I heard they make overbloated and unreliable hardware compared to their competitors, is it true?
I heard they make overbloated and unreliable hardware compared to their competitors, is it true?
I heard they make overbloated and unreliable hardware compared to their competitors, is it true?
No that's just Airbus propaganda.
All commercial aircraft have pretty much the same crash record per passenger-mile, except for one Airbus model which is like double anything else. I forget which one it was.
The 777 was the absolute safest. IIRC the first and only unintentional fatalities (not counting the fucking Russians shooting down MH17, or the psycho pilot crashing MH370) were on that Air Asia flight that hit the barrier at San Francisco because the Korean pilots forgot to keep flying it until it was fully on the ground.
Disclaimer: I don't know about the 737 MAX, the stats I saw were long before its time.
Hope the 737 MAX + COVID was a wakeup call for them, that scandal was government contractor bloat and corruption at it's worst
it wasn't.
it was a symptom of deep seated issues that have been going on since Boeings old merger with McDonnell Douglas.
Boeing was supposed to be acquiring THEM, but somehow a bunch of McDD's corpo elites ended up getting high level management positions in Boeing, so it was more like the failing company acquired the successful one.
It was downhill from there, but what kept things running smooth was the MASSIVE network of people who had worked on EVERYTHING for decades at that point who were still around.
The problems came when the new blood started coming in.
Lets call it a training problem and a middle management problem.
There is this massive system of existing agreements, procedures, old tech, expectations, etc that Boeing has with all of these people and systems, foreign nations, etc.
The new people coming in don't get to properly learn them and don't get to talk to the people that know it, or don't listen.
Sometimes its management, sometimes its just new people being new.
Imagine trying to go into a bunch of contracts and try to fulfill them without even getting to read what was written on them.
And those contracts each have their own set of different rules and regulations, because they are with different nations wanting their own tweaks, with documentation and things written down that require context of what previous systems and agreements and contracts were made and fulfilled.
Its a fucking mess, even if things are still chugging along.
I have family who were engineers for 40 years for Boeing in commercial and military contracts for some of the systems on their planes, and that is the understanding I have after years of listening to one of them vent over issues while asking questions every now and then.
>it was a symptom of deep seated issues that have been going on since Boeings old merger with McDonnell Douglas.
>Boeing was supposed to be acquiring THEM, but somehow a bunch of McDD's corpo elites ended up getting high level management positions in Boeing, so it was more like the failing company acquired the successful one.
Source of bad ideas is Douglas in specific. That is where bad ideas originated. Whole thing that drove McDonnell Douglas merger was size of companies and how much money they could borrow individually. As bigger company they could get more loans to fund R&D. As everything was based on finances, both companies essentially remained as they were as separate units. Douglas handled commercial airliners and large military transports, McDonnell handled fighter business. The thing that drove merger with Boeing was the fact that Douglas had neglected R&D. They had no money to develop replacement for MD-11, that was becoming obsolete as range limitations for twinjets were being lifted. On narrowbody market they had no replacement for DC-9 derived planes. McDonnell was doing decently in 90's, F-15 and F/A-18 were selling fine, both domestically and for export markets.
It is pretty natural that in case of major corporate merger that some people will move to the board of new company even from smaller company. That is where the bad ideas about skimming on R&D and outsourcing too much shit instead of doing it that shit properly in-house came from. In addition to corporate logo. Douglas dragged down MDC, proper acronym for Mcdonnell Douglas Corporation (capitalization is intentional, not typo), and now Boeing.
>They are literally dying of old age, unexpected health issues, and/or retiring and disappearing.
Or quitting because corporate forces them to sign over shit they really aren't in control of due to outsourcing.
>cont
And another part of it is simply that the people who knew all the quirks of some of this stuff...
the software, the hardware, the agreements, the people, etc?
They are literally dying of old age, unexpected health issues, and/or retiring and disappearing.
None of this is stuff that will BREAK Boeing.
They are not THAT incompetent and/or troubled.
But it acts to massively inconvenience the system and waste a LOT of time and money, while often hurting the overall quality of their product to varying degrees.
No in general Boeing products are safe, just not as safe as Airbus equivalent products.
Mainly the 737 MAX has a terrible incident record because Boeing decided to put profit over safety.
