5 ms·

US sanctions Boeing for sharing information about 737 MAX 9 investigation

79 points by Bluestein 2y ago

tracker1 2y ago
I can't help but think of the old use of Saddam Hussein as a caricature in South Part when I keep seeing what Boeing is up to lately... I think we need more visibility with similar for Boeing executives.
- Bluestein 2y ago
  We indeed need all visibility and full accountability.-
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > We indeed need all visibility …literally on a thread about Boeing being overly (and misleadingly) transparent during an investigation.
    - AnimalMuppet 2y ago
      "Misleading" isn't transparent. It's obscuring.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  It's too bad that Saddam's punishment isn't in the cards for Boeing executives and other corporate execs who commit heinous acts that kill people.
fileseeder 2y ago
@tracker1 I'm sure South Park is cooking something with boing haha
- Bluestein 2y ago
  "If it's Boeing I ain't goin'"
ein0p 2y ago
What a fall from grace. An unstoppable company with a jaw dropping lineup of products, pride of the nation, destroyed by bean counters and MBAs within just 15 years or so. One would hope lessons would be learned, but one would then also be naive.
- Bluestein 2y ago
  It used to be an engineering and engineer company, back in its day.- PS. Sadly, not only the company is falling (from grace. The planes are also. Apart.-
  - sbuttgereit 2y ago
    Ironic that the CEO that was substantially oversaw the development of Boeing as an "engineering company" was a lawyer. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McPherson_Allen https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McPherson_Allen
    - shiroiushi 2y ago
      You don't have to be an engineer to appreciate the value of engineering. Also, a lawyer is more likely to think about risk and liability first and "shareholder value" later.
      - sbuttgereit 2y ago
        I agree. But thought it was worth mentioning because I'm not so sure everyone repeating the engineering company line understands that. Similarly, Boeing's decline is attributed quite frequently to the managerial descendants of Jack Welch. And Welch? Well he was... an engineer. A PhD in chemical engineering no less. Sometimes (often times) comments here over simplify the reality that underlies the real issues that need to be addressed. I think it's worth while to break the stereotypes and charactures that often time get used in arguments to either iconize or demonize various groups, depending on the viewpoint of the speaker. That tendency is the real problem with modern discourse.
- 2y ago
Molitor5901 2y ago
I don't understand the justification for this. I am familiar with the NTSB's practices (thanks in on small part to Admiral Cloudberg) but I do not see how Boeing put a foot wrong on this issue. Won't the NTSB report say what it will say regardless what Boeing says or does??
- garrettgarcia 2y ago
  Agreed. They're being "sanctioned" for answering the media's questions about their own company, probably because the NTSB wants to control the narrative. The "sanction" seems to amount to nothing, though. No fine. No change to the investigation. Just bureaucratic finger-wagging and empty threats. Boeing certainly deserves to be investigated and prosecuted, if the evidence supports it, but arbitrarily refusing to let them talk to the media is wrong.
  - KerrAvon 2y ago
    TFA seems pretty clear about it? For example: "The NTSB said that during a media briefing on Tuesday, a Boeing executive provided non-public investigative information to journalists about the Alaska Airlines incident that the agency had not verified or authorized for release." That doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
    - Bluestein 2y ago
      > provided non-public investigative information to journalists about the Alaska Airlines incident that the agency had not verified or authorized for release I think "non-public" is key here ...
  - calf 2y ago
    The "bureacratic finger-wagging" in this particular context is a lesser evil than the alternative, allowing a corporation to pre-manufacture public opinion by contaminating the neutrality of the investigation and prosecution. It's just a lesser evil given the status quo of the opposing systems of regulation and capitalism.
textlapse 2y ago
Probably a repost, but this excellent video talks about the problems with outsourcing everything (i.e. the L J Hart-Smith report) https://youtu.be/PQccNdwm8Tw?t=566 https://youtu.be/PQccNdwm8Tw?t=566 - the report itself is fairly accessible and an eye-opener on what happens when you outsource all of your core competency. The only remaining thing is a weak 'systems integrator'. And the best part is the suppliers have more leverage and less compliance/liability than you do! Because nobody even knows their name.
- TaylorAlexander 2y ago
  Thanks for sharing! I’ll have to take a look. I wanted to add that a great counter example in support of your point is SpaceX, who is highly integrated out of a desire for success and has clearly demonstrated engineering excellence, in some cases in direct competition with Boeing with impressive results.
  - imoverclocked 2y ago
    ... and Boeing used to be the shining example in the field until they were reverse-acquired by McDonnell Douglas, 81 years after their inception. It will be interesting to see where SpaceX is in another 100 years from now and how many mistakes they repeat. IMHO, it's already being run by someone who cares more about profit than technical excellence or safety.
    - TaylorAlexander 2y ago
      Oh absolutely. Boeing is their own counter example, but the direct competition between Boeing and SpaceX at the same time and place on the same government contracts provides a very nice case study in distributed versus integrated engineering and manufacturing development. And yes, concerns with Musk abound, but certainly SpaceX is his baby and he has been pretty focused with that one, unlike other companies like Tesla and X.
    - textlapse 2y ago
      I think SpaceX has done more to spur interest in lean/mean private companies that have collectively got 'bored, working on ads' people out doing quite spectacular work. I think there are a lot of hungry people looking for some purpose - SpaceX seems to provide a sense of purpose. This might inspire more companies over time even if SpaceX eventually fades away. It's a shining example of a proper American company that Boeing's now ship-of-theseus once was.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

79 points by Bluestein 2y ago

I can't help but think of the old use of Saddam Hussein as a caricature in South Part when I keep seeing what Boeing is up to lately... I think we need more visibility with similar for Boeing executives.

