Quotes from tdracer:
"I make no secret that I'm not a pilot (although I would have liked to be, and nearly was - but that's another story). But I do have 36 plus years experience as an engineer in Boeing Commercial Aircraft - working at one time or another 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777. In short, I know a lot about 'how planes work' (at least Boeing planes), and I'd like to think that knowledge brings something valuable to the discussions."
Precisely the kind of input pilots need to challenge their assumptions.
"...I also value the pilots input on what we do. I've known and worked with lots of Boeing test pilots over the years - some well known, others not so much - but getting input from the guys (and gals) that fly these planes on a day to day basis has a special value."
Looking back at my unremarkable career, some of the most rewarding dialogues I had were with engineers. Some of them were grizzled flight-engineers, but right now I'm talking about ground engineers. Admittedly, in my case they were mainly line-maintenance people; except in my earlier days on conversion courses, when some of the guys teaching us a/c systems had been production engineers on the same a/c. They've all since been supplanted by CBT, and what the powers-that-be think we "need to know"; more's the pity.
"Unfortunately I often have to censor myself, because I know things that I'm not allowed to make public. Oftentimes it's considered Boeing proprietary/sensitive, in the case of air safety investigations we can get in big trouble for releasing unauthorized information before the official stuff comes out..."
roulishollandais (above) expresses the concerns of many of us, but I'm assuming that anything operators need to know urgently will be promulgated to them by the usual bulletins (senior moment: can't remember what they are called!). The only snag is that, in rare cases, the incident might not be manufacturer-specific. Operators of comparable a/c from a rival manufacturer might also need to be warned.
Speaking more generally about commercially sensitive information, there is a perception in British aviation circles that, in the past, efforts to share knowledge for mutual benefit have rarely been reciprocated by American manufacturers (without mentioning any names). It's a truism that the Brits have been better at coming up with new ideas than they are at producing something that sells in large numbers. That's why we think it's a bit rich when Boeing supporters fume about Airbus's sales successes.
Perhaps, in some after-life, all you Boeing and Airbus engineers - not to mention the Russians and all the others - will get together, realise how similar your aspirations and expertise are, and create even better aircraft. But that kind of cosy, utopian relationship is not, admittedly, what got Apollo 11 to the Moon and back.
Last edited by Chris Scott; 9th Oct 2013 at 14:35.
Reason: Omission of F/Es corrected.