Bloomberg Report: Boeing Mocked Lion Air Calls for More 737 Max Training Before Crash
Thread Starter
Bloomberg Report: Boeing Mocked Lion Air Calls for More 737 Max Training Before Crash
The headline is bad enough, however, read what Boeing is reported to have said internally, it is beyond bad taste and manners. If correct, then shame on Boeing, doubly so for the offensive followup that was made. Not only didn't Boeing mention what they had done on the systems, they demeaned an operator that was attempting to get comfortable with the differences, in order to save their program from some questions that could cost them.
I'm not sure that is defensible in any manner, and I would think that airline acquisition departments would question how they can trust such a supplier.
Boeing, you need to clean up your act. And not the lip gloss that has passed for response to the prior ethical antics.
Or don't, and see how the market takes the latest revelations.
I am physically nauseas after reading the comments reportedly made by the manufacturer. I think I'll just go and throw up.
Boeing, you have lost me, and I have been a fan for 40 years flying your equipment.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ng-thwarted-it
I'm not sure that is defensible in any manner, and I would think that airline acquisition departments would question how they can trust such a supplier.
Boeing, you need to clean up your act. And not the lip gloss that has passed for response to the prior ethical antics.
Or don't, and see how the market takes the latest revelations.
I am physically nauseas after reading the comments reportedly made by the manufacturer. I think I'll just go and throw up.
Boeing, you have lost me, and I have been a fan for 40 years flying your equipment.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ng-thwarted-it
...
“Now friggin Lion Air might need a sim to fly the MAX, and maybe because of their own stupidity. I’m scrambling trying to figure out how to unscrew this now! idiots,” one Boeing employee wrote in June 2017 text messages obtained by the company and released by the House committee.
In response, a Boeing colleague replied: “WHAT THE F%$&!!!! But their sister airline is already flying it!” That was an apparent reference to Malindo Air, the Malaysian-based carrier that was the first to fly the Max commercially.
Doing simulator training would have undercut a critical selling point of the jet: that airlines would be able to allow crews trained on an older 737 version to fly the Max after just a brief computer course.
...
“Now friggin Lion Air might need a sim to fly the MAX, and maybe because of their own stupidity. I’m scrambling trying to figure out how to unscrew this now! idiots,” one Boeing employee wrote in June 2017 text messages obtained by the company and released by the House committee.
In response, a Boeing colleague replied: “WHAT THE F%$&!!!! But their sister airline is already flying it!” That was an apparent reference to Malindo Air, the Malaysian-based carrier that was the first to fly the Max commercially.
Doing simulator training would have undercut a critical selling point of the jet: that airlines would be able to allow crews trained on an older 737 version to fly the Max after just a brief computer course.
...
...
The communications include a 2017 email from Boeing’s chief technical pilot on the 737 in which he crowed to colleagues: “Looks like my jedi mind trick worked again!” The email was sent two days after the earlier messages expressing alarm about Lion Air potentially demanding simulator training.
Attached was a forwarded email exchange in which the person warned an unnamed recipient against offering simulator training for Max pilots, pushing instead for the computer-based course that regulators had already approved for flight crews transitioning to the Max from earlier 737 models.
“I am concerned that if [redacted] chooses to require a Max simulator for its pilots beyond what all other regulators are requiring that it will be creating a difficult and unnecessary training burden for your airline, as well as potentially establish a precedent in your region for other Max customers,” the Boeing pilot wrote in the forwarded message.
...
The communications include a 2017 email from Boeing’s chief technical pilot on the 737 in which he crowed to colleagues: “Looks like my jedi mind trick worked again!” The email was sent two days after the earlier messages expressing alarm about Lion Air potentially demanding simulator training.
Attached was a forwarded email exchange in which the person warned an unnamed recipient against offering simulator training for Max pilots, pushing instead for the computer-based course that regulators had already approved for flight crews transitioning to the Max from earlier 737 models.
“I am concerned that if [redacted] chooses to require a Max simulator for its pilots beyond what all other regulators are requiring that it will be creating a difficult and unnecessary training burden for your airline, as well as potentially establish a precedent in your region for other Max customers,” the Boeing pilot wrote in the forwarded message.
...
Last edited by fdr; 14th Jan 2020 at 16:02.
Muss say the most recent reports are pretty damning, if not really surprising.
The civil lawyers will have a field day.
