General Aviation Thread

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Interesting story in The Atlantic about how Boeing has ended up in the position that it is in now. Basically the company it took over, McDonnell Douglas, actually took it over - meaning the management of a successful company, Boeing, was swallowed by the management of the failed company, McDonnell Douglas.

The Long-Forgotten Flight That Sent Boeing Off Course
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Basically the company it took over, McDonnell Douglas, actually took it over - meaning the management of a successful company, Boeing, was swallowed by the management of the failed company, McDonnell Douglas.
Sadly, this is not happen to Boeing alone. Aerospace Industry, like other industries now drove by the need of short term gain from stock market. The need for fund managers that control flow of Investment is now more and more Paramount in the eyes of Company's Boards throughout multiple industries.

As a Banker I watch how the cycle will come back in the shorter intervals as time goes by. When I was still an Undergrate student, my professors talk about 20 years cycle between crisis, by beginning 21st, we see the cycle shorten to 10 years, now we in financial Industry begin to see the cycle can be shorten to 5 years. All related on the need of Capital Investors on moving fund fast but also gain fast.

My Industry (financial) have big influence for that, and I must admit the 'greed' of Investors drove the Financial Industry which then drove other industries for the need on 'short term' gain. The fluctuations of capital market, thus money market which run other industries more on more derived on shorter horizon gains.

Investors need to see how much annual return they can get, and this drove fund managers to tell all CEO's in multiple industry on: "stop talking much on long term..long term is my secondary or even fourth need..I want to now how you'll end this year".

Thus all bean counters in every companies told the strategy better be the one that can provide higher return in the shortest time.
What the article wrote is a very common strategy that any top tier/Ivy leagues business school teach for decades.. despite all talking of sustainability and business ethics, corporate responsibility, social accountability..in the end what matters most is what your investors need.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The Atlantic article is truly a depressing story on how many formally stellar companies are being ruined by financial a-holes. Another sad fact, I have made comments on other threads on how disgusting I find the actions of many Western corporations ( controlled by similar a-holes) giving huge technological and manufacturing concessions to China for market access when they know full well China will utilize this in the future to develop competitive products. Clearly not a problem for these parasites who only care about a quick return. They will be gone when these companies ultimately fail.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
FAA says it again: Boeing's 737 Max is not ready for certification

Not going to be good end year result that Boeing hope..as they still say by end of 2020 they will get clearance from FAA for Max. Now FAA seems saying: 'no' we are not satisfied yet..we will give clearance when we already satisfied.

This can turn much longer outside US, since many Aviation regulators seems to wait for Both FAA, and European Aviation Authority. With no clearance horizon yet from FAA, it will be more time from Euro Authority.

Honestly, I don't understand why Boeing shareholders not swipe clean present Boeing Management.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Boeing have undertaken a stress test on the B777-X and the fuselage collapsed behind the wing root at 99% (1.54 x aluminium wing load limit). The aircraft has carbon fibre wings, and they were testing to 1.55 x aluminium wing load limit, because they didn't want the carbon fibre wings to break. Apparently they explode, rather than clean break like metal structures. The wings held firm, but the fuselage behind the wing roots didn't. Because it's only 1% from the test requirement, the FAA apparently will allow Boeing to calculate and model the strengthen requirements for the fuselage, rather than destroy another aircraft in a full test, because the fuselage strength wasn't being tested and is not considered critical.

Boeing 777X’s fuselage split dramatically during September stress test
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Safety engineer at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), speaking anonymously without permission from the agency, said that because the blowout happened so close to the target load, it barely counts as a failure.
This I quoted from that article. Hope this will not going to be another problem for FAA and Boeing. The article says that the structural failure happen close to 1.5 times normal load factor (at 1.49), still considering the previous 777 can handle stress more than 1.5 before failed, then hope this will not come to another attack on Boeing getting preferable treatment from FAA.

For me it's close enough to the threshold, however considering what happen to MAX, both FAA and Boeing under intense scrutiny that they better make sure no doubt can come back to them on the test integrity.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The reasoning for not requiring another test aircraft is sound and pilots, regulators, and airlines understand this. However, with the MAX story fresh in passenger minds, their enthusiasm for riding in a 777X may have diminished somewhat.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The FAA are taking over the issuing of MAX airworthiness certificates from Boeing. FAA Will Take Over Issuing MAX Airworthiness Certificates. Contrary to what Boeing have been claiming: “The agency will not approve the aircraft for return to service until it has completed numerous rounds of rigorous testing,” the agency said in a statement. “The FAA will take all the time it needs to ensure the aircraft is safe.”

Another bad day for Boeing, the NTSB has recommended that Boeing redesign the engine cowls on all B737NG aircraft powered by the CFM56-7B engine. NTSB Recommends Boeing 737NG Fan Cowl Redesign. If the FAA mandate the recommendation, operators will have to retrofit the cowls on all the affected aircraft. This is after a "low cycle"crack found in a fan on a South West Airlines CFM56-7B engine.

The way things are going their share price must be heading to join the submarine service.
 

