909]

AMEN ... If you book the parts to stock, check if it's the one you're expecting and if it's up to snuf.

[@mreese8764]

As far as I understood Boeing outsourced the designing of parts, too. Which wouldn't work for a complex system as a plane, where everyone relates to everything. Also, the third party just might not know how to design.

[@sarojpatel4262]

We need to hold the WHOLE BOEING BOARD accountable. EVERY SINGLE BOARD MEMBER.

[@Alley-dw2fl]

100% that's where the problem is.

[@jackdamron382]

Including Niki Haley.

[@anonanon1604]

can I visit your fantasy world? it sounds really nice there in reality, they will get richer and richer no matter how many deaths their decisions cause

[@ebenwaterman5858]

Part of the aquisition agreement of MD was integrating ALL of MD top execs into Boeing. That's what killed Boeing.

[@joecrou9445]

yes but who got the best position was Boeing manager NOT McD. I know some of the managers.

[@ebenwaterman5858]

@@joecrou9445 I don't. I just heard. :)

[@FloorItDuh]

@@joecrou9445 Correct but how many of those Boeing managers are left? Let's be real, it's MD running the show at Boeing.

[@DriveByShouting]

Blaming McDonnell Douglas is giving Boeing an easy way out. McDonnell-Douglas produced amazing, safe aircraft still flying today such as MD-80’s, MD-82’s, MD-83’s, MD-88’s, MD-11’s and the McDonnell Douglas MD-95 (AKA The Boeing 717, a Jet Delta Airlines, among others can’t get enough of and certainly wish more had been built). However the MD-95 (Boeing 717) was TOO good, and a DIRECT competitor to Boeing’s 737. So Boeing axed the 717, an Aircraft with one of the best safety records in History. Boeing’s big screw up’s were: Killing off the 717 in favor of the 737. Making the 737 longer, and longer until engineers realized to compete with Airbus, they would need an Engine with a wider diameter. The 717 would not have had this issue as it’s engines were not mounted on the wings, but the back of the fuselage under the T-Tail Vertical stabilizer. Boeing’s other, even bigger mistake was to kill off another aircraft, one of the best Airliners of all time, and a perfect 737 replacement; The Boeing 757. If McDonnell Douglas executives had so much power, why did they kill off their beloved MD-95 (717) when they should have killed off the 737? Had they kept the 717, MD-82 sized variants would have been produced, the 757 could be offered in a shortened version called the 757-100. Had they have retired the 737 instead of the 717, Boeing would have an outstanding lineup of: Boeing 717-200, 717-300, and possibly the 717-400. Boeing 747-8I Boeing 757-100, 757-200, 757-300 Boeing 777 Boeing 787 Boeing NMA Boeing should have purchased Bombardier. They didn’t. They should have purchased Embraer. They didn’t.

[@johnmknox]

@@DriveByShouting It is the same company now so they are both to blame but Boeing slightly more.

[@DerbJd]

I remember when the 787 workers started complaining and striking over safety, so Boeing made a new factory in a different state to undermine the strikers.

[@josephparker3033]

Before, to be a manager at Boeing, you needed to start as an engineer. Now just an MBA is enough. For critical systems like this, it is not. Ignoring the Thiokol engineers is what brought down the Challenger shuttle. You must understand and respect the science.

[@MottaFilms]

“Money is a great servant but a bad master.” - Francis Bacon

[@philipambler3825]

Thankyou for such a timely quote.

[@kendallevans4079]

As a retired engineer my chime-in is this: If a plane does not fundamentally want to fly you fix/redesign so it does. You don't force it to fly with a S/W patch.

[@55nsmooth]

Except virtually every newer transport as well as every US fighter jet is 'fundamentally' dependent on software to fly.

[@jasonpeng5798]

@@55nsmoothand that’s why fighter jets crash so much lol

[@ConspicuousBuyer3592]

Bravo! Microsoft patches my computer all the time. It always needs more patches. I never know what is being patched or why. I believe Boeing did this to the FAA and the airlines. It killed people. The 737 is not compatible with the new larger engines. This was a cost saving design decision that led to casualties and may bankrupt the company.

[@thesupreme8062]

​@@jasonpeng5798they really dont crash very much at all

[@truenoae8689]

​@@55nsmoothnot really unless you mean fly by wire or emergency aid systems. Most airframes are designed well enough so that they don't need software constantly correcting their flaws.

[@ASH7388]

1990: if it ain't boeing, i ain't flying 2020: if its boeing, it ain't flying

[@bobcornwell403]

I think the top management, who were in charge when the max was developed and sold, should face criminal charges, and should be sued. The reason we have these problems is that top management in these companies is never held accountable. In the future, top managers should be fined rather than the company.

[@Schimml0rd]

Haha, will never happen since it directly contradicts their interests, and so they would never create a law like that and send it to their politicians to ratify

[@weir-t7y]

Rule of law isn't for the rich

[@oldtimer2192]

Too true, they typically can just resign which is rediculous!

[@dieseltu1035]

Nobody cares what anyone thinks .

[@PRH123]

In the first 100+ years of us history, corporations were very rare things. Europe had already experienced at that time a massive financial collapse caused by limited liability companies. Corporations were chartered only for a few years, for specific projects (like building a bridge or something), with permission from the state legislature. Charters were time limited and didn’t automatically renew. Corporations had the same criminal liability for their actions as private persons. Company owners legally bore personal responsibility for the company’s actions. It was only towards the end of the 19th century that corporations began to have continuous charters. And limited personal liability for the officers.

[@JJs_playground]

I'm not an aviation nerd and after the 737 Max 8 disasters I started to pay more attention to what plane I was flying on. I don't trust Boeing at all. Also, it's not just Boeing's fault. The FAA had a huge part in the 737 Max 8 disasters, by the fact they allowed Boeing to self-certify.

[@stefanocozzi8188]

as of now the 737-8 max is faa certified and it is being used all over the world. The only area where it is not allowed to fly is china, eventhough it will start flying there. You have nothing to worry about (:

[@rishavbhowmik8163]

I always preffer Airbus. As cabin pressure is perfect & Toilets size is ok for civilised people. I only travel by Indigo & Vistara for domestic & Emirates or Singapore for international (For A380)

[@tesmith47]

Government is controlled/ infected with capitalist corporate thinking

[@lila2028]

I simply stopped flying at all.

[@zoidberg444]

Yeah - I think I'll stick to airbus or older Boeings from now on.

[@HB-hs1nr]

Not an aviation nerd, but I've changed flight plans when I saw I would be flying on a MAX. And will cotinue to do so!

[@aycc-nbh7289]

Why? Airbus never fully repaired the landing gears on their aircraft and yet people still continue to fly theirs.

[@zacharytracy3797]

At least a faulty landing gear won’t plummet your plane into the ground at Mach 0.85

[@aycc-nbh7289]

@@zacharytracy3797That’s until it detaches from the rest of the plane and flies into the engine or tears a hole into the fuselage. I’m glad this hasn’t happened yet, but it’s only a matter of time before it does.