The worst Airbus plane would be the A310 which is out of production since 1998, but it still has a far better incident record compared to the 737 MAX and is actually pretty close to the 747 family of planes.
i have the type rating for both the a350-1000 and the 737-300. airbus feels like a truck, very stable, slow acceleration (around its axis not in the speed sense) and much safer. boeing feels like a old racing car you really do feel the aircraft trough the commands but it has been a while since i flew that and even back then it was very old.
they caused two totally fatal air crashes by pushing some meme tech to appease shareholders not accounting for basic shit like frozen sensor tubes or third worlder pilots
Pilot nationality had nothing to do with it. If MCAS wanted the nose pointed down, it would override all pilot control. Boeing decided to remove any mention of its existence in the manuals and training so that they could cut a training corner as their 1960s plane has all sorts of crutches to try and compete with an A320 that was designed for modern infrastructure. Literal greed. Boeing is a hollow mask worn by the same type of business degrees that hollowed out MD.
> A320 that was designed for modern infrastructure
>A320
>First flight : 22 February 1987
>Modern infrastructure
NTA, but modern in the sense that it was built from the ground up as FBW. Preventing pilot error is probably the number one safety feature being developed.
Yes. The 737 was designed before the jetway was really a universal thing, so they kept it low to the ground in order to make loading and unloading of passengers and baggage easier. This in turn means that they just don't have the space to fit modern, large diameter turbofans under the wings. The new engine designs are much more fuel efficient and if Boeing couldn't fit them, then they'd lose the entire market to Airbus. The solution was to push the engines farther forward. This changes flight dynamics enough that pilots would have to be recertified, something airlines do not want to pay for. So, the install MCAS to make the new 737 behave like the old 737 and thereby keep their type certification. But, they fucked up the implementation badly (a sin that happens) while also specifically hiding the existence of MCAS so that pilots were just completely unable to diagnose the problem and fly the plane (the actual damning sin).
The A320 is just taller, so it doesn't have to play these games in order to slap new engines on like they did with the neo. The 737MAX was a rush job response to A320neo. Picrel illustrates the height difference.
It was built to go into places that doesn't necessarily have stairs moved by vehicles. 737 has airstairs.
it was designed in a time when low-bypass turbofans were the norm. Ever since the 737-300 design from the late 70s it has been a compromise because they just couldn't fit a normal high-bypass engine under the wing. Boeing has been holding off investment into developing a new narrow-body design for decades so they had to come up with compromises like the flat bottom nacelles and moving the engines further and further infront of the wing.
Reason they haven't given it taller landing gear is because they would have to completely redesign center wing section to accommodate taller landing gear. That would mean spending money on R&D. It would be more expensive than simply pushing the engines forward and adding MCAS designed by incompetent pajeets compensate for aerodynamic changes that come up with pushing engines forward.While there is argument for designing completely new replacement for 737, there is also arguments simply upgrading 737 properly. There are engine developments coming up that may revolutionize aircraft design or may fizzle up in relatively quickly in future. 737 replacement might be just as obsolete as current 737's or potential non-half ass upgraded 737's in 10 to 20 years ahead. Due to that clean sheet designs in immediate future might be obsolete as soon as those come out. There is also a down side in not developing aircraft now, there is simple reason for that. If your R&D is practically doing nothing major for next 15 years, you don't have engineering expertise to run smooth development program after those 15 years. Pretty much everyone with substantial new development and management expertise has retired by then.
>with an A320 that was designed for modern infrastructure.
It isnt infrastructure. They wanted to upgrade the 737 with new higher bypass engines to reduce fuel consumption. This would have given the plane new flight characteristics, which by FAA regulations would require retraining for the pilots, which is costly. So Boeing decided to fix this by making a hack that emulates the old 737s and the FAA accepted it. This hack then flies two planes into the ground.
>t. has never used the trim disconnect switch
sad!
Specifically did not affect MCAS. There was a disconnect switch, but a switch on a system doesn't help if you weren't told about the existence of the system or how it could fail. There was a 10 second override, where the pilot could counteract the dive and it would stop, but then it would just reengage 10 seconds later. So as a pilot, your plane would go into a dive, you'd fight it and get it up, and 10 seconds later it would do it again, and again, and again. It'll just keep doing it until it flies you into the dirt or you manage to figure out a system that was erased from the manuals had failed. You were supposed to follow the procedure for a runaway elevator, but the plane periodically deciding to try and kill you isn't what a runaway elevator feels like. Especially since you have full, normal control in between the 10 second override cycle.
>override all pilot control.
I get why they did this but this is so frightening.
uh oh, what happened in Ukraine now? Another ship scuttled, more Keystone Kops deaths by mobiks?
the overload of slide threads always makes me go look for the bad news that has upset King Monke
I'll bump anything that isn't slav civil war related. Also, isn't it bed time in whatever slav shithole you live in?
retard
The story is that Boeing went downhill after absorbing McDonnell Douglas. Supposedly McDonnell Douglas had an awful corporate culture with upper management dominated by non-engineers.