Bluestein 2y ago
We indeed need all visibility and full accountability.-
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > We indeed need all visibility …literally on a thread about Boeing being overly (and misleadingly) transparent during an investigation.
  - AnimalMuppet 2y ago
    "Misleading" isn't transparent. It's obscuring.
shiroiushi 2y ago
It's too bad that Saddam's punishment isn't in the cards for Boeing executives and other corporate execs who commit heinous acts that kill people.

fileseeder 2y ago

@tracker1 I'm sure South Park is cooking something with boing haha

Bluestein 2y ago
"If it's Boeing I ain't goin'"

ein0p 2y ago

What a fall from grace. An unstoppable company with a jaw dropping lineup of products, pride of the nation, destroyed by bean counters and MBAs within just 15 years or so. One would hope lessons would be learned, but one would then also be naive.

Bluestein 2y ago
It used to be an engineering and engineer company, back in its day.- PS. Sadly, not only the company is falling (from grace. The planes are also. Apart.-
- sbuttgereit 2y ago
  Ironic that the CEO that was substantially oversaw the development of Boeing as an "engineering company" was a lawyer. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McPherson_Allen https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McPherson_Allen
  - shiroiushi 2y ago
    You don't have to be an engineer to appreciate the value of engineering. Also, a lawyer is more likely to think about risk and liability first and "shareholder value" later.
    - sbuttgereit 2y ago
      I agree. But thought it was worth mentioning because I'm not so sure everyone repeating the engineering company line understands that. Similarly, Boeing's decline is attributed quite frequently to the managerial descendants of Jack Welch. And Welch? Well he was... an engineer. A PhD in chemical engineering no less. Sometimes (often times) comments here over simplify the reality that underlies the real issues that need to be addressed. I think it's worth while to break the stereotypes and charactures that often time get used in arguments to either iconize or demonize various groups, depending on the viewpoint of the speaker. That tendency is the real problem with modern discourse.
2y ago

Molitor5901 2y ago

I don't understand the justification for this. I am familiar with the NTSB's practices (thanks in on small part to Admiral Cloudberg) but I do not see how Boeing put a foot wrong on this issue. Won't the NTSB report say what it will say regardless what Boeing says or does??

garrettgarcia 2y ago
Agreed. They're being "sanctioned" for answering the media's questions about their own company, probably because the NTSB wants to control the narrative. The "sanction" seems to amount to nothing, though. No fine. No change to the investigation. Just bureaucratic finger-wagging and empty threats. Boeing certainly deserves to be investigated and prosecuted, if the evidence supports it, but arbitrarily refusing to let them talk to the media is wrong.
- KerrAvon 2y ago
  TFA seems pretty clear about it? For example: "The NTSB said that during a media briefing on Tuesday, a Boeing executive provided non-public investigative information to journalists about the Alaska Airlines incident that the agency had not verified or authorized for release." That doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
  - Bluestein 2y ago
    > provided non-public investigative information to journalists about the Alaska Airlines incident that the agency had not verified or authorized for release I think "non-public" is key here ...
- calf 2y ago
  The "bureacratic finger-wagging" in this particular context is a lesser evil than the alternative, allowing a corporation to pre-manufacture public opinion by contaminating the neutrality of the investigation and prosecution. It's just a lesser evil given the status quo of the opposing systems of regulation and capitalism.

textlapse 2y ago

Probably a repost, but this excellent video talks about the problems with outsourcing everything (i.e. the L J Hart-Smith report) https://youtu.be/PQccNdwm8Tw?t=566 https://youtu.be/PQccNdwm8Tw?t=566 - the report itself is fairly accessible and an eye-opener on what happens when you outsource all of your core competency. The only remaining thing is a weak 'systems integrator'. And the best part is the suppliers have more leverage and less compliance/liability than you do! Because nobody even knows their name.

TaylorAlexander 2y ago
Thanks for sharing! I’ll have to take a look. I wanted to add that a great counter example in support of your point is SpaceX, who is highly integrated out of a desire for success and has clearly demonstrated engineering excellence, in some cases in direct competition with Boeing with impressive results.
- imoverclocked 2y ago
  ... and Boeing used to be the shining example in the field until they were reverse-acquired by McDonnell Douglas, 81 years after their inception. It will be interesting to see where SpaceX is in another 100 years from now and how many mistakes they repeat. IMHO, it's already being run by someone who cares more about profit than technical excellence or safety.
  - TaylorAlexander 2y ago
    Oh absolutely. Boeing is their own counter example, but the direct competition between Boeing and SpaceX at the same time and place on the same government contracts provides a very nice case study in distributed versus integrated engineering and manufacturing development. And yes, concerns with Musk abound, but certainly SpaceX is his baby and he has been pretty focused with that one, unlike other companies like Tesla and X.
  - textlapse 2y ago
    I think SpaceX has done more to spur interest in lean/mean private companies that have collectively got 'bored, working on ads' people out doing quite spectacular work. I think there are a lot of hungry people looking for some purpose - SpaceX seems to provide a sense of purpose. This might inspire more companies over time even if SpaceX eventually fades away. It's a shining example of a proper American company that Boeing's now ship-of-theseus once was.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]