5 ms·

There are two phenomenal pieces of writing that lend great insight to what's going on at Boeing (that is, if you believe the two authors): How Boeing Lost Its

There are two phenomenal pieces of writing that lend great insight to what's going on at Boeing (that is, if you believe the two authors): How Boeing Lost Its Bearings: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/how-boeing-lost-its-bearings/602188/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/how-boeing... Out-Sourced Profits -- The Cornerstone Of Successful Subcontracting: https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/69746/hart-smith-on-outsourcing.pdf https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/6974... I've worked with Boeing spaceflight engineers, and several acquaintances of mine have worked for Boeing aviation. I have never seen or heard of any Boeing-branded organization putting out a single well-organized, quality piece of engineering or IT infrastructure since I entered the job market in 2017. From what I can tell, it's practically a state department at this point.

N_A_T_E 5y ago
Painful to read “When people say I changed the culture of Boeing, that was the intent, so that it’s run like a business rather than a great engineering firm.”
- xyzzy21 5y ago
  Indeed. The guy not understanding EITHER what an engineering firm actually is nor what a business is.
twiddling 5y ago
I would also plug Dominic Gates from the Seattle Times ( https://twitter.com/dominicgates https://twitter.com/dominicgates ) with his on the ground (ha) reporting on the Lazy B
JumpCrisscross 5y ago
Would breaking up Boeing alleviate the problem? If so, what would be the fracture lines (and conditions)?
- fsckboy 5y ago
  you're asking somebody who entered the job market in 2017 and worked in one division which was not aviation how Boeing should be broken up?
  - geodel 5y ago
    Yeah, like management consultants who become experts overnight once billing starts from clients.
  - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
    > you're asking somebody who entered the job market in 2017 and worked in one division which was not aviation how Boeing should be broken up? Yup! In my experience, the guys in Chicago have zero clue how their technical teams work and so where a schism could be debilitating versus not noticeable.
- Accujack 5y ago
  I don't think so - no. There's no turning back the clock here. Prior to the "big change" Boeing was one of the last survivors of the huge industrial boom that followed world war 2. It's difficult to overstate how gigantic that boom was in the aerospace field and how unique the industry it created in the US was. So many aerospace related companies, all competing with each other, all continually improving the aircraft technology, engineering best practices, manufacturing practices, corporate structure and governance, and everything else associated with aircraft manufacture so they produced the best product. The competition produced some incredible advances and some unique corporations (like Boeing was) that functioned in a way not before seen (and not presently continued) for an American corporation. Basically, an engineering firm that as sort of side business produced airplanes. The problem was, of course, that the boom couldn't last - as other countries rebuilt their industries, the US was no longer the only game in town. For a long time, the US dominated aerospace because not only did this unique industry exist here but also because we had a huge head start. Eventually, though, through mismanagement and delusions about why the US was in the lead, that lead was squandered, companies were sold out, consolidated, and markets shrank as regulation caused aircraft manufacturing to be a more specialized industry. Boeing was one of the last firms that retained the focus on engineering from that post war boom time. Now that it's changed, to change it back would require a new generation of employees to make a conscious effort to do so, to replicate what happened during the post war boom. That's nearly impossible.
bluedino 5y ago
We are a Boeing supplier and it is rumored they are going to require 50 year data retention Yikes.
- imglorp 5y ago
  The B52 first flew in 1952; the 737 in 1967. Both are still in the air. With lifetimes like that, who can blame them? Someone needs to hold that data while the product is in use.
- bigbillheck 5y ago
  What's wrong with that? Seems like good practice if you expect these planes to be flying for decades.
  - bluedino 5y ago
    How do you store data for that long? Imagine the costs.
    - HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
      Don't imagine: someone will calculate it. Besides, what's important is that the benefit outweighs the cost. If the cost is required to stay in business, then it's probably important enough to incur. Remember: someone's going to be paying that cost and it's clearly worthwhile to them.
    - bigbillheck 5y ago
      You do it however you have to, for example: https://hvmag.com/life-style/history/a-history-of-iron-mountain-an-information-storage-facility-in-germantown-ny/ https://hvmag.com/life-style/history/a-history-of-iron-mount...
    - hungryforcodes 5y ago
      100 year archival DVDs with redundancy? The first question should be how much data do they need to store over 50 years...
barbarbar 5y ago
But 2017 is also sort of yesterday.