[@pikazilla2897]

@@aycc-nbh7289still even if that occurs unless it causes a chain explosion (which I know can occur but is quite unlikely) you’d have a better chance of survival since unless it also punctures the hydraulic system an emergency landing would most likely be successful

[@aycc-nbh7289]

@@pikazilla2897You’d have to assume that nothing like what you mentioned doesn’t happen during the landing.

[@andyb.1026]

In 1985 I came back from an overseas job to work for BAe at Filton UK. With 20 years of Aircraft Engineering experience, I was appalled at their methods. A middle Manager explained to me patiently that "" You don't need to know anything about Aircraft, to be a Manager"" ! ! ! at a time they almost went broke & scraping around for contracts, building a 4 engine 146 when the rest of the world & Operators wanted 2 engines,, etc etc etc

[@farhanatashiga3721]

The 146 was well renowned though, airlines that operates them loves it and it's unique design makes it perfect for some specialized situations.

[@patrickcannell2258]

That manager's attitude is typical of modern business models. Stinks to core!

[@Zed_Oud]

It is always madness to place Business logic over sound engineering. But there’s also engineers that had reason to suspect systemic flaws if not specific ones. Any licensed Professional Engineer involved in such circumstances and organizations should be treated with suspicion. What bad characters they have. Negligence. Arrogance. Sloth. Greed. FTC or NTSB need to set up a whistleblower program for engineers to call out suspect transportation or structural engineering.

[@LogicallyAnswered]

A lot of those engineers don’t really have a voice and fear keeping their jobs

[@Zed_Oud]

@@LogicallyAnswered You have to build an environment where the easy, safe, and rewarding thing to do is report safety concerns. Whistleblowing is an uncomfortable intermediate step to that. If an engineer is handsomely rewarded for whistleblowing a shady business, inspection, or engineering climate, let alone for an actual design flaw brushed aside on the path to production? We will see business objectives line up such that engineers don’t need to put themselves out there. (Look at the fat percentage rewards SEC whistleblowers receive for financial fraud and such). When it comes to engineers and the managers put over them, we need to eliminate the chronically apathetic and protect the honest yet timid and do both through solid guarantees of monetary penalties and rewards, respectively. Nothing else gets the job done. Fat pensions and payouts for those who call out bad practices, and jail time or mandatory civil suits against those who were bad actors. Malicious apathy, I think we can call it that when someone sees something and yet while facing no consequences still decides not to say something. We just need to create the proper incentives and smash the disincentives.

[@darkgalaxy5548]

But...but... what you're suggesting would cut into profits!

[@thee-sportspantheon330]

We had that. It was called wikileaks. Some people did not like that website. Not one bit.

[@AC09524]

There is ALOT of bad practice in these big companies. Huntington Ingalls is one too. All these military DOD Army and defense contractors won't blink an eye at the death of an employee and won't hesitate to steal a dead man's benefits these days. Mass corruption and nepotism doesn't end.

[@TheCebulon]

Saw this live in our company. When an accountant took over the IT department. He did not understand what was going on or important!

[@christopherspeers4706]

I could write a very long post both for and against the things in this video although most in the for category. I think that I will summarize my thoughts by saying that when I started at Boeing in 2005 there was a culture of "quality first" (at least on the defense business side). Boeing spared no expense to make top quality products many times adding features at no cost to the customer. Boeing also generally had the best benefits in the defense industry. However, these things led to Boeing being very expensive. Multiple government agencies remarked to us that they loved our products, but that we were becoming too expensive. And indeed there was a shift on the defense side for the government to start selecting the winner of competitive proposals using a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) approach where they selected the lowest bid that met the bare minimum technical aspects. Boeing's approach of going above and beyond (with a fee to match it) no longer worked and several key defense contracts were lost to competitors. While I didn't work on the commercial business side, thanks to a employee benefit where Boeing paid for access to virtually any news subscription that mentioned Boeing, I often read up on the commercial side during my lunch breaks. For 9 straight years between 2003 and 2011 Airbus sold more commercial aircraft than Boeing. And Boeing executives HATED that. From what I read it again came down to price. It is my belief (no proof) that Boeing leadership decided to do whatever it would take to dethrone Airbus. So that meant bringing the price tag down. As a finance analyst I'm all for bringing the price down by finding efficiencies and building better. And indeed we went on a company wide initiative to become as lean as possible. When that had a negligible effect virtually every meeting turned into "how can we cut costs?" Quality was no longer mentioned and was a thing of the past. Around 2015 about the same time that Dennis Muilenburg became CEO is when things got even worse. Despite being a guy that had come up the ranks (on the defense side) working his way from peon up to top dog, one of the first things he did was to start laying off employees. At first it was just those who had bad marks on their performance reviews. Ok. Then it was those who had satisfactory performance reviews. I hardly ever saw my manager anymore because he was constantly in meetings where they were ranking employees and deciding who to fire next. During all of this Boeing hired a new executive on the commercial side and gave him a huge bonus (something like $13M). This literally made me sick in the stomach. This was not a fun culture to be in so I took a job with a pay raise and relocation and got out of there. I am by no means happy that there are these defects that have lead to hundreds of deaths. But it also doesn't surprise me that someone was either deliberately told to cut corners or did so out of the cultural pressure to cut costs and build faster. So yeah, this is my short version of my Boeing experience...

[@38dragoon38]

Thank you for sharing your experience. I genuinely had goosebumps reading it as you have experienced the issues in real-life. It's like hearing the first-hand experiences of an engineer building the Hindenburg airship.

[@manuxx3543]

It's rare that competition is bad for the customer but thats one case

[@kendallevans4079]

That's your short version?

[@christopherspeers4706]

kendall Evans haha, yep. Plenty more experiences and stories. I could be much more thorough and detailed! 😁

[@drawingboard82]

Sounds depressingly familiar to the journey Rolls Royce is on. I worked there and witnessed a gradual depredation in it's respect for engineering.

[@michaelalexander2306]

Considering that Boeing stated "....safety in at the centre of everything we do". Why are they seeking an extension to get the MAX7 and MAX10 certified to avoid the requirement to fit EIACAS to keep commonality - a safety system?

[@LogicallyAnswered]

Hmmmm

[@snarwars]

I’ll give an answer into their thinking. The safety argument for seeking the extension would allow all 737 Max lineup to share one type rating. Means pilots trained for it can fly any variant. Without this, you would divide “visually” the same airframe into two different operational procedures for pilots. This is assuming boeing is honest when they say adding the new safety features may change up the cockpit layout enough to shake things up.

[@mhdibm7515]

Mentour pilot has a good video explaining this

[@57Jimmy]

@@mhdibm7515 and for someone who’s profession and life depends on knowing what’s making his plane fly safely not only for him but his 150+ pax and crew, Petter is the most knowledgable expert I have ever watched when it comes to aircraft systems, operations, training and safety!