To me the most egregious is the CEO going out with a 60mn golden parachute. Muilenburg might have not known all that was happening but the buck stops with him.
The civil lawyers will have a field day.
To me the most egregious is the CEO going out with a 60mn golden parachute. Muilenburg might have not known all that was happening but the buck stops with him.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...is-no-contest/
After Boeing’s horrible year, annual race against Airbus is no contest
Jan. 14, 2020 at 8:44 am
By Dominic Gates
Seattle Times aerospace reporter
Boeing’s final tally of commercial jet orders and deliveries in 2019, released Tuesday, starkly displays just how bad the year was: Deliveries were down to a level last seen when all production was halted by a two-month strike and net orders were negative — with more cancellations than new orders.
The annual competition between rival jetmakers was no contest, with Airbus the runaway winner.
Airbus released its final sales and production tally Monday, showing it delivered a total of 863 jets and won 768 net new orders in 2019.
In contrast, Boeing delivered only 380 planes, the lowest total since a 57-day strike shut down production in 2008.
That doesn’t reflect total production. Boeing built around 400 of its 737 MAXs, but with the jet grounded they were parked with their engines and inlets wrapped for long-term storage. Boeing cannot deliver them.
In an indication of the paralysis gripping Boeing’s business, sales also plummeted. There were very few sales of the MAX offset by many more cancellations.
Boeing got a big boost at the Paris Air Show when British Airways announced its intention to place an order for 200 MAXs, but not surprisingly, it was never finalized. That’s unlikely to happen until the airplane gets clearance to fly again from U.S. and foreign regulators.
Net orders for the MAX came in at -73.
Boeing also suffered a net loss of orders for its upcoming 777X widebody jet, which ended the year down 23 orders after a big cancellation from Gulf carrier Emirates.
As a result, Boeing’s overall net order figure for the year was -87.
The MAX crisis has left Airbus the undisputed No. 1 airplane manufacturer.
More details and analysis of the data to come.
Dominic Gates: 206-464-2963 or [email protected]; on Twitter: @dominicgates.
After Boeing’s horrible year, annual race against Airbus is no contest
Jan. 14, 2020 at 8:44 am
By Dominic Gates
Seattle Times aerospace reporter
Boeing’s final tally of commercial jet orders and deliveries in 2019, released Tuesday, starkly displays just how bad the year was: Deliveries were down to a level last seen when all production was halted by a two-month strike and net orders were negative — with more cancellations than new orders.
The annual competition between rival jetmakers was no contest, with Airbus the runaway winner.
Airbus released its final sales and production tally Monday, showing it delivered a total of 863 jets and won 768 net new orders in 2019.
In contrast, Boeing delivered only 380 planes, the lowest total since a 57-day strike shut down production in 2008.
That doesn’t reflect total production. Boeing built around 400 of its 737 MAXs, but with the jet grounded they were parked with their engines and inlets wrapped for long-term storage. Boeing cannot deliver them.
In an indication of the paralysis gripping Boeing’s business, sales also plummeted. There were very few sales of the MAX offset by many more cancellations.
Boeing got a big boost at the Paris Air Show when British Airways announced its intention to place an order for 200 MAXs, but not surprisingly, it was never finalized. That’s unlikely to happen until the airplane gets clearance to fly again from U.S. and foreign regulators.
Net orders for the MAX came in at -73.
Boeing also suffered a net loss of orders for its upcoming 777X widebody jet, which ended the year down 23 orders after a big cancellation from Gulf carrier Emirates.
As a result, Boeing’s overall net order figure for the year was -87.
The MAX crisis has left Airbus the undisputed No. 1 airplane manufacturer.
More details and analysis of the data to come.
Dominic Gates: 206-464-2963 or [email protected]; on Twitter: @dominicgates.
Thread Starter
The arrogance of the Boeing staff is remarkable. I hope that Lion Air & Ethiopian families get a fair hearing and are able to be compensated for the egregious behaviour of Boeing.
Sorry, I'm just going to go throw up again.
Prior to this, I have always contended that the industry is better for having Boeing as a manufacturer, but I am not so sure that they deserve loyalty or faith in their inherent desire to build the proud products that they used to.
Sorry, I'm just going to go throw up again.
Prior to this, I have always contended that the industry is better for having Boeing as a manufacturer, but I am not so sure that they deserve loyalty or faith in their inherent desire to build the proud products that they used to.
