Live data from Hacker News

Boeing CEO says planemaker could be forced to cancel 737 Max 10

reuters.com

31–40 of 83 posts

Re: Boeing CEO says planemaker could be forced to cancel 737 Max 10

#31

In a way it is a good thing. They should be forced to take many steps back and look at where they bungled up. For starters, not trying to fix aerodynamic issues with software patches, and getting honest engineering back at the helm should be on the top of the list.

It's hard when your customers are requiring you to do mutually exclusive things. First, reduce fuel consumption by significant amounts, which requires changes to aerodynamics or engines (this is just physics). Second, don't make any major changes, because major changes would be too expensive for customers to implement and make the whole project not feasible.

There's no "honest engineering" that will solve the problem. This is exactly what regulators are for, because there are huge incentives for the executives on both the airline side and the Boeing side to make a deal here... everyone saves money and takes home huge bonuses.

Re: Boeing CEO says planemaker could be forced to cancel 737 Max 10

#32

In a way it is a good thing. They should be forced to take many steps back and look at where they bungled up. For starters, not trying to fix aerodynamic issues with software patches, and getting honest engineering back at the helm should be on the top of the list.

It's hard when your customers are requiring you to do mutually exclusive things. First, reduce fuel consumption by significant amounts, which requires changes to aerodynamics or engines (this is just physics). Second, don't make any major changes, because major changes would be too expensive for customers to implement and make the whole project not feasible. There's no "honest engineering" that will solve the problem…

True. And for unimaginable long term costs.

Re: Boeing CEO says planemaker could be forced to cancel 737 Max 10

#33
post #5
post #2

Well, yes, when you are unable or unwilling to build the product to modern safety standards, you should be forced to cancel it.

is the consensus that Boeing's engineering prowess is unrecoverable now, post-McDD merger?

What's the track record for huge companies successfully fixing major problems with their internal quality / engineering cultures?

My impression is that usually or always the company just ends slowly dying instead. I'm thinking of IBM, and maybe Intel, GE, Boeing.

Re: Boeing CEO says planemaker could be forced to cancel 737 Max 10

#35
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know if that is the consensus but I struggle to find a major program there that isn’t completely rotten.

Yeah, I challenge anyone to show me a unconditionally successful Boeing program post 2000 AD. Please. Please show one to me. I am begging you here. Aboulafia had like fifty graphs on exactly how Boeing is doomed, at least as a unified company; they might survive in pieces after a GE-style split. Big B is spending all their money on precisely the wrong products, and leaving the right products to die on the vine. This…

So I'm probably ignorant, but the 787? I've seen it as a great aircraft that has moved the bar significantly... there have been some issues, but I'm surprised that you wouldn't even consider it a successful program?

Re: Boeing CEO says planemaker could be forced to cancel 737 Max 10

#36
post #10

>> "the debts that we’ve had to accumulate" Like the $5B (and counting) for bungling the KC-46 design? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_KC-46_Pegasus#Flight_...

What about Starliner? It is years behind schedule and a huge embarrassment to the US' play in space.

> huge embarrassment

Is a huge overstatement. SpaceX has made an equivalent capsule that has been working for more than a year. The US Gov should stop being wasteful and just cancel the other program (or redirect the money to something useful: e.g. buy more F-15s or something).

It's an embarrassment to Boeing maybe, but not the US' play in space.

Re: Boeing CEO says planemaker could be forced to cancel 737 Max 10

#37
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MQ-25 F/A-18E/F 777

The MQ-25 is a repurposing of a failed armed drone program. The F/A-18 is from the 70s, and the Super Hornet's from the mid 1990s. The 777 first flew in the mid 1990s. There's not much recent to brag about.

X-37/B

Re: Boeing CEO says planemaker could be forced to cancel 737 Max 10

#39
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MQ-25 F/A-18E/F 777

The MQ-25 is a repurposing of a failed armed drone program. The F/A-18 is from the 70s, and the Super Hornet's from the mid 1990s. The 777 first flew in the mid 1990s. There's not much recent to brag about.

IMHO, converting the carrier based armed drone program (UCLASS) into a carrier based refueling drone program (CBARS) is one of the most sane and prudent things military acquisition has done in recent times.

Why push a cutting edge technology for which there is no immediate need into operational status?

Why not instead harvest the low-hanging fruit, while simultaneously using it to refine carrier operations, and then restart UCAV development later when technologies have had more time to mature?

Re: Boeing CEO says planemaker could be forced to cancel 737 Max 10

#40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The MQ-25 is a repurposing of a failed armed drone program. The F/A-18 is from the 70s, and the Super Hornet's from the mid 1990s. The 777 first flew in the mid 1990s. There's not much recent to brag about.

X-37/B

Started in 1999, and it's a little hard to gauge efficacy of a program we know very little about.
Post reply on HN