[@mhdibm7515]

@@57Jimmy i agree , and his content's quality is so high i can't believe it's free to watch on youtube

[@charlielynes]

Just remember, when a corporation says its products are completely fine and safe to use, the safety of users is a long way behind the profits. Then the corporation is too big to question - "we know best" The same "profit before people" is in full effect at Boeing, as it was at Fujitsu with the Horizon system employed by the Post Office.

[@SWExplore]

Yes, I just watched "Mr Bates vs the Post Office" fiasco that ruined the lives of so many, including 4 suicides. Bureaucracy and loads of red tape and not wanting to lose the reputation of the Royal Mail was absolutely disgusting. Heck, Boeing is doing the same thing but many more lives are on the line.

[@mastersitorou8289]

These aluminum cargo door locks was a fatal flaw, the embarrassing part is a good engineer/citizen replicated the door lock mechanism for to further investigate his son's death and talked about how this flaw works in detail, this company I've seen so far was actually a trail before failure of ready to fly aircraft.

[@apolloniaaskew9487]

The cargo locking door mechanism was a problem for the 747 and the DC-10 in the seventies and eighties by the supplier.

[@VanillaMacaron551]

Yes it doesn't seem that Boeing applied itself to identifying that door problem. It was finally revealed by the NZ engineer who doggedly pursued and revealed the design issue, in spite of Boeing's non-cooperation and lack of support.

[@mrl22222]

you should understand that there tens of thousands of these latches, and none has ever had a problem until now.

[@annedavis3340]

​@@mrl22222 based on your comment I presume you think you're speaking with someone about the door plug blow out of current events. Their comment is from a year ago and referred to the historical cases of cargo doors opening, causing depressurization and some avoidable deaths. Unfortunately, those deaths were during a subsequent event, not the "first time" it had happened, and therefore were preventable. But were not. Even after the deaths, the cause (discovered by the grieving parents) was denied for years till it happened to trigger while mechanics were standing looking at it while the cargo door opened itself, proving their theory, which had already been ignored by that time, correct. An article in the Seattle Times called "Terror in thr Sky -- Flight 811 Lost a Cargo Door and Nine Lives -- Boeing is Still Wrestling with Solutions and Settlements" goes into the timeline in a way you can see it. MentourDetective channel has a video on how these work. There's a Mayday episode online called "The Unimaginable Tragedy of United Airlines Flight 811 | Mayday: Air Disaster." I think there were some crash investigation shows on it as well but it has been a bit longer since I've seen them.

[@embeddedude737]

Yeah, I worked for Boeing for 32 years but retired early because I was witnessing a decline in quality control for the sake of production and kinda lost my pride of workmanship...then the 737-8 MAX disasters happened. They were caused by a design flaw that wasn't sufficiently tested. I haven't flown since.

[@quicksno]

I'd like to see an update to this. I work at a production plant for GA aircraft and I can tell you that it's much easier to catch and fix issues with such a small operation (1500 employees). But the management attitude is still the same, push-push-push. It amazes me every year how strict they are for safety of flight, quality, and employee safety at the beginning of the year and then throw all that out the window so they make schedule at the end of the year. It's honestly psychotic

[@AlchemistCH]

12:47 "They might have a preference for an airline..." Shows an airline that replaced its entire fleet of 737's with A320's. That's quite a subtle hint.

[@aycc-nbh7289]

Why do that when they had their own issues with landing gears that they overlooked?

[@aleide2980]

@@aycc-nbh7289 To be fair, I would take a landing gear issue over a nosedive any day of the week

[@angrydragonslayer]

@@aleide2980 belly landing might be bad but nose landing.....

[@madusmaxamus8670]

You just confirmed what I have been saying for some time now. Boeing started going down hill when them merged with MD. The sad thing that it is only getting worse to the point of people are saying "if it's Boeing, I ain't going". I have also complained that Boeings outsourcing is a cause of many of the problems that Boeing is experiencing.

[@bertdellaluna5612]

It's difficult not to fly Boing craft when you fly commercially. During the 70's I wouldn't fly on a Douglas DC10 because of a lousy safety record. I would change my schedule so I could fly L1011. I always make it a point to know what type of craft and what series of the craft I fly on because of safety concerns because it's not like pulling over to the side of the road to change a flat.

[@snegik]

B O I N G

[@lbowsk]

How many DC10 accidents were there that were the fault of the airplane? The actual design and or construction of the airplane? Only one that I can see.

[@Morpheus-pt3wq]

Meanwhile, many DC10 fly even today, transporting cargo around the world. How many of them are crashing? Plane with dubious reputation will not get scrapped - it will get fixed and if it becomes unusable for its purpose, it will be repurposed. Aviation industry is interesting in such way, when a manufacturer makes mistake, they eventually get caught and have to fix it. Meanwhile manufacturers in different sectors can get away with almost anything.

[@XX-bn9sf]

L1011 Tristar? Worst experience. Had to deboard that plane twice, because they couldn't fix problems before takeoff and one aborted takeoff at the last minute. Really disliked the Tristar.

[@rishavbhowmik8163]

In USA only Delta uses Airbus.

[@anton74624]

As an aviation engineer myself my dealings with Boeing, the OEM, was not always smooth. I found that the Europeans with Airbus industry are more diligent and disciplined. Although the Airbus planes are harder to maintain in the sense that its more like rocket science.

[@elely1973]

I've worked on several models of Airbus and find them easier to maintain actually.

[@mangos2888]

Who would you rather work for?

[@elely1973]

@@mangos2888 im not a full engineer yet, im an Aircraft Technician, I take apart the aircraft and fix any discrepancies, so basically the aircraft have the same parts or similar part numbers when you order parts, so it comes down to what culture of company you would like to spend your life with. Boeing lays-off too much. IDK what the retention rate is at Airbus or they're pay scale.

[@aleide2980]

@@elely1973 Since Airbus is European, and here Unions are a major power (or pain in the butt), it is harder to layoff, and if you do lose your job, if you were in a European country you usually get around 1 to 2 years of salary as compensation. If you work for Airbus in another country, well i imagine the layoff would be easier, but you probably still have more stability than with Boeing.

[@elely1973]

@@aleide2980 yeah..I know alot of guys who worked for Boeing and they always talking about lay-offs, I don't know anyone at an actual Airbus facility so I really couldn't say how good or bad they are on the issue..I happen to like both of the products, its the management that can be so frustrating.

[@rwdplz1]

You got the 'why' exactly right. They pushed out their senior engineers and replaced them with zero experience H1B visa workers to save money. With nobody to actually do the hard work, it didn't get done.

[@leroy2576]

This is a good video, but one important part that is missing in the 737 Max story, is that Boeing promised Airlines that they would keep training costs down. Also, because of the redesign of the 737 Max and consideration for flight stability, Boeing introduced software that pilots were not completely aware of called MCAS. The software on the plane would falsely detect a stall and try to nose down. The pilots were unaware that MCAS was doing this and try to exert manual control until they crashed.

[@MsJubjubbird]

Also that one of the airlines said they were going to order a bucketload of medium airliners from Boeing for delivery within the next few years; despite the fact that Boeing didn't have anything. Hence they rejigged the 737 when it was unsuitable for the purpose, given there was no time; instead of declining the order.

