this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2024
304 points (98.4% liked)

News

23367 readers
2855 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

"It's as if I'm watching a troubled child" is how Captain Dennis Tajer describes flying a Boeing 737 Max.

"The culture at Boeing has been toxic to trust for over a decade now," (Adam Dickson, a former senior manager at Boeing) says.

Five years ago Boeing faced one of the biggest scandals in its history, after two brand new 737 Max planes were lost in almost identical accidents that cost 346 lives.

The cause was flawed flight control software, details of which it was accused of deliberately concealing from regulators.

Meanwhile, further evidence of how production problems could endanger safety emerged this week.

The FAA warned that improperly installed wiring bundles on 737 Max planes could become damaged, leading to controls on the wings deploying unexpectedly, and making the aircraft start to roll.

If not addressed, it said, this "could result in loss of control of the airplane". Hundreds of planes already in service will have to be checked as a result.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 98 points 8 months ago (3 children)

A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.

[–] darvocet@infosec.pub 33 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Which car company did you say you worked for again?

[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 36 points 8 months ago

A major one.

[–] lorty@lemmy.ml 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Why do you expect it to be different for any of them?

[–] 24_at_the_withers@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago

It's a sequence of quotes from Fight Club

[–] credo@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They have to factor in the cost of the reputational damage too. But yeah, it’s all a dollar game.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DesertMagma@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago

we don’t talk about Bruno

[–] billiam0202@lemmy.world 72 points 8 months ago

Boeing: How much trouble is the company in?

Not as much as they should be in, probably.

[–] WhoIsTheDrizzle@lemmy.world 56 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They also likely murdered John Barnett, but I'm sure they are too big to fail or be tried for murder.

[–] credo@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Kinda hard to try a corporation for murder and stick it in jail, even though we all know it’s a person.

[–] Zron@lemmy.world 21 points 8 months ago

Whole company? Very difficult.

Whole board of directors? That’s easy

[–] FriendBesto@lemmy.ml 46 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Objectively? In a lot of trouble. Real world, though? They are one of the largest companies that feeds/works for the American Military Weapons Complex plus they are also among the largest lobbying/donors of the Federal Government. Just behind pharma.

[–] MeanEYE@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'd say no trouble at all. They should be sweating drops but they are not. Like you said, huge company with a "handle shit" budget. Am fully expecting nothing will happen and if they get sued they will settle outside of court, like they did with 737MAX issue. And problem solved.

[–] whereisk@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

The real world has a habit of catching up even to the biggest budgets.

My suspicion of what is currently going inside the company is that an army of consultants are going through every inch trying to produce reports of how to improve the "processes" to avoid such future incidents. However the percentage of change that will be implemented is only as big as management's willingness to upset current stakeholders including itself. So unlikely to be very big.

I would expect a continuous decline with ever-decreasing new orders from airlines - fire sales to attract new customers, reduced investment because of declining revenues etc.

The government titty will keep them operating for a while though - or at least until their incompetence embarrasses the government/army sufficiently.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] exanime@lemmy.today 29 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Likely not a all... The only chance these behemoth companies get punished is by the public turning on them but they have already insulated themselves from that (most people would not know how to avoid their planes when booking the next vacation on Expedia)

In a properly working environment, even a Capitalist one, the government should intervene, jail the board, and either nationalize it or auction it off for parts... The most important part is really the jailing of the board

[–] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Boeing and the american government are too deep in bed. Nothing significant will happen. Maybe a few executives get fired just to satisfy the demands for action. In fact the american government will likely bail the company out when things take a dive (their stock as well as their aircraft).

[–] exanime@lemmy.today 9 points 8 months ago

Sadly, I believe you are 100% right

[–] turkishdelight@lemmy.ml 28 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No trouble at all. It's impossible to get into trouble when there is no competition.

[–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (3 children)

except from Airbus... so yeah. there's competition.