This spread Into Boeing after the merger and basically slowly strangled the company, you really cannot get away with this kind of corporate management in aerospace, the industry is too technical and the workforce too specialised.
McDonnel Douglas bought Boeing with Boeing's money. Now engineers are wageslaves with no way to get higher ups to do anything or listen to anything. They even moved the headquarters of Boeing to Chicago, where very few engineers are allowed to work.
To add insult to injury, Chicago people can WFH while the rest of Boeing sites are "asked" to return to office. I work somewhere that is still nice in Boeing, but my friends from other sites have all left.
Yes it's true, except that they don't make any hardware, they just buy other companies, and then sell theirs.
>Believing internet narratives
>Falling for Gell-Mann amnesia
NGMI
in recent years yes, the 737 max crashed twice largely because boeing cut corners, the 787 kept catching fire for a long while.
and the KC46 was significantly behind and over budget and still delivered a worse aircraft than the A330 MRTT
>the 787 kept catching fire for a long while.
It didn't, though. It was just two fires in one battery system, and they fixed it within a few months. The primary blame for the fault was on the battery manufacturer, Yuasa, for manufacturing defects.
most of Boeing is a literal Vietnamese 3rd world village.
I'm not joking.
probably 1/2 the Asian workers can't read English properly.
or speak English.
yeah but the problem is, the amount of people who know what they're doing at Boeing is decreasing drastically.
there's a threshold that once you pass, a company will cease functioning.
I actually knew a guy where his dad ran an aerospace Tube Bending company.
and the same thing happened: eventually unskilled workers outnumbered the skilled workers and the company ceased to function & went out of business after a week.
This hasn't been made public yet, but the Air Force found more FOD and they're big mad getting ready to refuse delivery again. Lost tools drill shavings bag of fasteners zip tied to a wire bundle. No one gives a shit.
yeah that's nothing new.
I'm a Boeing fag and I actually had to explain to someone who worked for Boeing for 10 years what FOD was.
How do you work an aerospace and not know that?
Had to explain to a new mfg manager what STA locations were. He had worked here 3 years.
My team keeps stealing these fucking posters and now we have a collection lol
Damn Even the freshest level 1 engineer is taught what STA is on day one
Are you seeking speaking and listening anon
Jesus fuck.
Then again, I also work aerospace on the production floor and met someone who had trouble with the concept of multiplication.
God I hate working here so much
Anon, do you have coverage for your unexcused overtime absence? You were designated this weekend. CAM time buddy.
I don't get how management doesn't understand: anyone not White, cannot build a proper airplane.
brown people don't even understand how an airplane works.
they cannot do basic math.
they can't even understand smoke detectors or how Hispanices work.
shit skins kill economies
I work for Boeing, and yeah we're circling the drain.
Boeing no longer has skilled workers. it's like 95% retards and maybe 5% people who know what they're doing.
Even the most basic tasks people can't seem to accomplish and the quality being produced is absolute garbage.
there's a shortage of workers they just keep hiring more and more people and none of which know what they're doing. almost all them are either brown or illiterate Asians.
it's getting so bad that Boeing actually paid to redo all their animated training programs to change the skin color of the animations from white to brown. not joking.
All the skilled aerospace workers don't want to work for Boeing. They're working for SpaceX Blue Origin or defense companies.
in my opinion Boeing will probably get bought out in about 10-15 years or so.
just like McDonald Douglas did.
you simply cannot function at such a low level of quality and still make money.
>almost all them are either brown or illiterate Asians.
What country they usually from? India? SEA? China?
PNW seems to have a lot of SEA south of Seattle.
Hi. I need a job and have non engineering stem degree. How much will you pay me?
ship floor starts at around $20 an hr.
after 6yrs you'll get around $45 an hour.
real engineering jobs at Boeing are trash.
Provided the industry doesn’t slump and rounds of layoffs gobble you up.
737 MAX incident really hurt, orders were hemorrhaging. Then shortly Covid happened and it was the apocalypse for aerospace for at least 1.5 years before it began ticking back up.
>737 MAX incident really hurt, orders were hemorrhaging.