[@acreguy3156]

Correct, Leroy. Pilots were never informed that they could override the MCAS system. If you watch the Mayday show, the investigators are mostly long-term pilots with years of experience and their golden rule before all this computerized automation came in was to "fly the plane," something MCAS won't let you do unless you know where the damn OFF button is!

[@remote24]

​@@acreguy3156 glorious idea to implement a cruise missile function without anyone knowing about and being unable to be overwritten by manual controls

[@jackdbur]

The fatal flaw of MCAS is that it is a stand alone system controlled by a single sensor that is known to go bad! This is because tying it to the main flight computers would have required pilots to have to be recertified on the aircraft! 😊

[@jackdbur]

​@@acreguy3156Pilots weren't even advised of the stick pusher function!!😊

[@EnDSchultz1]

Dad was a Boeing engineer for around 35 years, with a long pedigree spanning the 1980s to mid 2010s which I won't bother to cite, suffice to say he was there for the before and after. He always lamented the tectonic shift in attitude and management style he observed following the MD merger. 787 program was such a cluster it was the last straw that convinced him to retire. The experience of constantly butting heads with management and having to deal with their absurdity drove him positively batty. And the catastrophically deteriorating Seattle traffic over the decades but that's another story. You wouldn't think one person could make a difference but sometimes I wonder if the MAX accidents would have happened if he hadn't retired after Dreamliner. He worked in flight controls and failure analysis and was a DER (Designated Engineering Representative) in the certification process.

[@alanfaulkner5266]

I see that management style at most logistics companies of all types. Class 1 Railroads, Trucking, Aviation, Marine doesn't matter where you look, profits always have the top priority over literally everything else because those companies answer to ignorant CEOS, board members, and stock holders who just want to see the money pile grow. Every body does have a price and it's paid for in advance, it's called an insurance policy.

[@yacaattwood2421]

YES!!!!! The Class I Railroads want to run longer and heavier freight trains with just an engineer; a conductor would be dispatched to the site of any issues such as hotboxes or detached air hoses. Precision Scheduled Railroading places more stress on crews to meet unrealistic timetables I worked for Conrail from 1979-1985; at that time, some freight crews consisted of five people: engineer, fireman, conductor and two brakemen. The crews were reduced to three, some trains run with just an engineer and conductor There are videos of kids crawling underneath stopped trains at crossings to get to school because the trains are so long Profit Over All is the ruling philosophy in the corporate world

[@Antonio-lt1sp]

Boeing gave a new meaning to "screw up", as the post morten of the fallen aircrafts confirmed the jackscrews doomed positions.

[@hrishikeshdatar1708]

The word "screw up" should be replaced by BOEING in every dictionary. They are nothing but abunch of businessmen who are ready to kill /let people die to line their pockets

[@uscustoms05]

If Lion and Ethiopian took better care of their aircraft, we wouldn't be posting here. You don't need to believe me. A quick review of the acft maintenance logs provides a lot of information not made public.

[@Schimml0rd]

@@uscustoms05 so it was their fault and the planes are fine and it was just coincidence they all crashed?

[@williammorris3334]

It’s happening everywhere. I work for a premium hvac dealer and the equipment we get is crap. We’re doing multiple major repairs on many systems before they’re even three years old. I work on all brands and they’re all engineered down more and more taking quality out while they simultaneously raise prices multiple times a year. It’s the same for most major appliances.

[@angrydragonslayer]

Yeah.... I found an old (2006) heat-pump (retrofitted for new gasses) and the tech that installed it said it will probably last 20-30 years from 2017

[@dfct9494]

It's because just like in the case of boeing, everyone buys cheaper stuff. So if you want to stay in business, you make your stuff cheaper as well. Anyways, boeing planes are great, they still are on the forefront of aviation, this guy just wants to make a viral video that's it.

[@angrydragonslayer]

@@dfct9494 thank you, i will now mix in carbon tet into my corn syrup to make it 5% cheaper

[@dfct9494]

@@angrydragonslayer You are just being unproductive for no reason.

[@angrydragonslayer]

@@dfct9494 please do explain what you mean by this is my comparison between adding dangerous chemicals to food and cutting corners on safety for airplanes not fitting in some way?

[@gj8550]

At 30,000 feet, there’s absolutely no room for error. I am not boarding another Boeing plane again. Ever.

[@j.t.cooper2963]

I worked at Boeing when they started the 737 Max back in the early 2000's. All of the engineers I knew were against it. Management didn't care what they thought. That was the first mistake and many more soon followed.

[@Ondar007]

Worst is that all corporates operates like this :(

[@LogicallyAnswered]

All of them have different levels of consequences though

[@kirilmihaylov1934]

@@LogicallyAnswered Boeing Is the most Important

[@franscorpio1113]

Corporates are not human

[@matthew8153]

@@franscorpio1113 According to the Supreme Court of these United States they are.

[@buh5995]

even in shipping and logistics companies these years.

[@s.v.discussion8665]

We must call this company MacDonnell Douglas. It is not Boeing anymore.

[@brady3474]

I don’t know why MD was bought by boeing, but MD made the best aircraft ever made: A4, F4, F15, F18, MD 11. I guess MD had great engineers but bad business men

[@Raul_Menendez]

Engineers: This aircraft is unsafe. Businessmen: You meant cost efficient.

[@TecraX2]

MCAS: "Based on a SINGLE Non-Redundant sensor, I consider myself to be omniscient!!!" #FlawlessLogic

[@fjohnson9749]

On nearly every jet operating in the US there are 2 AOA vanes. Yes, without redundancy if there is a failure, then what? There are procedures that pilots are taught during Initial Type training to discern erroneous indications and use the correct indications.

[@tonycook7679]

@@markdratini2889 It doesn't matter, you just flag the system as faulty and go back to manual control. That is enough to avoid the absolutely inevitable disaster you get by just trusting one. That is insane. This is what all dual channel flight control systems do, it takes a triple redundant system to have an option of disregarding a single faulty channel. I did in fact work, in a very minor role, on the Tornado's Spin Prevention and Incidence Limiting System (SPILS), albeit very briefly in 1979. This used two AOA sensors to aid the pilot in spin prevention and incidence limiting. This was a dual channel analogue flight computer with multiple cross channel checks through the whole of the controller. It would disable itself if any of these cross channel checks went out of bounds. This is how you do it, anything else is rank stupidity. All the critical flight computers were triple redundant and intended to survive a single channel failure.

[@hrissan]

IDK why computer cannot use information from all sensor to construct the physical model of aircraft. If aircraft is in full throttle, altitude is diminishing, then air speed cannot be so low, and the speed sensors are most likely faulty. Aircraft has very little free dimensions, so all array of sensors is redundant. Add separate GPS and glonass receiver and you have even more ways to calculate the same true position and speed.

