491–500 of 637 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait, Boeing were actually trying to do something _different_ than this?
They might just scrap the whole project.
Former Boeing employee here[1]: I remember when the company decided to do all 401k matching in Boeing stock in 2009. It seemed like a sketchy, borderline unethical way to keep the stock price afloat. All to say I’m happy to have transitioned all my 401k years ago! [1] I worked in the defense industry. Nothing to do with planes: my company was acquired by Boeing and operated relatively independently.
I remember when the company decided to do all 401k matching in Boeing stock in 2009. I thought that was the norm? I've only worked at one public company and they did matching in company stock as well - I'd periodically sell it and reinvest so only about 20% of my holdings was in company stock. I wish I'd kept more in their stock since they've done quite well.
Somehow the investor class has managed to convince the rest of the world that losing a CEO job is a “punishment” and that the public should be satisfied with this sacrifice. It’s like the ancient kings murdering a slave child in a ceremony to appease the “gods” for the outcomes of bad leadership or bad weather.
The only credible way from here is to: - remove the hack that is MCAS for the purpose of being able to piggyback on the old 737 type certificate; - start the process of type-certifying 737-MAX as the individual design that it is without MCAS instead of trying to make it behave like the old 737 just to keep things on the cheap side; - and offer free type certification for existing 737 pilots to obtain their certificat…
It might just be a feel thing, but the "constant backpressure when approaching stall" feel is required by the FAA certification for all aircraft.
An alternative solution:
- Split the MAX off from the 737 type certificate.
- Make MCAS super easy to disable while leaving electric trim enabled
- Train Pilots to recognise MCAS failures and turn it off
- Training all 737-MAX pilots to fly with MCAS disabled in simulators.
- Require both MCAS failure and flying with the degraded feel in pilots yearly simulator training.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The NYT didn’t have to be right, they only had to sell newspapers and clicks. The burden of evidence for publishing a hit piece is much lower than that for making an actual business decision. I’m no fan of Boeing but the truth is, betting your entire business requires a much higher burden of proof than journalism does.
"The NYT didn’t have to be right, they only had to sell newspapers and clicks." This is totally wrong. The New York Times depends on its reputation for accuracy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or you can do what many other airlines do, which is to make business class so much better that even if econony is nice, business class is so much above that that it's worth the money. I tend to try to travel on Qatar, and their new business class cabins are amazing: https://www.qatarairways.com/en/onboard/qsuite.html It's also cheaper than the (worse) business class on many other airlines.
I've flown a lot of long-haul business and first class over the years (Qatar, Thai, Austrian, Scandinavian, Delta, United, Qantas) and Qatar is the only airline I've ever blacklisted for business class. While the QSuites and the cabin crew are nice, you rarely get QSuites in reality. But you always get a stopover in Doha, and those stopovers generally include business lounges so busy you can rarely get a shower with…
The business class lounge at Doha is the best I've ever been to. You do need to go to the premium lounge though. They have a separate lounge for people with gold cards, and that one was a huge disappointment.
Somehow the investor class has managed to convince the rest of the world that losing a CEO job is a “punishment” and that the public should be satisfied with this sacrifice. It’s like the ancient kings murdering a slave child in a ceremony to appease the “gods” for the outcomes of bad leadership or bad weather.
Muilenberg was raked over the coals in the media--and rightly so--before being publicly fired. His name is pretty much mud at this point. So yes, I think he was punished amply.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The inconsistency of business class does make it unappealing though. Sometimes, it's almost first class (Singapore Airlines). Many times, it's barely a step up from economy though, and just feels like a rip off.
Yes, but babies and children do not ride in business class.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In fairness, issue two is probably better addressed at the national level -- something like what Social Security's original intention seemed to be: a safety blanket for those who lived much longer than expected. In 1935 when SS was enacted, life expectancy was 61.7 years. benefits didn't kick in until the average person was dead by 3.3 years. If this chart is accurate: http://vis.stanford.edu/jheer/d3/pyramid/shift.h…
life expectancy in 1935 was severely dragged down by infant mortality. What was the life expectancy at age 18? At retirement age? If you made it past childhood, you were pretty likely to die far later than 61 years.