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: 900m
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing got a big boost at the Paris Air Show when British Airways announced its intention to place an order for 200 MAXs, but not surprisingly, it was never finalized. That’s unlikely to happen until the airplane gets clearance to fly again from U.S. and foreign regulators.
The CEOs on both sides of that deal are coincidentally both out of a job...
The CEOs on both sides of that deal are coincidentally both out of a job...
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing's fall from grace will be a case study for the pitfalls of late stage capitalism. A complete and utter breakdown in leadership, company culture and honesty, in the name of greed and stock price. The Chicago leadership team were running this once proud company more like a desperate hedge fund than an airplane innovator and manufacturer. If Boeing were not backed by the full might of the US government there is a good chance they would be circling the drain as a company.
As a Canadian I can't help but see irony regarding the Cseries and MAX. Bombardier Aerospace invested heavily and developed a seemingly cutting edge, modern, safe plane and got bankrupted for it by the cynical tag team duo of Boeing and the US Government and the outrageous C-Series tariff. In the same time-frame Boeing cut every corner they could, lied, broke rules and laws left and right during the MAX development, certification and sales and delivered a complete dud. The CEO is rewarded with a $60 million golden parachute. Perhaps if Boeing's leadership was more focused on the engineering and manufacturing side, rather than focusing on financial and political moves to enrich themselves and torpedo competition, a few hundred people may still be alive today.
As a Canadian I can't help but see irony regarding the Cseries and MAX. Bombardier Aerospace invested heavily and developed a seemingly cutting edge, modern, safe plane and got bankrupted for it by the cynical tag team duo of Boeing and the US Government and the outrageous C-Series tariff. In the same time-frame Boeing cut every corner they could, lied, broke rules and laws left and right during the MAX development, certification and sales and delivered a complete dud. The CEO is rewarded with a $60 million golden parachute. Perhaps if Boeing's leadership was more focused on the engineering and manufacturing side, rather than focusing on financial and political moves to enrich themselves and torpedo competition, a few hundred people may still be alive today.
To me the most egregious is the CEO going out with a 60mn golden parachute. Muilenburgmight have not known all that was happening but the buck stops with him
However, there is a close correlation between the incompetence of a CEO and the size of the package that he/she negotiates, before taking up the job, for his/her exit within a few years as a total failure.
If Muilenberg did not know what was going on in his organisation he needs to return all the salary and other goodies he has picked up as its CEO. IT'S HIS JOB TO KNOW, FFS! If he didn't know, he was not doing his job. I fail to understand why he is receiving 1 cent, let alone zillions, as he leaves Boeing so damaged that it will only survive, if it does, as a military supplier protected by over-priced Government contracts (aka subsidy), as it always has been. (If he did know, and did nothing about it, then he should be sacked without 1 cent compensation.)
It is arguable that Mr Muilenberg holds a tangible share of personal responsibility for the horrific deaths of all the passengers and crew in those two B737 Max crashes. Does that concern him? I doubt it. He has hit the jackpot, and walks away with money that would have been better spent on the families of the victims of Boeing's crimes, committed under his "leadership".
Last edited by old,not bold; 14th Jan 2020 at 18:00.
Writing that last post has saddened me hugely . From the start of my time in the air transport industry I have always believed that while many aviation administrations, manufacturers and operators did things properly and systematically, with people who believed that safety was all-important, it was the USA that led the world in almost every aspect of aviation, with skill, innovation, and above all a total respect for safety and professionalism, led by an incorruptible FAA whose staff were highly trained and motivated experts. You could see everywhere the inheritance of people like Earnest Gann as they built on the foundations laid before and during WWII.
Now this might have been looking through rose-coloured specs in some ways, but by and large it was true.
What Boeing has done is to blow this image into the dust of history. In other words it has taken the reputation of whole of the USA's air transport industry down with it. The fact that in recent times the FAA have helped them mightily to do that doesn't make it feel any better.
It is a huge shame.
Now this might have been looking through rose-coloured specs in some ways, but by and large it was true.
What Boeing has done is to blow this image into the dust of history. In other words it has taken the reputation of whole of the USA's air transport industry down with it. The fact that in recent times the FAA have helped them mightily to do that doesn't make it feel any better.
It is a huge shame.
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I you want to make money in the airline biz don't buy Boeing
The arrogance of the Boeing staff is remarkable. I hope that Lion Air & Ethiopian families get a fair hearing and are able to be compensated for the egregious behaviour of Boeing.