[@zenlexon2836]

@@hrissan The ability to take in instrument data and intuitively understand from it what the aircraft is doing is a part of good airmanship - and also a very human thing. It's surprisingly difficult to give computers an equivalent to intuition. Taking your scenario, dropping altitude and low airspeed along with full throttle could be indicative of a faulty airspeed indicator - or it could indicate a power-on stall.

[@nigelbond4056]

With respect, there were multiple issues reported by flight crews of the 737 Max long before the Lion Air disaster. Planes with less than 40 hours flight time were suffering failures to instrumentation, flight control and engines. These issues continue to this day with the Alaska plug blow-out being one of the more known failures. However, there have been several reports of bolts holding the tail fin not being secured, horizontal stabilisers not functioning and even an inflatable slide deploying in the air. I certainly wouldn’t fly on one.

[@Timpon_Dorz]

Hey, remember when Booing blamed the Lion airs pilots for being poorly trained? Lol

[@UHF43]

Well, Boeing knew for sure the pilots weren't properly trained...

[@Timpon_Dorz]

@@UHF43 their own test pilot says he would've crashed the plane if it happens in real life.

[@BoDiddly]

I refuse to ever board a Boeing 787! I lost my long held trust in Boeing when Engineers and Assembly staff of the 787 both said there were issues with it's production. Apparently, Boeing has allowed Executives in their ranks that don't have "Safety" as their prime objective as it was with Boeing in the 1970's.

[@BoDiddly]

Hah! Now that I am 2/3's the way through the video, it appears that we both agree on the problem!

[@michaelkaufman9625]

Airbus just won over another customer.

[@matthewsmith2787]

787 has never crashed

[@BoDiddly]

@@matthewsmith2787 Yet! Sometimes problems take years to manifest.

[@kirilmihaylov1934]

@@BoDiddly 787 had problems too but it did not crash

[@frederikc_]

that they didnt ground all 737 maxes at the first crash, is just insane

[@aycc-nbh7289]

Then how come Airbus didn’t ground their A320’s after the Jet Blue incident? And one crash doesn’t necessarily indicate a systematic problem.

[@Basket_Propellors]

I mean tbh you can chalk it up as a one-time issue or a maintenance problem if it crashed just once now if it crashed the second time with the same issue as the first, that would be a justifiable reason for them to ground the fleet If they grounded planes after one fatal crash, a lot of planes would've been grounded by now

[@kwadwothestan]

They did in most other countries but the US government refused to do so for quite a while, they sided with Boeing

[@tigeruntamed6036]

@@aycc-nbh7289 Better safe than sorry

[@Peacewind152]

Just want to point out that the 747 cargo door issue was actually figured out by a father of one of the victims, who happened to be an engineer himself. Boeing would have swept it under the rug if he hadn't blown the whistle.

[@WillyWeiss-HH]

This is not blowing the whistle - he didn't work there. He just turned it into his life mission to find the cause, and not only he - his wife (the victim's mother) as well - together they travelled the world, from one aviation regulation office to another, between Boeing's factories and part dealers, until he could build the model that was shown on TV.

[@jackandblaze5956]

I always breathe relief when I see that the jet I'm boarding is an Airbus instead of a Boeing.

[@JimIntriglia]

I take alternate flights that provide Airbus. Maybe travelers will begin considering their safety in addition to price point.

[@nialloftheninedevils]

This what happens when accountants run manufacturing companies, they understand the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

[@Phil_Scott]

I was a facilities engineer at Boeing Military Aircraft in the late 1980's early 1990s time frame...resigning in protest over a few safety and 30 foot tall 5 axis mills issues... and somehow knew that one day I would see all that hit the fan. THANKS... for your fine fine work on the video. This sort of baloney is not uncommon, following that I was retained by Westinghouse Hanford Corp to evaluate the nations primary plutonium manufacturing facility where the plutonium that went into Hiroshima was made... . .....but really all they wanted from me was to sign off as safe, a stack of documents a few inches tall covering the entire 530 square mile facility ....and dozens of reactors and 1 million gallon high level radioactive waste tanks. . I ended up after a few threats testifying before the US congress for two hours or so on those issues but primarily on what happens to the company, then the nation that supports that sort of corruption. Its been 27 years.... now the entire 530 square miles of it are being bulldozed to the ground. . the time frame to fix all that .. 100 years and one trillion dollars. I knew then that I would live long enough to see that mess hit the fan as well. Now we have the glorious work wide financial reset.... I truly truly wish them the very very best...because the lives of billions of people depend on it working. If it 'work' all freedom will be lost... leaving the historically not so decent or worse, in charge. That has always ended with humdreds of millions of lives lost and with those responsible exposed. . I think at 81 years old .... that I will live long enough to see part of that mess but not the full Monte so to speak. Brace yourself... we are not a world run by saintly geniuses. . ****** My advice ....be microscopically honest with yourself about all things first.... That will produce miracles in you.. you might even cry for a few days or weeks.... while you experience that...and learn to forgive yourself for all the core level damage you have done to yourself primarily... and others. . ......but not necessarily with anything attempting to slide a saber into your stomach ...or back or some other orifice...that is a crucial point that I have yet to become completely clear on... . My intuition tells me that even that could be a path to oblivion... maybe better to stand and fight... with all those sabers sticking out of you... maybe... . Someone reading this might have some thoughts on that. I would like to hear them. . Phil Scott

[@dpeter6396]

Hanford is still being kept quiet.... I remember seeing a bit about those hearings and remember the local news coverage investigation team really digging into the corruption and medical problems there. But nothing in the last few years... That sort of corruption makes me sick!

[@Phil_Scott]

​@@dpeter6396 The entire exhaust system at what was originally called the 'Plutonium Finishing Plant' but renamed a bunch of times for various bogus reasons... was caked with thick layers of plutonium oxides etc that if they fell off could collect in a pile and react in critical mass fashion... but not as with a bomba banana because the mass would not be contained.. . Regarding the reporters 'investigation'...when I was there they found ONE cockroach... that had one of its tiney little cockroachy footsies, ***CONTAMINATED*** WITH ONE MOLECULE OF PU OXIDE... gaspppp ... double gasp... OMG... the horror, the horror.... ....used as a distraction from the real issues that the entire 530 sq mile facility is now being torn down for. ... a project estimated to take 100 years and cost one trillion dollars..... to round it down a bit from the actual situation.... . .... just a very very SLIGHT bit more than a contaminated cockroach footsie. I was not impressed with the coverage. . Similarly with Rocky Flats.... not actually a condo complex. DPeter as you know reported earier by someone at @LaOrifice .... . Their wives leave them, their kids hate their guts... they self destuct. . ** The truth works better. . We were in a race to develop nuclear weapons with a known genocidal german regime at the time, and the safety issues at Hanford were more that quite secondary to that.... . We did all that...and we won the crucial war. My hat is off to those finest of fine men and women. . . but not to those following who chose to lie, cheat and threaten those who are having to work with the resulting disaster.. . .........and I *detest those however who released hundreds of pounds of plutonium oxide into the air to see how many would die down wind of that in Nevada and points south of there.... documented by congressional investigation. and continue lying today.. there is no point of being any part of that road to complete an utter ruin... unless one is an idiot. . That is insanity, any decent person with a brain knows better than that instictively.