N_A_T_E 5y ago

Painful to read “When people say I changed the culture of Boeing, that was the intent, so that it’s run like a business rather than a great engineering firm.”

xyzzy21 5y ago
Indeed. The guy not understanding EITHER what an engineering firm actually is nor what a business is.

twiddling 5y ago

I would also plug Dominic Gates from the Seattle Times ( https://twitter.com/dominicgates https://twitter.com/dominicgates ) with his on the ground (ha) reporting on the Lazy B

JumpCrisscross 5y ago

Would breaking up Boeing alleviate the problem? If so, what would be the fracture lines (and conditions)?

fsckboy 5y ago
you're asking somebody who entered the job market in 2017 and worked in one division which was not aviation how Boeing should be broken up?
- geodel 5y ago
  Yeah, like management consultants who become experts overnight once billing starts from clients.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > you're asking somebody who entered the job market in 2017 and worked in one division which was not aviation how Boeing should be broken up? Yup! In my experience, the guys in Chicago have zero clue how their technical teams work and so where a schism could be debilitating versus not noticeable.
Accujack 5y ago
I don't think so - no. There's no turning back the clock here. Prior to the "big change" Boeing was one of the last survivors of the huge industrial boom that followed world war 2. It's difficult to overstate how gigantic that boom was in the aerospace field and how unique the industry it created in the US was. So many aerospace related companies, all competing with each other, all continually improving the aircraft technology, engineering best practices, manufacturing practices, corporate structure and governance, and everything else associated with aircraft manufacture so they produced the best product. The competition produced some incredible advances and some unique corporations (like Boeing was) that functioned in a way not before seen (and not presently continued) for an American corporation. Basically, an engineering firm that as sort of side business produced airplanes. The problem was, of course, that the boom couldn't last - as other countries rebuilt their industries, the US was no longer the only game in town. For a long time, the US dominated aerospace because not only did this unique industry exist here but also because we had a huge head start. Eventually, though, through mismanagement and delusions about why the US was in the lead, that lead was squandered, companies were sold out, consolidated, and markets shrank as regulation caused aircraft manufacturing to be a more specialized industry. Boeing was one of the last firms that retained the focus on engineering from that post war boom time. Now that it's changed, to change it back would require a new generation of employees to make a conscious effort to do so, to replicate what happened during the post war boom. That's nearly impossible.

bluedino 5y ago

We are a Boeing supplier and it is rumored they are going to require 50 year data retention Yikes.

imglorp 5y ago
The B52 first flew in 1952; the 737 in 1967. Both are still in the air. With lifetimes like that, who can blame them? Someone needs to hold that data while the product is in use.
bigbillheck 5y ago
What's wrong with that? Seems like good practice if you expect these planes to be flying for decades.
- bluedino 5y ago
  How do you store data for that long? Imagine the costs.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
    Don't imagine: someone will calculate it. Besides, what's important is that the benefit outweighs the cost. If the cost is required to stay in business, then it's probably important enough to incur. Remember: someone's going to be paying that cost and it's clearly worthwhile to them.
  - bigbillheck 5y ago
    You do it however you have to, for example: https://hvmag.com/life-style/history/a-history-of-iron-mountain-an-information-storage-facility-in-germantown-ny/ https://hvmag.com/life-style/history/a-history-of-iron-mount...
  - hungryforcodes 5y ago
    100 year archival DVDs with redundancy? The first question should be how much data do they need to store over 50 years...

barbarbar 5y ago

But 2017 is also sort of yesterday.