3 ms·
If Boeing’s product was something less necessary, and held in lower esteem, like military aircraft, a lot of these QA issues (and clear lack of ethics) would fa
by limpbizkitfan 2y ago
If Boeing’s product was something less necessary, and held in lower esteem, like military aircraft, a lot of these QA issues (and clear lack of ethics) would fall by the wayside in terms of press coverage. Boeing is not the only company that has wrung itself dry with goals of growth-over-growth in terms of stock dividends.
Planes require so much validation and Boeing aircraft were held in very high esteem, but these attributes are just cows to milk in the eyes of the “smartest” investor. Boeing is the canary, the first to erode, because they set high standards for themselves and have to meet stringent regulatory standards. I won’t be at all surprised when other companies with less important products begin to display fraying edges.
- kunai 2y agoWhat? How exactly are military aircraft "held in low esteem?" If anything, it's the exact opposite.
- limpbizkitfan 2y agoThe initial batches of F-35 rusted to pieces in 3 months of service. The Sikorsky MH-53E has a kapton defect and has been dropping out of the sky for decades. Commercial aircraft aren’t filled with well paid people who signed a waiver saying they’re OK with the risk of dying. It’s a completely different space. A fighter pilot crashing isn’t anything compared with a plane going down with a hundred souls aboard
- dragonwriter 2y ago> Commercial aircraft aren’t filled with well paid people who signed a waiver saying they’re OK with the risk of dying. Neither are military aircraft (especially ones that carry more than just a pilot and navigator/RIO), generally, unless “well-paid” is defined broadly enough to be equivalent to just “paid”.