[@eternalharmony0]

@@Phil_Scott I fell like following you on LinkedIn. sir you're amazing

[@sdtangler]

This would be a great forward to a book. That would hopefully list names, so the minor accountability of shame would follow them.

[@anneoconnor8741]

I worked for US companies,Gillette was a really good company,especially in the UK. Gave 11 years of my life, no joke, the factory noises were my heartbeat, I knew straightaway when things were wrong. It was just not me, we all cared. I will never buy anything made by P&G. They are a truly awful company. They shut down factories and send all the machinery overseas. They take pride in the fact that every year their least performing brands are "divested". They are evil and have hurt thousands of hard-working people. Please just not buy anything made by p&g. They are so evi? that they buy well loved brand names, and hurt the loyal staff. They are sneaky, they hide behind well loved brands they have bought. Please, please, examine your purchase closely, and if it has p&g hidden in a corner DO NOT BUY IT.

[@OceanDriveSpeeder]

What does this RANT have to do with BOEING?

[@navyseal1689]

can u just tell whats wrong with P&G?

[@matthew8153]

It’s literally the same story with every publicly traded company.

[@MrGchiasson]

Already put them on my growing 'boycott' list.

[@bloodspartan300]

That may be true about p and g but you were part of a gillette that in your opinon was more ethical and passinate but you play a roll in ruining the Gillette brand and it is in finacinal shambles because of your anti male wokeness

[@joelchristianson5454]

Very well done. Thank you for not using an AI voice. A real & genuine accent is infinitely better.

[@probiethetank8825]

Pilot: “Pulls nose up” 737: *We Don’t Do That Here*

[@Shoppincart]

It used to be "If It ain't Boeing, I ain't going" but now Its "If its Boeing, I ain't going".

[@zbubby1202]

As an engineer unfortunately this is an all to often occurrence. I have been asked to relax my standards for performance goals that are completely arbitrary in the grand scheme of things, to the detriment of the system that is under development. We need to take more personal responsibility for banding together as industry experts and defending engineering decisions that may not be the most popular with management. Most engineers also end up in management at some point, and in my experience even the most miserly of engineers (usually civil lol) end up relaxing their standards once they become part of the 'executive MBA' brigade.

[@mrDingleberry44]

I was a Boeing engineer, and I approve this vid. I left Boeing shortly after my program completed after a decade of work. The programs that I've been a part have all had way too much bureaucratic bloat. They could do better with more engineers and a ton fewer managers. Everything took forever when working with an endless team of below average managers.

[@scottkirby5016]

As for the mechanic not checking the door and how long these issues have been going on at Boeing...not that long, since they opened the South Carolina plant which was part of a major culture change on the factory floor there (as opposed to the Douglas changes that got to the executives and bean counters) As for why Boeing bought McD it was about the defense contracts vs civil aviation balance.

[@thomaswayneward]

Baloney, I watched a news report around 1990 that exposed how the managers at Boeing would cut corners, forcing the manufacturing to go forward with known faults in the structure of the airplane. Bet you are from Seattle.

[@IStMl]

Never flying anything else than an Airbus

[@TenorCantusFirmus]

"We have to design the 737MAX." "Fine, we also have purchased McDonnell-Douglas. We'll give the task to those having designed the DC-10."

[@tomriley5790]

Yep exactly - the MD10 in my opinion one of the worst designed widebody airliners ever built.

[@roykliffen9674]

@@tomriley5790 Not really true; The DC-10 was a fine aircraft with some design flaws that were dealt with. The biggest problem was related to PR with some very public, videoed crashes. The O'Hare crash - the one where an engine broke free of the wing and the aircraft rolling over and diving to the ground - was NOT due to faulty design but the airline screwing up maintenance to save a buck. The Sioux City crash - the one where a DC-10 cartwheeled after an emergency landing - was another one. most passengers survived that crash which is a testament to the strength of the aircraft. It crashed after the no.2 engine suffered an un-contained explosion - BTW not a McDonnell Douglas design - and the shrapnel subsequently severing the hydraulic lines of ALL hydraulic systems; an event so unlikely it was not even included in the risk analysis during development. Still the crew managed to fly this aircraft onto a runway. A real design flaw led to the problem with the rear cargo door opening in flight; it led to a fatal crash near Paris where the opening of this door caused the floor to collapse and thus severing the control cables to the control surfaces. The same happened to American Airlines flight 96, but it was able to land safely. The rear cargo door latches were revised and never again gave problems. Additionally the main floor was provided with vents preventing its collapse like happened with the Paris crash. By then however the public had lost confidence in this trijet - mostly due to the visuals but also the unjustified grounding of the type after the O'Hare crash - and airlines didn't anymore want to offer this aircraft as a mode of transport to a reluctant public, so it was relegaded to cargo duties. Ever since the DC-10 has had a fine, if not exemplary safety record. Later MD-10's were basically the same aircraft with an upgraded two-man cockpit, but the MD-11 was a completely different aircraft, even though it looked very similar. Funny though As shown in this video, the Boeing 747 had similar problems with its cargo doors leading to fatalities. In 1992 the no-3 and no.4 engines of a Boeing 747 broke free from the wing and the aircraft subsequently crashed into an apartment complex near Amsterdam. Somehow that didn't lead to the grounding of the 747 fleet as the FAA did with the DC-10; makes one wonder why.

[@marcmcreynolds2827]

@@roykliffen9674 The DC-10 fleet grounding was basically a misunderstanding. The investigation following American Airlines Flight 191 soon zeroed in on a fatigue crack discovered in the pylon of the departed engine. So the fleet was inspected, but in few cases similar cracks in the same critical part were apparently missed the first time. During reinspections not long after, cracks were found in pylons thought to be crack-free, raising the question of whether such cracks were somehow forming after a very small number of cycles. So all the planes were grounded, but after more analysis it was concluded that no, cracks couldn't possibly be forming that fast -- it must have been that they were present during the first inspections but had been missed.

[@Blur4strike]

My uncle used to work for Boeing in Everett, WA. When he retired he mentioned how things were changing for the worse before he left, McDonald Douglas bean-counters were beginning to interfere with Boeing engineers jobs.

[@marklatimer7333]

Perhaps these comparison websites that offer flight tickets should add another tick box next to 'Direct Flight' saying 'No Boeings'? It could be just above the preference tick boxes marked 'Low Sodium Meal', 'Arrive Safely' or 'Experience Fiery Death'.

[@normferguson2769]

Boeing messed up. They tried to put bigger engines in their new 737’s to keep up with Airbus. Instead of adding longer landing gear they tried to rebalance the aircraft and had to add software solutions to make it stable. The KISS principle was totally missed.

[@acreguy3156]

Correct, Norm. Few people notice that the engines on the MAX project above the wing by several inches. They failed to correctly compensate for this difference. At least, that's what I read...

[@toasterhavingabath6980]

Whats that?

[@axanarahyanda628]

​@@toasterhavingabath6980The bigger engines story or the KISS principle?

