“It’s as if I’m watching a troubled child” is how Captain Dennis Tajer describes flying a Boeing 737 Max.

“The culture at Boeing has been toxic to trust for over a decade now,” (Adam Dickson, a former senior manager at Boeing) says.

Five years ago Boeing faced one of the biggest scandals in its history, after two brand new 737 Max planes were lost in almost identical accidents that cost 346 lives.

The cause was flawed flight control software, details of which it was accused of deliberately concealing from regulators.

Meanwhile, further evidence of how production problems could endanger safety emerged this week.

The FAA warned that improperly installed wiring bundles on 737 Max planes could become damaged, leading to controls on the wings deploying unexpectedly, and making the aircraft start to roll.

If not addressed, it said, this “could result in loss of control of the airplane”. Hundreds of planes already in service will have to be checked as a result.

  • Zachariah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    99
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don’t do one.

  • Billiam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Boeing: How much trouble is the company in?

    Not as much as they should be in, probably.

    • credo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      7 months ago

      Kinda hard to try a corporation for murder and stick it in jail, even though we all know it’s a person.

  • FriendBesto@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    6 months ago

    Objectively? In a lot of trouble. Real world, though? They are one of the largest companies that feeds/works for the American Military Weapons Complex plus they are also among the largest lobbying/donors of the Federal Government. Just behind pharma.

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’d say no trouble at all. They should be sweating drops but they are not. Like you said, huge company with a “handle shit” budget. Am fully expecting nothing will happen and if they get sued they will settle outside of court, like they did with 737MAX issue. And problem solved.

      • whereisk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        The real world has a habit of catching up even to the biggest budgets.

        My suspicion of what is currently going inside the company is that an army of consultants are going through every inch trying to produce reports of how to improve the “processes” to avoid such future incidents. However the percentage of change that will be implemented is only as big as management’s willingness to upset current stakeholders including itself. So unlikely to be very big.

        I would expect a continuous decline with ever-decreasing new orders from airlines - fire sales to attract new customers, reduced investment because of declining revenues etc.

        The government titty will keep them operating for a while though - or at least until their incompetence embarrasses the government/army sufficiently.

    • NotAtWork@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      works for the American Military Weapons Complex

      That is where this will fuck Boeing, you can buy regulators for having the side of your plane fall off in flight, or an Auto piolet that loves to use the lithobreak, but don’t fuck with the US military contracting system. The DOD contracts for things with very specific and some times stupid standards, but they get exactly what you paid for or else.

  • exanime@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Likely not a all… The only chance these behemoth companies get punished is by the public turning on them but they have already insulated themselves from that (most people would not know how to avoid their planes when booking the next vacation on Expedia)

    In a properly working environment, even a Capitalist one, the government should intervene, jail the board, and either nationalize it or auction it off for parts… The most important part is really the jailing of the board

    • Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      7 months ago

      Boeing and the american government are too deep in bed. Nothing significant will happen. Maybe a few executives get fired just to satisfy the demands for action. In fact the american government will likely bail the company out when things take a dive (their stock as well as their aircraft).

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    6 months ago

    I miss North American Aviation.

    Even if Boeing doesn’t face any real consequences, I hope airlines take this time to just go full Airbus even if it’s out of fear from future litigation and not inherent customer safety. Airbus should also jump on this opportunity and offer some good deals for actual functioning and safety tested aircraft.

    • MrStankov@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      The main issue is that Airbus has a huge backlog for their aircraft which continues to grow. They’re slowly adding more capacity, but not nearly fast enough to satisfy their current demand, let alone what additional customers would bring.

      • rhythmnova@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        6 months ago

        By what measure is it a much smaller company? By planes sold it appears negligible: between 2007 and 2016 Airbus delivered 5,644 and Boeing delivered 5,718, for a difference of 74. In terms of market share they’re roughly equivalent in twin-aisle jets and Airbus has a significant lead in single-aisle jets (for obvious reasons).

        • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          6 months ago

          You’re right. i was pulling from something i read a couple weeks ago but looking at it now they do seem comperable. airbus even delivered more airframes last year than boeing did by a significant margin. although i imagine that boeings safety concerns do contribute to that lack of deliveries

          I deleted my comment

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Their market cap is comparable, but that’s after Boeing’s stock took a hit. About a 50% cut over the last 5 years. Airbus’ stock is slightly higher than it was 5 years ago.