Sorry, I'm just going to go throw up again.
Prior to this, I have always contended that the industry is better for having Boeing as a manufacturer, but I am not so sure that they deserve loyalty or faith in their inherent desire to build the proud products that they used to.
Sorry, I'm just going to go throw up again.
Prior to this, I have always contended that the industry is better for having Boeing as a manufacturer, but I am not so sure that they deserve loyalty or faith in their inherent desire to build the proud products that they used to.
The extremeness of some outside views brought about by this sorry business are far, far less edifying even than some of the balls-ups made by various players within it.
It is grotesquely, outrageously unfair to publish such totalitarian accusations that you cannot possibly substantiate and which attack and belittle every single Boeing employee, just as much as it is the ultimate in spite and vindictiveness against them to whip up a Salem-witch-hunt-like frenzy against their company to see it destroyed due to the poor decisions of a few, probably very few indeed, of their colleagues.
For shame.
What an appalling slander against the vast majority of Boeing employees who are decent, honest, professional and conscientious!
The extremeness of some outside views brought about by this sorry business are far, far less edifying even than some of the balls-ups made by various players within it.
It is grotesquely, outrageously unfair to publish such totalitarian accusations that you cannot possibly substantiate and which attack and belittle every single Boeing employee, just as much as it is the ultimate in spite and vindictiveness against them to whip up a Salem-witch-hunt-like frenzy against their company to see it destroyed due to the poor decisions of a few, probably very few indeed, of their colleagues.
For shame.
The extremeness of some outside views brought about by this sorry business are far, far less edifying even than some of the balls-ups made by various players within it.
It is grotesquely, outrageously unfair to publish such totalitarian accusations that you cannot possibly substantiate and which attack and belittle every single Boeing employee, just as much as it is the ultimate in spite and vindictiveness against them to whip up a Salem-witch-hunt-like frenzy against their company to see it destroyed due to the poor decisions of a few, probably very few indeed, of their colleagues.
For shame.
I don't think FDR was referring to " the vast majority of Boeing employees who are decent, honest, professional and conscientious" but to senior management some of whom are walking away $60M.
What an appalling slander against the vast majority of Boeing employees who are decent, honest, professional and conscientious!
The extremeness of some outside views brought about by this sorry business are far, far less edifying even than some of the balls-ups made by various players within it.
It is grotesquely, outrageously unfair to publish such totalitarian accusations that you cannot possibly substantiate and which attack and belittle every single Boeing employee, just as much as it is the ultimate in spite and vindictiveness against them to whip up a Salem-witch-hunt-like frenzy against their company to see it destroyed due to the poor decisions of a few, probably very few indeed, of their colleagues.
For shame.
The extremeness of some outside views brought about by this sorry business are far, far less edifying even than some of the balls-ups made by various players within it.
It is grotesquely, outrageously unfair to publish such totalitarian accusations that you cannot possibly substantiate and which attack and belittle every single Boeing employee, just as much as it is the ultimate in spite and vindictiveness against them to whip up a Salem-witch-hunt-like frenzy against their company to see it destroyed due to the poor decisions of a few, probably very few indeed, of their colleagues.
For shame.
His comments on Boeing staff are related directly to the earlier posts (and subject of this thread) -- The staff who sent all those emails. If you don't think the words, tone, and arrogantly misplaced righteousness of those emails are disgusting at best, and truly sickening at worst, you haven't been paying attention to the MAX saga.
grizz
Fact is a lot of SLF will never in their lifetimes willingly board a modern Boeing again, just as many of us have a long list of airlines to avoid.
Fact.
Fact.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
I think the people responsible for this whole sad and sorry saga should search their consciences and ask them selves "what would William Boeing say?"
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think it matters what WIlliam Boeing would say. What this really is about is people who have no comprehension of the responsibilities placed on their shoulders and further, the the indiscriminate dismissal of such responsibilties because they siimply don't care, don't want to be bothered, or more likely - calls into question their judgement as being flawed, something which might be more intolerable for some generations than others. In over 40 years of professional work including aviation, I've not seen such appalling behaivor by some, at least in industries where lives were on the line.
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: leftcoast
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look up Japan Airlines 123 747 crash- The first thing Tee did was to fly to japan, check with local culture and personally contacted survivors, families, etc and handed out a fair amount of money to all- later financed a major memorial
Contrast with the current missed management who me ??