Milne Bay

Active Member
The FAA are taking over the issuing of MAX airworthiness certificates from Boeing. FAA Will Take Over Issuing MAX Airworthiness Certificates. Contrary to what Boeing have been claiming: “The agency will not approve the aircraft for return to service until it has completed numerous rounds of rigorous testing,” the agency said in a statement. “The FAA will take all the time it needs to ensure the aircraft is safe.”

Another bad day for Boeing, the NTSB has recommended that Boeing redesign the engine cowls on all B737NG aircraft powered by the CFM56-7B engine. NTSB Recommends Boeing 737NG Fan Cowl Redesign. If the FAA mandate the recommendation, operators will have to retrofit the cowls on all the affected aircraft. This is after a "low cycle"crack found in a fan on a South West Airlines CFM56-7B engine.

The way things are going their share price must be heading to join the submarine service.
The issues with the 737 MAX and the disasters with the frankentanker could be enough to sink Boeing.
I can't imagine anyone advising on the purchase of Boeing stock at the present time.
Perhaps Lockheed and Northrop Grumman may end up the last two survivors in the US military aviation industry
MB
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Don't think the the Pentagon would be very happy in a LM and NG world. Maybe splitting off Boeing commercial is a solution and getting two separate management teams might be the way forward. Might even improve share value. If the MAX issue drags on for another 6 months, Boeing's cash position is going to be dire.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
It appears that airliner cancellations have had an increase from 303 in 2018 to 441, with the Boeing 737-MAX having 229 cancellations. The Boeing 787 has 35 cancellations as well. Airliner Cancellations Slightly Concerning, Analysts Say

We are all aware of the MAX problems, however I came across this last night: Veteran Boeing manager was transferred to 787 production; based on he saw there, he won't fly in a Dreamliner and begs his family not to. The engineer alleges that airworthiness and safety standards at the 787 manufacturing plant have decreased markedly since new facility management have taken over. He cites and razor sharp titanium shards were left in wiring compartments due to faulty titanium nut tightening procedures.

Along with the FOD found in the KC-46, Boeing's apparent lack of concern about it, and the continual delays with the KC-46, this is not a good look for Boeing and when you also take into consideration Northrop Grumman's refusal to work with Boeing on the new ICBM project, Boeing must be facing a large crisis.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Avoiding 787s in Canada means flying on 737 MAXs when Air Canada is allowed to return them to service for most domestic routes. Westjet is a 737 airline. Minimal alternatives to Boeing in Canada now.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
United orders 50 long-range Airbus jets to replace older Boeing planes

Another bad news for Boeing..United as one of large user of 757 and one of the Airlines that demand the need for Middle of the Market Airliners, has decided to go to A321XLR.
Boeing indecisive move on middle of the market begin to costs them. With MAX, problem of 777X delay, the issue of build quality.. honestly I still can't figure out how Boeing shareholders still not throwing out Boeing present management to the street.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The A321XLR will own the middle of the market as Boeing is in no position to respond quickly if at all. Currently over 200 MAX orders have been cancelled. Airlines are likely aware of the FOD problem in the KC-46 and the 787 (as per Ngatimozart's earlier post here). It seems the QA staff at Boeing have been made redundant. The consequences of this will be reflected in lawsuits and more lost sales so shareholders will demand changes very soon IMO.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
The A321XLR will own the middle of the market as Boeing is in no position to respond quickly if at all.
This article from simple flying eventough still speculation based 'uncomfirmed' report in the Industry, if it's proven right could be the answer that Boeing Should do.

https://simpleflying-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/simpleflying.com/boeing-fsa/amp/?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE=#aoh=15755917315633&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://simpleflying.com/boeing-fsa/

This FSA is the one that Boeing should done. I have put some predicament before on much of Asia Pacific market (as the largest aero industry growth) need single aisles in the class of 737 and 320 family. For that potential double aisle NMA (797) probably only be needed in North America and Trans Atlantic routes, which is perhaps not enough for justification on building new clean sheet design Airliners.

This FSA if being developed will be in equivalent of MAX 8,9,10 and compete A320/321 NEO class. It will foregone the need of MAX 7 or compete with A318 NEO which will be fullfill by E Series. No need for NMA as after this FSA they will go directly to 787.

Clean sheets design will take at least 7 years to come to operation at fastest. However if Boeing starts now, it will potentially rebound trust on Boeing line up in the future, since it's a decision that put an End to MAX that more and more shown lost competitive edge to A320 NEO family or even A220.
 
Last edited:

Ananda

The Bunker Group
https://amp-businessinsider-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.businessinsider.com/boeing-737-max-mcas-fixes-2019-12?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1#referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.businessinsider.com/boeing-737-max-mcas-fixes-2019-12

More info on what Boeing has done to rectified MCAS problem. The way I see it come down to one thing; "simplified Pilots on manual override and switch off MCAS if they see it become problematic"

Very basic in my opinion on any control on every computer based system. The operators has to have simple process to take control from computers. In the end human factor has to be able to determine when they want to relied on computer or take in charge by them selves.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Should make for quieter summer days at the Coal Harbour marina.:D
It's not right. In fact, it's an abomination in the eyes of men and the gods. A flying machine that doesn't sing the sweet harmonies of the round engine, inline engine or gas turbine engine.
 
Top