[–] No_Eponym@lemmy.ca 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] turkishdelight@lemmy.ml 5 points 8 months ago

hardly. airbus can't double it's production overnight.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mlg@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago (6 children)

I miss North American Aviation.

Even if Boeing doesn't face any real consequences, I hope airlines take this time to just go full Airbus even if it's out of fear from future litigation and not inherent customer safety. Airbus should also jump on this opportunity and offer some good deals for actual functioning and safety tested aircraft.

[–] MrStankov@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

The main issue is that Airbus has a huge backlog for their aircraft which continues to grow. They're slowly adding more capacity, but not nearly fast enough to satisfy their current demand, let alone what additional customers would bring.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] sxan@midwest.social 20 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I have a simple solution: force Boeing to go back to it's management roots. Require all C-levels to have engineering degrees.

But the shareholders would rather see the company be shut down than give up some profit.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 8 months ago

Also, put an end to their union busting garbage. Then quality that they were known for was established when all of their labor was done by well-compensated union labor, instead of outsourcing to get around union contracts.

[–] PanArab@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago (5 children)

I really hope this allows a third and perhaps even a fourth company to enter the market

[–] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Be careful what you wish for. Some of the most likely contenders are Lockheed, Raytheon, and a few other military contractors that haven't broken into the civilian market yet.

[–] Rinox@feddit.it 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not really. The most likely contenders I could see now are Embraer and Comac (Chinese aircraft manufacturer). A few years ago Bombardier could have been a very likely contender, but not today.

I could see Lockheed and Raytheon entering the civilian market only if the demand on the military side starts drying up, which in this climate I find doubtful.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] sagrotan@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (4 children)

The founder, William Boeing, was a a white segregationist, active against mixed racial marriages, believed in the pure white blood and shit. His parents were Austrian/ German, Böing. America, the land of opportunity.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 78 points 8 months ago (8 children)

Sure, and Henry Ford was an out-and-out antisemite who published a newspaper where he serialized the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and Hitler kept a photo of him on his desk.

That doesn't mean we should expect Ford cars to fall apart on the road.

It's way too late to be pissed off about William Boeing or Henry Ford. Or Hugo Boss or Ferdinand Porsche, who directly worked with the Nazis.

Or IBM or the Coca-Cola company, which did too.

Etc.

[–] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 26 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (9 children)

Henry Ford is also the reason kids learn square dancing in school. I actually had to learn how to dance like a hillbilly in gym class because some long-dead antisemite was once convinced that jazz music and the Charleston (read: black people and anything cultural that they contribute) would corrupt the youth, who could only be saved by the purity of barnyard dancing.

I don't know how this contributes to the conversation at hand, but I think about it a lot.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Ugh. I hated square dancing so much.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] solidgrue@lemmy.world 39 points 8 months ago

Be that as it may, Boeing himself was a stickler for quality and set a vision of quality and excellence that made Boeing aircraft some of the safest in the fleet, up until their merger with McDonnell Douglas. It was said he'd rather go out of business than ship a shoddy product.

The corporation isn't the person. That's sort of the point.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 23 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That has little to nothing to do with the current state of affairs at Boeing. The current situation was brought about by the merger between Boeing and McDonnell Douglas, with the MDD executives joining Boeing's board of directors and continuing the same shitty behaviour. Eg, with the MD-10 and its cargo door, the issue was raised at design stage, denied until after 2 massive fatal accidents occurred, and then they tried to get around it with "gentleman's agreements" with the FAA - just like with the MCAS issue on the 737 MAX.

The problems can be pinned down to a very small number of executives, who belong in prison.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And part of the problem is that McDonnell Douglas left the commercial aviation market because they couldn't compete with Boeing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Are you asserting 737 Max issues and the latency to mechanically resolve them is caused by a family legacy of white supremacy haunting the board rooms of present day Boeing HQ?

Because I otherwise don't see your point in the context of this article and news.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago (3 children)

I had the pleasure of interviewing several engineers from Boeing with PhDs and almost the worst interviews ever. Very awkward interviews and possibly the worst in person interview ever.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›