More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

Post by KerrAvon » Tue, Feb 06, 2024, 1:43 AM UTC

rpmisms wrote: post #267

BoxFour wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever your opinion of Elon is, it’s extremely generous to say he comes from an engineering background and just flat-out wrong to say he comes from the type of traditional engineering background relevant to companies like Boeing (the PE type of engineering). If you approve of Elon as a leader, he is basically the embodiment of “you do not need to be an engineer to run a highly technical company”

I think describing Elon as a small-e engineer (not designing powertrains, but at least understanding them) is accurate, and saying that an an engineering-first mindset is important for companies like Boeing and SpaceX would ring true. Engineering background is different than engineering mindset.

Post by rpmisms » Tue, Feb 06, 2024, 1:49 AM UTC

KerrAvon wrote: post #412

rpmisms wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want Elon to run Boeing, that's never been part of my argument. I want leadership at Boeing that elevates engineers, understands that engineering is absolutely critical, and punishes bean-counters for pushing against a good engineering culture.

Also important for leadership is being a thin-skinned an emerald mine scion who believes in astonishingly racist tropes.

Post by refurb » Tue, Feb 06, 2024, 3:46 AM UTC

tomp wrote: post #296

mayneack wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth, in "Flying Blind", the book written about the first round of 737 max issues, the author has a pretty negative outlook on Calhoun as being mostly aligned with Muilenburg. > Robison, however, finds little reason for optimism. While Boeing has now accepted responsibility for one of the crashes as part of a settlement, no one at the company besides Forkner has been charged with a crime. Muilenburg wa…

Can ELI5 why do investors (owners of the company) accept CEO's pay packages that involve golden parachutes? It doesn't make sense to me (I mean, it might in case of offensive takeovers, but who's gonna take over Boeing?!)

Post by shiroiuma » Tue, Feb 06, 2024, 4:14 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #202

BenoitP wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read that he was the token engineer in the see of accountants, MBAs and consultants. Cultural change goes much deeper than changing the CEO. Boeing might not be salvageable on the cheap side. Decapitating the company at levels 1-4 may not even be enough. It may require acknowledging that changing the flight envelope and software-patching it was a mistake. This is a major can of worms on itself. This means a plan…

> I've read that he was the token engineer in the see of accountants, MBAs and consultants The myth that engineers make better leaders may have originated with Andy Grove. In truth, there is no evidence for the claim. Jack Welch was as much an engineer as an asshole.

Post by nikau » Tue, Feb 06, 2024, 4:16 AM UTC

kccqzy wrote: post #364

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Unfortunately Boeing always has a sweet defense contract waiting to compensate any "rough year", so they keep fucking around. And because once airlines have their fleets locked into a specific airplane brand, swapping it for the competition is almost impossible without crazy expense, so they coasted on this vendor lock in for decades knowing their existing customers have no choice but to keep buying their planes. An…

That doesn't sound likely. They can wait for existing planes to age out and then buy a competitor's planes. For many reasons including fuel efficiency, when an airline retires a plane they are not going to replace it with the exact same plane. So some levels of pilot retraining is expected.