Ironically it doesn't hurt Boeing itself as much as it could have been. They spun off their aerostructure division in Wichita into its own company, Spirit AeroSystems. They produce 737 fuselage, that is their main product. They do other stuff like 787 fuselage sections and parts of A350 wings and wings and fuselage for A220 for Airbus. 737 fuselage just happens to be so big part their business that pause in 737 MAX sales due to crashes and COVID has really put them on ropes. If Spirit goes under, Boeing might be in bit of a trouble if they don't have fuselages 737's. They might need bailout from Boeing or government(s) (as Boeing board without doubt would prefer). Boeing isn't only one that depends on them, they also produce fuselage for CH-53K's for Sikorsky. A220 part of their operation is in Belfast, former Bombardiers European operations, one to bail 'em out would be likely be some combination of UK government or Airbus taking over the operation.
>Spirit AeroSystems
>plane company spins off the part of the company that builds planes
These suits are fucking retards.
An American Khmer Rouge rising up and killing everyone who's attended business school would fix 99% of the US's problems overnight
Spirit keeps fucking the MAX orders up, too. Boeing is continually sinking more money into it just to keep it afloat.
I survived the layoffs last round with only 2yrs seniority.
only the new fags get BTFO
that's starting for the basic jobs
you get $1 a year raise guaranteed.
inflation raises every 3 months
then a $15hr raise after 6yrs.
probably over $50an hr next contract.
for blue collar work, it's basically unbeatable.
>that's starting for the basic jobs
>you get $1 a year raise guaranteed.
>inflation raises every 3 months
Thats still total garbage, you should depose management and throw them into a running engine
Have the Feds sued you because you won't hire illegal aliens yet?
>$20 an hr
lmao mcjob tier even academia pays (barely) more than that
>They suck. is it true?
Yes.
.t lockmart
eh, y'all fags can't really talk either.
I see how you neanderthals install F135 engines.
and don't get me started on the F119 engine overhauls that Pratt does.
>I see how you neanderthals install F135 engines
How bad can it be? Forklifts? Better yet, grab a forklift and some straps.
try a giant choker chain.
not even kidding.
those fucs want +-0.0001 roundness tolerances on huge items.
then wrap a chain around it to install.
nah that's a meme.
the 757 and 767 both nose up heavily when throttle is applied.
yet pilots love 757s.
the MCAS was fine overall, but they designed it to activate too many times in a row.
Why is ALIS so bad?
Get me the fuck out of IE
Give me more bar time you little fucker
Gotta do a time study pal 🙂
>I’ll never do it
If it's Boeing you're flying,
Soon you'll be dying.
As a former L3 employee I promise L3 is the king of incompetence and malice towards their employees and you're all fighting for second
The only hope for the US defense industry is nationalizing all defense contractors and executing everyone outside of production research and engineering including shareholders
Fuck I just tossed an app into them for a supply chain job because I miss being virtual. How bad of an idea is that?
If you literally never ever have to go into the office go for it
I have another fun twist for everyone here.
Boeing doesn't actually document their code for all of their systems, new and old.
Anything from after the big switch to C++, as old as that is.
No formal urge or need to properly comment code and write out what it does, no more peer review of that write out between members of a team so you can see during the design phase of said code where certain issues might arise, etc.
>Anything from after the big switch to C++
what did they use before that?
Raw assembly?
Pascal?
FORTRAN?
My bet is on Ada.
unironically a lot of it IS ADA.
the 777 ran on it.
but the one I had heard of before that was PLM, which is from the 70's.
ADA just gave advantages towards finding bugs, as far as I can tell from looking into the language and why they wanted it.
oh, and as of a few years ago the shit boeing is running or has contracts with STILL requires going back into the old PLM systems.
That is the sort of shit the zoomies coming in are gonna get fucked by, whether they are being newfags about it or not.
>PLM
first I've heard of this language
from Wikipedia it looks like a weird mashup of BASIC and assembly
you learn something new every day..
also,
>it could support direct access to any location in memory
lol
I recall an interesting issue from my family member where they had, somehow, two different programs/systems/whatever trying to access and allocate the same piece of memory at the same time.
I wonder if it was PLM code.
PLM as in a language or PLM as in a product database?
A language. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL/M
they used to write out everything in pseudo-code on top of that, and had it all either in digital form or marked up paper copies.
Oops...
talked some more with my family because I got curious.
I was wrong about PLM, misheard it over the phone. He was saying "PDL" which was what they called the psuedocode documentation.
JOVIAL is what was actually used.
Its something even older from the very end of the 50's PURPOSE built for military electronics on aircraft.
So yeah retard on PrepHole is retarded.
What is interesting is that it is around in a lot of stuff.
oh, and also bear in mind that the member of my family that talked about their work only ever worked security contracts boeing had with the government and other militaries around the world.
so everything was according to various military standards, which would almost certainly include the coding language.
what those are I wouldn't be able to tell you