[QUOTE] Japan Airlines Flight 123 was a scheduled domestic passenger flight f On August 12, 1985, a 747 operating this route suffered a sudden decompression twelve minutes into the flight and crashed ---- 100 kilometres (62 miles; 54 nautical miles) from Tokyo thirty-two minutes later. The crash site was on Osutaka Ridge, near ....
Japan . . . officially concluded that the rapid decompression was caused by a faulty repair by Boeing technicians . . .
Psychophysiological entity
meleagertoo's post stood out for me because I was becoming very uneasy about the universal and almost undivided criticism. I'd even thought of writing a post called The Inertia of Indignation. But perhaps this will do. I think the problem with his post is that it's such a violent swing onto a reciprocal heading. Folk are not ready for it; not willing to give too much thought to the reality of the real human nature found in big corporations - indeed, in all walks of life. While I accept there has to be huge changes in the structure of Boeing, nothing I'm reading surprises me that much. On a small scale, I've seen it before: bewildering, cruel, callus behaviour meted out by people that should never have attained their management positions. I have been left winded by cowards and downright liars. People I'd looked up to but that clearly had no souls.
I've been pretty critical of Boeing from the onset and sometimes it's weighed on my conscience, given the millions the brand has carried. What are we really seeing when we lift the lid of this particular company? Well, bullying and resultant fear, for a start. Everyone knows that innovative design and skilled workmanship can't be carried out under threat, and it's an industry that can't blithely put failures right, but now the revelations astonish the unaware reader.
When I got old I started to look at my passengers walking out. Ordinary folk, but then a mother, carrying a child. Those little shoes, almost the same shoes I'd put out for children and then grandchildren. They looked the same, the same as the ones so often focused in on at crash sites. It's perhaps time to walk away when you start to think like that. Perhaps a case-hardening is needed to do the job, flying or crafting. But callous disregard for the reality of their responsibility? Is that what they're doing, shutting their minds to the real-world? Surely they can't rush code, or hammer parts in, if they really care about people?
It's a special industry because it can kill so quickly, but the horrific truth is there are several huge corporations that seem to shut their minds to their particular kind of carnage. The toll is vast compared to aviation deaths and remains unchecked. The $-power is unassailable. The callous disregard on a whole new scale.
But back to the absurd communications. I wonder how many times I've heard management and senior pilots blasting forth after a few drinks. A lot of the often loud protests were banal, embarrassing and often threatening. Yet, I'd perhaps flown with them for the entire day, and they'd been nothing short of professional. Strange what that evening drink can do, especially when you're venting and think no one will ever see your words.
Can we expect people in aviation to set a whole new standard? Well yes, we can expect until the cows come home but it won't make a jot of difference. Human nature will out, and there is probably nothing we can do about it. To build a perfect corporation that can produce something at the cutting edge of man's ability and then sell it into a world-wide market against powerful competition is simply not possible. Even with US government funding and the science of NASA, things still went disastrously wrong.
This time it was the bizarre coincidence of two disparate faults that exposed the fallibility of the single sensor, but that's 'all' it was. Hard to say the word, but that's all it was. But it opened the can. What is so hard to visualise is just how different the lives of thousands would be if two small components hadn't failed. Is it possible that an airliner can be produced that could self correct issues and always fail safe? I think we could possibly get close to that in twenty years, but not while the free world model of competition is allowed to eat at the moral fabric of corporations. The two just don't go together. Aviation a special case? It won't happen. You don't have to search long for far greater disregard for human life, and that's getting worse by the patent.
I've been pretty critical of Boeing from the onset and sometimes it's weighed on my conscience, given the millions the brand has carried. What are we really seeing when we lift the lid of this particular company? Well, bullying and resultant fear, for a start. Everyone knows that innovative design and skilled workmanship can't be carried out under threat, and it's an industry that can't blithely put failures right, but now the revelations astonish the unaware reader.
When I got old I started to look at my passengers walking out. Ordinary folk, but then a mother, carrying a child. Those little shoes, almost the same shoes I'd put out for children and then grandchildren. They looked the same, the same as the ones so often focused in on at crash sites. It's perhaps time to walk away when you start to think like that. Perhaps a case-hardening is needed to do the job, flying or crafting. But callous disregard for the reality of their responsibility? Is that what they're doing, shutting their minds to the real-world? Surely they can't rush code, or hammer parts in, if they really care about people?