[@233kosta]

The silliest part of all this is that the MCAS system wasn't even necessary to solve the issue it was meant to solve. They could have just adjusted the existing stall prevention systems - the ones validated over millions of flight hours!

[@icabod9345]

I was an engineer at GM, AT&T Bell Labs, and worked closely with HP back in the day. Same thing happened to these companies. In all cases, upper management went from engineering backgrounds to business backgrounds. Corporate cultures change with management changes of this kind and good engineers move on. Human greed knows no bounds.

[@potatoradio]

I worked at HP and knew it was over in the 2000s when they shut down the store and I found a copy of the book the HP way in the garbage. Legit good book on listening to your workers and customers, and not chasing profits or C suite bonuses at all costs.

[@fdjw88]

Nothing is changing at Boeing. one of my best friends his dad is a recently retired Boeing engineer who worked at the Everett factory. I personally have friends who are current Boeing engineers. Right now, senior management is engaged in undesirable cost cutting methods, such as hiring temporary contractors instead of full time permanent employees. Outsourcing hasn't stopped, many programming are still outsourced to India where the company has a hard time conducting oversights and QAs. Newly hired contractors have no passion towards the jobs they do, they are getting paid very little, they have no benefits, and management can fire them whenever they want with no compensation. These people don't care about the planes they build, most of these contractors don't even stay with Boeing for more than 2 years, some even left after 1 year, and management will just replace them with someone else who is looking for a quick buck. The situation is very very sad.

[@williamcarter7655]

And in comes DEI, it appears it’s working out real good for Boeing…….well maybe not so much!🤣

[@nuherbleath461]

I’ve gotta flight with Ryanair next month and they’ve taken delivery of 70 of these, so there’s a 27% chance I’ll end up in the English Channel instead of Spain

[@hrishikeshdatar1708]

Hillarious to some extent and extremely terrifying too

[@felanylove1895]

😂😂😂😂 God won’t let that happen 🙏

[@romanobezuidenhout7506]

Make sure to pack your Speedo and diving goggles!!!

[@StCreed]

Well, you are flying with a very cheap Airline. Can't have everything :)

[@alanhoughton4415]

​@@felanylove1895 does he work for Boeing?

[@brans0217]

Boeing’s stock has retreated only 19% over this past door failure. People really don’t care, investors could punish them but don’t.

[@RM-el3gw]

i dont agree with what youre saying. The billions in payouts that boeing had to go through with the max have permanently affected boeing stock value; it had its all time high around 2018-2019, but after the second crash, it hasnt gotten close to what it used to be. Over this latest door incident, it seems that delta or united will cancel a substantial amount of their 737 max orders, which further affects the company financially, and in wall street as well.

[@ibnwarraq7826]

Until top executives face criminal charges and long sentences and maybe a guillotine visit or two, corporations will continue to do what they have always done, pursue more and more profit at the cost of everything else. Fines are a cost of business after all. This applies to every industry not just aviation.

[@dfct9494]

Boeing planes are still good do not get the wrong idea. And you might ask why they make stuff less "good", let me explain. Everyone else makes their planes cheaper, all the airlines buy those ones instead of your expensive planes. So if you want to still exist as a company, you have to make your planes cheaper.

[@monitastevana1810]

#TeamAirbus ❤. Here in Indonesia, Lion Air is no longer using 737 max. No max flying over indonesia’ sky.

[@777FreakyD]

All of Lion Airs MAXs are being transferred to Batik Air, whose parent company is Lion Air. Just smoke and mirrors my friend.

[@monitastevana1810]

@@777FreakyD lol dont you read my comment clearly! I said in indonesia sky not malaysia😂 come on. Thats different country license different ownership. Pls do RESEARCH! As batik air malaysia is different with lion air(parent company) , they different owner

[@777FreakyD]

@@monitastevana1810 I understand Batik Air is a Malaysian based airline, but it is under the same ownership group as Lion Air and Batik will be flying thier MAXs into Indonesia. Plus other airlines that do operate the MAX fly into Indonesia. So your statement "no max flying over Indonesia sky" is inaccurate on many levels.

[@marcd1981]

Thank you for this video. This is January 26, 2024, and there have been two additional incidents with the MAX aircraft: 1. In December 2023, Boeing urged all airlines to inspect their MAX aircraft after an international carrier found a nut missing from a bolt on the rudder control system. Then Boeing found an undelivered MAX that had the same nut loose on the bolt in the rudder control system. Alaska Airlines reported finding multiple MAX aircraft with these loose bolts. 2. On January 5, 2024, An Alaska Airlines MAX-9 was at 16,000ft when a cabin door plug blew out, depressurizing the aircraft and forcing an emergency landing. The FAA grounded ALL MAX-9 aircraft (171) for inspections. A couple of things regarding these aviation company's mantra of "Safety is our #1 priority", and I'm including airlines along with Boeing. First, this is not the actual case, as safety is several steps down on their priority list. The #1 priority for the manufacturer is delivering aircraft, no matter what it takes. The #1 priority for airlines is getting as many of their aircraft in the sky as possible, no matter what it takes. This is all you need to know about their priorities, as it overrides what any engineer or maintenance personnel have to say about the safety of an aircraft. So, before I get jumped for making things up, I will explain I just retired from a 30 year aviation career with a US carrier. I worked in several areas of what is now called Technical Operations (Tech Ops), and what I still referred to as Aircraft Maintenance. I worked in both Union and Management positions, and was involved in many safety related decisions when deciding if an aircraft was removed from service, or if "No known condition exists that would render this aircraft unairworthy". And I can unequivocally state that getting the aircraft off of the gate and into the air was the most important thing (#1 priority) to upper management. Now this has come around and is affecting my wife and I, as we have a vacation scheduled, booked the airline tickets, and just found out the airline we are flying on uses MAX-9 aircraft for all four legs. And with the MAX-9 about to go back into service, I don't know if I have any recourse to be refunded for the tickets. We really do not want to fly on any of the MAX aircraft, but especially the MAX-9 with the findings they have so far.

[@tigeruntamed6036]

If you do ultimately decide to go anyways I pray safe travels.

[@TubeSkaterRudy]

I remember on holidays many years ago there was a engineer from Airbus telling me he really avoided going with a Boeing because he was baffled when he observed how they worked within the company.

[@CO84trucker]

Two conclusions: 1. It's too bad there aren't any airline executives these days like the late Austrian Niki Lauda who had a pair of steel balls and fought Boeing tooth & nail to get them to correct the Boeing reverse thruster flaw which resulted in the deadly Lauda Flight 004 crash in Thailand. 2. Men in 👖 built this country but men in 👔 destroyed it (for the latter's own 💰 🤑 💸 gain).

[@rezaaprililo]

ofc niki lauda has ball of steel, he is almost die at nürburgring gp 1976 and comeback to almost win 1976 championship and win it at 1977

[@jimhill6586]

I remember Niki lauda with Phil Condit on a golf cart. Niki picked out a white tail to replace the one managers finished during the strike. Niki demanded his plane to be finished during the strike. Other airlines refused to have management finish their airplane. He should have known better.

