Boeing - Design Issues...

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Doggzilla

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
2,263
Location
Everywhere USA
Luckily they are not. The 777 has a very robust system that is either triplex or quadruplex. Some of the 777 crew stated they couldnt believe how poorly the MAX was designed, it was a frankenstein compared to the 757,767, or 777 systems.

As for the wing tips, the real issue is if one retracts while the other does not. A similar system on small jets already caused a crash when one moved and the other did not.

If one tip malfunctions the other tip needs to be able to match it to keep roll control symmetrical.

The real issue is whether or not the tip sensors have triplex in order to make sure the tips are in the correct position. If they only have a single sensor then a MAX like issue could occur. If the computer thinks one tip is in the wrong position and the other tip is moved, this can very clearly destroy the aircraft from asymmetrical lift rolling it over.
 

Doggzilla

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
2,263
Location
Everywhere USA

User27

Active Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2015
Messages
33
Location
England
Perhaps the balance between commercial imperatives and design integrity should re-evaluated. Certainly letting the engineering department rule is a recipe for commercial failure but has the balance gone too far in the other direction?
 

litespeed

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 21, 2008
Messages
1,557
Location
Sydney
I have said this was coming for at least six months.

The accounts are as transparent as mud. All just a house of cards built on lies and fraud.
 

Doggzilla

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
2,263
Location
Everywhere USA
Sounds a lot like what happened with the first CEO of Tesla, Martin Eberhard. They fired him for fraud and kept it secret because the media frenzy would have caused far more financial damage than the fraud itself did. Elon Musk was the chairman of the board at the time and had to step in and take over, and had to completely redesign their first car to meet the production goals. Eberhard had been spending $140,000 per car but selling them for half of that (while lying to the board and investors about the true numbers), which clearly would have destroyed the company if it had not been caught.

It would not surprise me if Boeing was doing the same thing to try and limit financial damage. If they caught an executive committing fraud and had them arrested, the ensuing media frenzy would destroy billions and billions of dollars of their stock value. So it would be a double punishment for the investors who already got victimized.
 

PMD

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
185
Location
Martensville SK
Just a little correction in terms: Stock fraud at Boeing will do little financial damage to Boeing, as it will not change the book value or profitability (OTHER things are obviously doing that). Even calling shareholders "investors" is stretching things a bit. Unless they bought in IPO or PO, they didn't "invest" in anything, they instead went to the Casino and placed a bet on where the stock value was going to go.

What has all of this got to do with airplanes? Simple: almost everything in a publicly traded company. Once the tail start wagging the dog (i.e. finance takes over from engineering and management) business and as we can see from this whole affair DESIGN decisions are being made by people who's motivation is to reward from financial activity, not productive endeavor. This is not just a Boeing problem, it is an aviation industry and every other industry problem. My last encounter with such things was when my good friend sunk his brand new 601D taxiing in from a test flight. GE had bought Walter, and the price of every part on the shelf went up from 3x to 10x. All without adding any value whatsoever - just gouging for the pure sake of gouging. Heroes on Wall Street, Hardly that if you happen to need to rely on them for parts and support. Interesting to note that Boeing's solution to their current problems is not to bring someone in who can build a better Boeing, but someone who can run a company just as he was taught at GE.
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
10,822
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
Back in the 1990’s, GE was the darling of Wall Street. Their management practices, as well as many of their managers, were wholesale imported into other companies. The results were management teams that produced terrible results. I’ve been there, seen it first hand, and hope never to see some of those former GE managers again; don’t want to end up in prison.


BJC
 

Doggzilla

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
2,263
Location
Everywhere USA

litespeed

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 21, 2008
Messages
1,557
Location
Sydney
And apparently the wiring bundles are too close to eachother. Causing shorts!

Wow, it just keeps getting better.........
 

PMD

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
185
Location
Martensville SK
Just in case Boeing's management style has not been called into question enough, the Dutch authorities have dog piled on over the 2009 Turkish crash at Schiphol.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/06/business/boeing-737-inquiry.html?te=1&nl=morning-briefing&emc=edit_NN_p_20200207&section=whatElse&campaign_id=9&instance_id=15812&segment_id=21057&user_id=2a3e757b2285568cc6aee5465e9acea4&regi_id=100982531ion=whatElse

Just goes to show that the Max affair was actually a LONG time in breeding.

I think Boeing may be even more dishonest and corrupt than Tesla, if that is possible.
 

Doggzilla

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
2,263
Location
Everywhere USA
I know many people who work there and its not anything like Boeing. People actually enjoy their work and are proud of it.