It's a special industry because it can kill so quickly, but the horrific truth is there are several huge corporations that seem to shut their minds to their particular kind of carnage. The toll is vast compared to aviation deaths and remains unchecked. The $-power is unassailable. The callous disregard on a whole new scale.
But back to the absurd communications. I wonder how many times I've heard management and senior pilots blasting forth after a few drinks. A lot of the often loud protests were banal, embarrassing and often threatening. Yet, I'd perhaps flown with them for the entire day, and they'd been nothing short of professional. Strange what that evening drink can do, especially when you're venting and think no one will ever see your words.
Can we expect people in aviation to set a whole new standard? Well yes, we can expect until the cows come home but it won't make a jot of difference. Human nature will out, and there is probably nothing we can do about it. To build a perfect corporation that can produce something at the cutting edge of man's ability and then sell it into a world-wide market against powerful competition is simply not possible. Even with US government funding and the science of NASA, things still went disastrously wrong.
This time it was the bizarre coincidence of two disparate faults that exposed the fallibility of the single sensor, but that's 'all' it was. Hard to say the word, but that's all it was. But it opened the can. What is so hard to visualise is just how different the lives of thousands would be if two small components hadn't failed. Is it possible that an airliner can be produced that could self correct issues and always fail safe? I think we could possibly get close to that in twenty years, but not while the free world model of competition is allowed to eat at the moral fabric of corporations. The two just don't go together. Aviation a special case? It won't happen. You don't have to search long for far greater disregard for human life, and that's getting worse by the patent.
In the same time-frame Boeing cut every corner they could, lied, broke rules and laws left and right during the MAX development, certification and sales and delivered a complete dud.
Fact is a lot of SLF will never in their lifetimes willingly board a modern Boeing again,
In my opinion MOST passengers have no idea what type of aircraft they are expecting to board when they buy a ticket. Even when shown on the booking.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
meleagertoo's post stood out for me because I was becoming very uneasy about the universal and almost undivided criticism. I'd even thought of writing a post called The Inertia of Indignation. But perhaps this will do. I think the problem with his post is that it's such a violent swing onto a reciprocal heading. Folk are not ready for it; not willing to give too much thought to the reality of the real human nature found in big corporations - indeed, in all walks of life. While I accept there has to be huge changes in the structure of Boeing, nothing I'm reading surprises me that much. On a small scale, I've seen it before: bewildering, cruel, callus behaviour meted out by people that should never have attained their management positions. I have been left winded by cowards and downright liars. People I'd looked up to but that clearly had no souls.
I've been pretty critical of Boeing from the onset and sometimes it's weighed on my conscience, given the millions the brand has carried. What are we really seeing when we lift the lid of this particular company? Well, bullying and resultant fear, for a start. Everyone knows that innovative design and skilled workmanship can't be carried out under threat, and it's an industry that can't blithely put failures right, but now the revelations astonish the unaware reader.
When I got old I started to look at my passengers walking out. Ordinary folk, but then a mother, carrying a child. Those little shoes, almost the same shoes I'd put out for children and then grandchildren. They looked the same, the same as the ones so often focused in on at crash sites. It's perhaps time to walk away when you start to think like that. Perhaps a case-hardening is needed to do the job, flying or crafting. But callous disregard for the reality of their responsibility? Is that what they're doing, shutting their minds to the real-world? Surely they can't rush code, or hammer parts in, if they really care about people?
It's a special industry because it can kill so quickly, but the horrific truth is there are several huge corporations that seem to shut their minds to their particular kind of carnage. The toll is vast compared to aviation deaths and remains unchecked. The $-power is unassailable. The callous disregard on a whole new scale.
But back to the absurd communications. I wonder how many times I've heard management and senior pilots blasting forth after a few drinks. A lot of the often loud protests were banal, embarrassing and often threatening. Yet, I'd perhaps flown with them for the entire day, and they'd been nothing short of professional. Strange what that evening drink can do, especially when you're venting and think no one will ever see your words.
Can we expect people in aviation to set a whole new standard? Well yes, we can expect until the cows come home but it won't make a jot of difference. Human nature will out, and there is probably nothing we can do about it. To build a perfect corporation that can produce something at the cutting edge of man's ability and then sell it into a world-wide market against powerful competition is simply not possible. Even with US government funding and the science of NASA, things still went disastrously wrong.
