4 ms·

It was more like the merger of Boeing - a long time high level engineering company and McDonnell-Douglas - a company that specialized in getting contracts was r

by bwanab 2y ago

It was more like the merger of Boeing - a long time high level engineering company and McDonnell-Douglas - a company that specialized in getting contracts was really a hostile takeover by MD. https://qz.com/1776080/how-the-mcdonnell-douglas-boeing-merger-led-to-the-737-max-crisis https://qz.com/1776080/how-the-mcdonnell-douglas-boeing-merg...

nine_k 2y ago
One reason to stay private, like Dell or SpaceX, is that a hostile takeover cannot happen.
justin66 2y ago
To someone like me without firsthand knowledge, the problem with a “McDonnell Douglas ruined everything” analysis is that McD’s military products are doing really well.
- dingaling 2y ago
  McDonnell St Louis ( what's now Boeing defence arm ) was a very different operating unit to Douglas Long Beach where the airliners were built. McD remained an engineering-driven unit whereas Douglas was constantly stymied by accountancy from the early 70s onwards. Douglas lapsed from defence after Ed Heinemann stepped down as chief designer, they had nothing to offer after the A-4. Boeing Defence is still riding on the solid engineering of the McD F-15 and -18 of that era. Plus the AH-64 from another engineering-driven company, Hughes, and the CH-47 from Vertol. Note the distinct lack of Boeing design origins.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    >Note the distinct lack of Boeing design origins. To add on to this, Boeing's F-15 and F/A-18 derivatives (F-15EX Eagle II and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet) have utterly failed to generate sales outside the US military, being defeated namely by Lockheed Martin's F-35 at every turn. The V-22 Osprey has also had a crashing record, to say the least.
    - justin66 2y ago
      > Boeing's F-15 and F/A-18 derivatives (F-15EX Eagle II and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet) have utterly failed to generate sales outside the US military, being defeated namely by Lockheed Martin's F-35 at every turn. Every assertion in that sentence is false. Indonesia, of all countries, intends to buy a couple dozen export versions of the F-15EX [0] and the RAAF is supplementing its F-35s with Super Hornets and plans to fly them until the 2040s. [1] And Kuwait will replace its Hornets with the Super Hornet as well. [2] But it's a different kind of mistake to ascribe failure to the F-15EX because it's not selling a lot of foreign copies. The thing you need remember about the F-15EX: it is a younger brother to the Saudi Arabian F-15SA and Qatari F-15QA, and in turn the Israeli F-15IA is newer still, but they are all really similar. The F-15EX includes a second seat that will never be used operationally, and funny little ears under the canopy which hold sensor equipment on the F-15SA but are completely superfluous on the F-15EX, and an engine that is not state of the art for that form factor, because the US military's intent was - to the fullest extent practical - to minimize development time and costs by using equipment whose development and testing had already been paid for. [3] I expect the trend of countries wanting to supplement fifth gen fighters with 4th and 4.5th gen fighters, for cost as well as operational reasons, will continue to take away from potential F-35 sales. Although back to your original point, that doesn't necessarily hurt Lockheed Martin too much: they do sell a fair number of F-16s, after all, and the newest ones command a high price. And yes, the Osprey is dogshit. [0] https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=131310 https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=1... [1] https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/australian-f/a-18fs-to-operate-out-to-2040-receive-hypersonic-weapons/157898.article https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/australian-f/a-18fs-to-... [2] https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/boeing-consolidates-ties-with-kuwait-for-f-a-18-70m-logistics-contract/ https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/boeing-consolidates... [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbOB7KlbcZI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbOB7KlbcZI

by bwanab 2y ago

nine_k 2y ago

One reason to stay private, like Dell or SpaceX, is that a hostile takeover cannot happen.

justin66 2y ago

To someone like me without firsthand knowledge, the problem with a “McDonnell Douglas ruined everything” analysis is that McD’s military products are doing really well.

dingaling 2y ago
McDonnell St Louis ( what's now Boeing defence arm ) was a very different operating unit to Douglas Long Beach where the airliners were built. McD remained an engineering-driven unit whereas Douglas was constantly stymied by accountancy from the early 70s onwards. Douglas lapsed from defence after Ed Heinemann stepped down as chief designer, they had nothing to offer after the A-4. Boeing Defence is still riding on the solid engineering of the McD F-15 and -18 of that era. Plus the AH-64 from another engineering-driven company, Hughes, and the CH-47 from Vertol. Note the distinct lack of Boeing design origins.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  >Note the distinct lack of Boeing design origins. To add on to this, Boeing's F-15 and F/A-18 derivatives (F-15EX Eagle II and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet) have utterly failed to generate sales outside the US military, being defeated namely by Lockheed Martin's F-35 at every turn. The V-22 Osprey has also had a crashing record, to say the least.
  - justin66 2y ago
    > Boeing's F-15 and F/A-18 derivatives (F-15EX Eagle II and F/A-18E/F Super Hornet) have utterly failed to generate sales outside the US military, being defeated namely by Lockheed Martin's F-35 at every turn. Every assertion in that sentence is false. Indonesia, of all countries, intends to buy a couple dozen export versions of the F-15EX [0] and the RAAF is supplementing its F-35s with Super Hornets and plans to fly them until the 2040s. [1] And Kuwait will replace its Hornets with the Super Hornet as well. [2] But it's a different kind of mistake to ascribe failure to the F-15EX because it's not selling a lot of foreign copies. The thing you need remember about the F-15EX: it is a younger brother to the Saudi Arabian F-15SA and Qatari F-15QA, and in turn the Israeli F-15IA is newer still, but they are all really similar. The F-15EX includes a second seat that will never be used operationally, and funny little ears under the canopy which hold sensor equipment on the F-15SA but are completely superfluous on the F-15EX, and an engine that is not state of the art for that form factor, because the US military's intent was - to the fullest extent practical - to minimize development time and costs by using equipment whose development and testing had already been paid for. [3] I expect the trend of countries wanting to supplement fifth gen fighters with 4th and 4.5th gen fighters, for cost as well as operational reasons, will continue to take away from potential F-35 sales. Although back to your original point, that doesn't necessarily hurt Lockheed Martin too much: they do sell a fair number of F-16s, after all, and the newest ones command a high price. And yes, the Osprey is dogshit. [0] https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=131310 https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=1... [1] https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/australian-f/a-18fs-to-operate-out-to-2040-receive-hypersonic-weapons/157898.article https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/australian-f/a-18fs-to-... [2] https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/boeing-consolidates-ties-with-kuwait-for-f-a-18-70m-logistics-contract/ https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/boeing-consolidates... [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbOB7KlbcZI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbOB7KlbcZI