Dont believe the stories you hear about them. Several major newspapers dismissed journalists for taking bribes to smear Tesla for short sellers. Business Insider had to fire several people because it turned out they were being paid to spread false information in order to manipulate stocks. They got off easy, because that's a felony. They really should be in prison for what they did.

Tesla is ranked the top auto company to work for and in the top 20 out of 50,000 companies in the US to work for. Thats the top 0.005% of best employees.

They aren't anything like Boeing at all.
 

PMD

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
185
Location
Martensville SK
I'm sure some may wonder why I think Tesla is an unethical company and why I wouldn't trust there financial and delivery claims. Here are a few examples

Trust the numbers?
Real Vision talking about how much effort it takes to try to even understand what Tesla is claiming.
https://twitter.com/realvision/statu...08498313285634
This is nothing new. Tesla famously invents new terms like factory gated in the early days of the Model 3. Tesla needed to show that deliveries were happening. Presumably they couldn't count on actual deliveries to customers so they invented something called factory gated. Over time Tesla would shift their definition of delivery to include things like fiscally delivered. Why not just say how many sales like all the other car companies?
https://twitter.com/danahull/status/...692800?lang=en

It's also never really clear if Tesla is counting the delivery of the same car more than once. This person's experience suggests yes.
https://twitter.com/JohnnyFarmer69/s...94986863505408
Short version is the person takes over a lease Tesla from his brother. State of Illinois says a lease transfer doesn't result in additional sales tax. Tesla charges the additional sales tax anyway. State of Illinois says they refunded the second tax payment back to Tesla but Tesla won't return the payment. This certainly means Tesla is not entitled to the money. It might also mean Tesla is counting this sale twice. In cases with lemon purchases there is speculation the cars would be counted more than once. Also, this would make sense as technically any car that was purchased then returned should have been titled then returned as used. However, Tesla's delays in registration would allow them to sell the car as new with a clean title.

Then we have Jalopnik covering a case of a used Tesla that was remotely stripped of it's FSD package while on a used car lot. The lot and new buyer assumed the car had the FSD option because, well the car said it did when the lot bought the used car from Tesla. It was also listed on the original window sticker. Tesla said the car wasn't supposed to have that feature and removed it... remotely.
https://jalopnik.com/tesla-remotely-...ium=socialflow
I don't have a handy reference to this but I've read something similar about a person who got a different Tesla. They wanted to transfer the FSD (or similar) from the old car to the new car since at that point it was a purchased "future option" which to date had delivered nothing. Tesla said no but they didn't transfer the feature to the new owner of the old car. I do understand that anymore some features on cars are just a software activation away. For example a car with or without NAV might just be a software setting. However, if that software is paid for I would expect it to stay with the car for life. Tesla seems to change the rules as their fiscal need dictate.

Finally we have cases of Tesla involved with doxxing critics and even filing false legal cases against them.
https://jalopnik.com/get-a-load-of-t...usk-1827842961

We have Martin Tripp who was swatted by "someone" when he was turning whistle blower against Tesla.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...r-martin-tripp

We also have the case of Tesla's false restraining order against a Twitter critic, Shabooshka.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...r-martin-tripp
This last one is particularly troubling. Tesla got the restraining order without the person knowing. That order accused them of workplace violence. The subject of the order was a grad student. Fortunately many people came to his defense starting with Montana Skeptic. As Montana Skeptic noted restraining order for workplace violence on one's record is a really big deal. Any background check would find it and it would be a perfectly legitimate reason for a company to avoid hiring a person. Thus it was a particularly vengeful way to silence a critic. MS setup a go fund me account for Shabooshka that ultimately raised enough money to mount a real legal defense. Tesla made a number of claims against Shabooshka. The defense effectively convinced the judge that Tesla had cameras so they could/should turn over their evidence. When Tesla's bluff was called they withdrew the claims. It's unclear if this will later result in a retaliatory SLAP lawsuit or not.
https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/22/2...training-order

Overall this paints a picture of a company that is more than willing to craft a false narrative, attack critics in ways both legal and not, do anything to claim some extra money (helps the profits and cash on hand lines on the balance sheet) etc. I've been asked why I wouldn't want to support an American company. My simple answer is I don't want to support a corrupt company.
 

Doggzilla

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
2,263
Location
Everywhere USA
I do not take tabloids or criminals as sources.

You conveniently left out that most of the sources have histories of harassment or workplace crime, including one who was caught and charged for corporate espionage after he was denied a promotion at Tesla.

“This known criminal said something to a tabloid” is not a reliable source.
 
2
Top