[@dvieitez]

Boeing has a history of success and creating some of the greatest birds. I'm a privat pilot, never flown a big airliner, but as the time was passing by during my training, it became clear to me how important is to be responsible on everything about aviation. I always have felt safe on any Boeing model, but that's not the case anymore. Seeing the commitment to safety being exchanged by margins & profits brings some doubts about choosing a company operating Boeings. I'm also glad the Embraer's deal did not work out. They are a great brazilian company that was saved from all this mess Boeing has done.

[@osasunaitor]

Indeed, Embraer saved themselves from a huge mess by avoiding the deal. They have a great reputation and it would be sad to see them being dragged to the bottom by Boeing.

[@jojothetasmaniansassmonkey8866]

as a nervous flyer, it gives me goosebumps knowing that i flew on the max in 2017

[@jari2018]

but you shuold be proud it was made to fly with max profit - if you did survive you can brag about it

[@AMCustomCoasters]

Ive flown on the max hundreds of times... they are perfectly safe nowadays.

[@jojothetasmaniansassmonkey8866]

@@AMCustomCoasters yeah...keyword being nowadays

[@AMCustomCoasters]

@@jojothetasmaniansassmonkey8866 Flew on em probably 50 times before those crashes though. Planes were definitely flawed and boeing at fault however US pilots reported the issue numerous times and were able to handle the issue so probably werent in much danger. Still horrific what happened though, I am not blaming the pilots of those flights.

[@jojothetasmaniansassmonkey8866]

@@AMCustomCoasters compared to riding in a car the danger back then was low, but compared to flying on say an a320 or 737ng, we were in substantially more danger than what the public has come to expect from aviation

[@CaptainDangeax]

A highschool friend of mine is a pilot. When he flew little planes like Beach King or Cessna Citation, he was more on Boeing's side than on Airbus'side. Since he performed in his job, he came to fly on Dassault and on Airbus too. Don't talk to him about Boeing, he now would prefer to ride a bicycle across europe than boarding a Boeing

[@daveroche6522]

Boeing were top of the game with the introduction of the 777 - alas the company subsequently incorporated the MMB fixation (Maximise Managements Bonuses).

[@goodfodder]

sadly all large corporations are like that these days

[@Wolfgulfur]

The M.D. view makes total sense. That companies commercial airplane history had always been extremely sketchy. When looking at Boeing now, it is so clear how the culture of MD manifested itself in Boeing

[@FloorItDuh]

Because the management of MD IS Boeing. Literally, not even joking. When Boeing bought MD as part of the merger they agreed to keep MD's management and integrate it into the new company. A few original Boeing management people remained but most were replaced by MD management. Eventually those old Boeing management people left and the remaining MD management swept in to turn Boeing into what it is today.

[@charliepiston3169]

It's like the WEF infiltrating governments around the world, or Goldman Sachs alumni running central banks around the world.

[@DARTHNECRION]

They made some great military aircraft back in the day, though. The F-15 was one of them, and it’s unmatched in the world. 104 kills and 0 losses in combat.

[@Wolfgulfur]

@@DARTHNECRION Several US F-15 have been shot down in combat. That record is only for air to air combat and excludes any casualties from ground fire, I.e. SAMs. If the Strike Eagle didn’t exist than that record would be true. Military is usually a different story than civil because of all the different companies involved in military production. They didn’t make the weapons, avionics, targeting systems, defense systems, radar, engines, or a lot of other components for the f-15. They only made the airframe and probably a few other bits and pieces. In US hands, a number of planes share that same record, including the F-16, again for air to air losses. Goes more to show that the Pilots and weapons systems we use are superior to what others are using, not so much the aircraft itself, and the other countries that have received F-15 exports do not see much air to air combat besides Israel who usually gets the best equipment that is not available for other countries

[@MyulMang]

MD was always sketchy they simply win other people heart by their designs but the design flaws have killed so many innocent lifes and they did nothing till the FAA told them to change and many of their planes were litreally bad EG: DC-10 But DC-10 was fixed after and it was the best plane after MD-11 had only like 6 crash i think thats ok and the deadlist crash was the Swiss AIR 111 and that was the airline fault not the plane

[@lucidmoses]

You can easily check. Look up the crashes per flight hour for each of the companies.

[@Morpheus-pt3wq]

I hate statistics. Results always depend on interpretation. Count in, how long is Boeing (along with McDonnell Douglas) around. Already over a century. Meanwhile, Airbus was created in 1970 by former european competitors - it took them 11 years to become popular. Until then, Boeing dominated the skies. Which also means, Boeing dominated crash statistics. Airbus also has its own share of crashes and issues, mostly related to their implementation of autopilot and automation. But, statistics often miss a reason, WHY a crash happened. It´s not always about technical state or neglected maintenance.

[@paullangford8179]

@@Morpheus-pt3wq Per flight hour... That disposes of everything to do with absolite numbers.

[@KadeCallisto]

I am one of those that do look at what aircraft model will be used, without being an aviation enthusiast. I always pick airlines that fly Airbus. I do stay away from several airlines as well though, for different reasons.

[@camillet4005]

I remember that somewhere in the early nineties (maybe end eighties), my graduation professor warned us for Boeing. He already mentioned that Boeing was cutting corners (he said it much more politely, though) and he didn't trust the Boeing policies entirely....

[@Nekorbmi]

I sent this to all my friends still working at boeing and they all said I was preaching to the choir lol. This was a really good video. So sad that Boeings upper management has a mindset about such an important aspect of the aviation business. Theyre a lot of decent mechanics working at boeing but only a few know what they are doing

[@4realzthobro332]

Actually there are alot of us mechanics and machinists at Boeing that know what we're doing. We're not the ones designing the planes. We just build them by design and according to the processes approved by the FAA.

[@austingwatson]

i worked at old boeing. i worked at new boeing. such a sad story. shareholder value is king. it is the one and only metric we managed to in the end. i called the change the time when the powerpoint boys won the battle with the excel boys.

[@robertbarnier45]

The FAA has a lot to answer for in this saga

[@DARTHNECRION]

Regulatory capture. 😔

[@j.g.951]

Another great video! Crazy stuff. Almost unbelievable on the surface until you dig deeper and realize the events and negligence that led to this situation. $$$

[@bacsi8337]

I’m sorry to say that my experience at MD convinced me that MD was in serious trouble. Supervisors are always happy to do whatever the Lower Managers tell them to do. But the Lower Managers and, to some extent, the Middle Managers at MD were not interested in doing their job. Back then, Management by Objective was being implemented by upper Management. But because training was not sufficiently budgeted, Lower Management bent over backwards to hide the corresponding Labor Efficiency Variances; and Middle Managers never bothered to probe into the process. Its sad to think that might have carried on to Boeing.

[@powellmountainmike8853]

I think it is extremely sad to see how a once great company, who cared to make safe, serviceable, aircraft, has been ruined by MBA corporate bean counters.