3 ms·

The 2 first accidents made it clear that this version of the 737 prioritized time-to-market over design (that’s why it needed the MCAS solution, a software patc

The 2 first accidents made it clear that this version of the 737 prioritized time-to-market over design (that’s why it needed the MCAS solution, a software patch for a hardware shortcoming.) Now this new incident with the Max 9 shows that they might have prioritized time-to-market (or cost) over production quality. This version seems to be doomed to have problems and I will avoid it for sure

Zigurd 3y ago
It wasn't just time to market. That impetus led to bad ideas chased the tails of other bad ideas in a spiral: You can't need pilot training, but you must have more efficient engines; a kludge for more efficient engines was applied, but it led to stall situations that would require pilot training; MCAS was added but could not be documented to pilots because they shouldn't need to know because that would undermine the claim no simulator time was needed for training, and because there are too few 737MAX simulators and too many pilots. Boeing is still benefiting from a cozy relationship because no hardware changes were employed in the fix, MCAS is still controlling trim, simulator training for AOA/MCAS issues isn't required and there are probably other ways in which safety did not come first before getting 737MAX deliveries back on line. If you are wondering how mighty Boeing had to have an expedient low-cost development project based on a 50 year old design when Boeing also sells a carbon fiber wonder-plane called Dreamliner, go down the Harry Stonecipher GE Jack Welch Six Sigma McDonnell Douglas outsource-everything rabbit hole. The 787 is a very nice plane to ride in, but it was tens of billions over budget, far more expensive to build than the aggressive outsourcing plan envisioned, doesn't fly as far as planned, and may not be profitable on a per unit basis yet. Boeing very badly needed a cash cow. And here's the internal doc that told then that's what would happen: https://techrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/2014130646.pdf https://techrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/2014130646...
- phendrenad2 3y ago
  All of this squeezing through loopholes is unfortunately how a lot of big companies operate. Nothing a company with lots of lawyers loves more than complex laws that take out competition before they can pose a threat.

Zigurd 3y ago

It wasn't just time to market. That impetus led to bad ideas chased the tails of other bad ideas in a spiral: You can't need pilot training, but you must have more efficient engines; a kludge for more efficient engines was applied, but it led to stall situations that would require pilot training; MCAS was added but could not be documented to pilots because they shouldn't need to know because that would undermine the claim no simulator time was needed for training, and because there are too few 737MAX simulators and too many pilots. Boeing is still benefiting from a cozy relationship because no hardware changes were employed in the fix, MCAS is still controlling trim, simulator training for AOA/MCAS issues isn't required and there are probably other ways in which safety did not come first before getting 737MAX deliveries back on line. If you are wondering how mighty Boeing had to have an expedient low-cost development project based on a 50 year old design when Boeing also sells a carbon fiber wonder-plane called Dreamliner, go down the Harry Stonecipher GE Jack Welch Six Sigma McDonnell Douglas outsource-everything rabbit hole. The 787 is a very nice plane to ride in, but it was tens of billions over budget, far more expensive to build than the aggressive outsourcing plan envisioned, doesn't fly as far as planned, and may not be profitable on a per unit basis yet. Boeing very badly needed a cash cow. And here's the internal doc that told then that's what would happen: https://techrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/2014130646.pdf https://techrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/2014130646...

phendrenad2 3y ago
All of this squeezing through loopholes is unfortunately how a lot of big companies operate. Nothing a company with lots of lawyers loves more than complex laws that take out competition before they can pose a threat.