          Remember that Boeing is all over the military market on top of their civilian programs. Airbus does do a few conversions of their civilian aircraft for military use (transport and aerial refueling, mostly), but it’s not a huge part of their revenue. Boeing does that stuff (the hump in the 747, in particular, has led to some specialized uses), plus more specialized designs. They’re still cranking out new versions of the F-15, for example. In fact, military stuff is the largest part of Boeing’s revenue.

          • rhythmnova@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Sure but the context of the comment I replied to was that many airlines don’t have a choice but to buy aircraft from Boeing because Airbus is much smaller and therefore unable to service the required orders. In actual fact they deliver nearly an equivalent number of (civilian) aircraft over 10 years from 2007-2016 and Airbus has been delivering more aircraft per year recently. If everyone suddenly only ordered with Airbus then sure it would create a supply bottleneck but that’s not because Airbus is a smaller company.

    • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 months ago

      Also, put an end to their union busting garbage. Then quality that they were known for was established when all of their labor was done by well-compensated union labor, instead of outsourcing to get around union contracts.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Be careful what you wish for. Some of the most likely contenders are Lockheed, Raytheon, and a few other military contractors that haven’t broken into the civilian market yet.

      • Rinox@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        Not really. The most likely contenders I could see now are Embraer and Comac (Chinese aircraft manufacturer). A few years ago Bombardier could have been a very likely contender, but not today.

        I could see Lockheed and Raytheon entering the civilian market only if the demand on the military side starts drying up, which in this climate I find doubtful.

        • 00x0xx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Comac

          I remember reading the Chinese had stagnated investment into Comac because it was more cost effective for their airlines to buy Boeing planes instead. But after the two 737-MAX crash, the Chinese was restarting investment and R&D for a Boeing replacement, however because they were far behind due to lack of investments, they wouldn’t have anything ready until 2026 the earliest. So I doubt they will be able to compete anytime soon.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    I had the pleasure of interviewing several engineers from Boeing with PhDs and almost the worst interviews ever. Very awkward interviews and possibly the worst in person interview ever.

    • iknowitwheniseeit@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Did you publish these? It would be interesting to read!

      Or maybe give some more insight here onto what you mean by “worst interview”. That could be so many things… 😉

      • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        How can a PhD engineer fail an interview among barely junior engineers? And fail it so badly that it officially became our worse interview ever?

        This person also had the audacity to call back and several times to demand to be interviewed again. During the interview I would ask simple engineering questions like “can you elaborate on F=ma” and the guy, instead of giving a straight answer “it’s the relationship between the force applied to a mass and the acceleration achieved” he would go in these crazy ass rants about stuff I can’t repeat and can’t remember. You know the stuff very well…like when your wife, husband or life partner starts talking to you about your mom and you love your mom so you shut down the listening port on your brain. Just ehem and uhumed the rest of the interview. It was bad. It was so bad that the junior engineers told me it was bad. Usually they hold judgment out of respect.

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Reminds me of my worst interview, though the candidate wasn’t phd. It was a recent bachelor’s grad doing a remote interview and he obviously had someone helping him (we could hear them whispering). Funny part was neither of them had a clue so the guy cheated but still gave among the worst responses.

          I can only assume he cheated his way to graduation, too.

  • Sagrotan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    7 months ago

    The founder, William Boeing, was a a white segregationist, active against mixed racial marriages, believed in the pure white blood and shit. His parents were Austrian/ German, Böing. America, the land of opportunity.

    • SolidGrue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Be that as it may, Boeing himself was a stickler for quality and set a vision of quality and excellence that made Boeing aircraft some of the safest in the fleet, up until their merger with McDonnell Douglas. It was said he’d rather go out of business than ship a shoddy product.

      The corporation isn’t the person. That’s sort of the point.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      That has little to nothing to do with the current state of affairs at Boeing. The current situation was brought about by the merger between Boeing and McDonnell Douglas, with the MDD executives joining Boeing’s board of directors and continuing the same shitty behaviour. Eg, with the MD-10 and its cargo door, the issue was raised at design stage, denied until after 2 massive fatal accidents occurred, and then they tried to get around it with “gentleman’s agreements” with the FAA - just like with the MCAS issue on the 737 MAX.

      The problems can be pinned down to a very small number of executives, who belong in prison.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Are you asserting 737 Max issues and the latency to mechanically resolve them is caused by a family legacy of white supremacy haunting the board rooms of present day Boeing HQ?

      Because I otherwise don’t see your point in the context of this article and news.

      • El Barto@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        I don’t see the point either, though it’s an interesting (and sad) piece of trivia, which I didn’t know.