This time it was the bizarre coincidence of two disparate faults that exposed the fallibility of the single sensor, but that's 'all' it was. Hard to say the word, but that's all it was. But it opened the can. What is so hard to visualise is just how different the lives of thousands would be if two small components hadn't failed. Is it possible that an airliner can be produced that could self correct issues and always fail safe? I think we could possibly get close to that in twenty years, but not while the free world model of competition is allowed to eat at the moral fabric of corporations. The two just don't go together. Aviation a special case? It won't happen. You don't have to search long for far greater disregard for human life, and that's getting worse by the patent.
I've been pretty critical of Boeing from the onset and sometimes it's weighed on my conscience, given the millions the brand has carried. What are we really seeing when we lift the lid of this particular company? Well, bullying and resultant fear, for a start. Everyone knows that innovative design and skilled workmanship can't be carried out under threat, and it's an industry that can't blithely put failures right, but now the revelations astonish the unaware reader.
When I got old I started to look at my passengers walking out. Ordinary folk, but then a mother, carrying a child. Those little shoes, almost the same shoes I'd put out for children and then grandchildren. They looked the same, the same as the ones so often focused in on at crash sites. It's perhaps time to walk away when you start to think like that. Perhaps a case-hardening is needed to do the job, flying or crafting. But callous disregard for the reality of their responsibility? Is that what they're doing, shutting their minds to the real-world? Surely they can't rush code, or hammer parts in, if they really care about people?
It's a special industry because it can kill so quickly, but the horrific truth is there are several huge corporations that seem to shut their minds to their particular kind of carnage. The toll is vast compared to aviation deaths and remains unchecked. The $-power is unassailable. The callous disregard on a whole new scale.
But back to the absurd communications. I wonder how many times I've heard management and senior pilots blasting forth after a few drinks. A lot of the often loud protests were banal, embarrassing and often threatening. Yet, I'd perhaps flown with them for the entire day, and they'd been nothing short of professional. Strange what that evening drink can do, especially when you're venting and think no one will ever see your words.
Can we expect people in aviation to set a whole new standard? Well yes, we can expect until the cows come home but it won't make a jot of difference. Human nature will out, and there is probably nothing we can do about it. To build a perfect corporation that can produce something at the cutting edge of man's ability and then sell it into a world-wide market against powerful competition is simply not possible. Even with US government funding and the science of NASA, things still went disastrously wrong.
This time it was the bizarre coincidence of two disparate faults that exposed the fallibility of the single sensor, but that's 'all' it was. Hard to say the word, but that's all it was. But it opened the can. What is so hard to visualise is just how different the lives of thousands would be if two small components hadn't failed. Is it possible that an airliner can be produced that could self correct issues and always fail safe? I think we could possibly get close to that in twenty years, but not while the free world model of competition is allowed to eat at the moral fabric of corporations. The two just don't go together. Aviation a special case? It won't happen. You don't have to search long for far greater disregard for human life, and that's getting worse by the patent.
You don't think that is overstating things just a little? Which laws (plural) did they break?
Here is a FACT, that is just an assertion, an opinon of yours.
In my opinion MOST passengers have no idea what type of aircraft they are expecting to board when they buy a ticket. Even when shown on the booking.
Here is a FACT, that is just an assertion, an opinon of yours.
In my opinion MOST passengers have no idea what type of aircraft they are expecting to board when they buy a ticket. Even when shown on the booking.
They might not, but the DO know B vs A which is bad enough. Chances of B remaining a prime example of corporate ethics failure like Monsanto or Dow chemical are high.
I am retired now having spent much of my civilian aviation career flying Boeing products mostly on the sublime 757. My licence shows that I was rated on the Boeing 737 100 through 900 series despite only having flown the 200 and that over thirty years ago. If I has spent my time with an operator flying just the 737' presumably I would have been able to convert to each 'new" version with the minimum of fuss which seems to have led to a scenario where the manufacturer recommends that differences training may be carried out by means of reading material on a tablet with no recourse to the simulator, CBT or classroom. Certainly I felt that towards the end of my time with my final employer, they felt absolutely compelled in fall in line with manufacturers methods of operating as opposed to decades of operational experience and this all down to the fear of corporate liability should the Operator choose a different procedure from the manufacturer.
Boeing were and indeed still are capable of producing first class aeroplanes. Their employees, customers and most important of all, passengers, deserve better than the level of management apparent at the factory.
Boeing were and indeed still are capable of producing first class aeroplanes. Their employees, customers and most important of all, passengers, deserve better than the level of management apparent at the factory.