Does Boeing Stand a Chance Anymore??
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 фев 2024
- Use code "mentournow" and the link below to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan: incogni.com/mentournow
---------------------------------------------------
What does Boeing’s latest crisis tell us about their position compared to Airbus? How far behind Airbus are Boeing today, and could they recover this lost ground? Things aren’t looking good for Boeing, to say the least, but… there may be a thin ray of hope for them, after all.
Stay tuned!
-----------------------------------------------------
If you want to support the work I do on the channel, join my Patreon crew and get awesome perks and help me move the channel forward!
👉🏻 / mentourpilot
Our Connections:
👉🏻 Exclusive Mentour Merch: mentour-crew.creator-spring.c...
👉🏻 Our other channel: / mentourpilotaviation
👉🏻 Amazon: www.amazon.com/shop/mentourpilot
👉🏻 BOSE Aviation: boseaviation-emea.aero/headsets
Social:
👉🏻 Facebook: / mentourpilot
👉🏻 Instagram: / mentour_pilot
👉🏻 Twitter: / mentourpilot
👉🏻 Discord server: / discord
Download the FREE Mentour Aviation app for all the lastest aviation content
👉🏻 www.mentourpilot.com/apps/
-----------------------------------------------------
Below you will find the links to videos and sources used in this episode.
leehamnews.com/
• Boeing, Airbus and the...
• Boeing in Crisis Mode ...
• Boeing is a company th...
• Paris Airshow 2023 - B...
• Former Boeing workers ...
• First Boeing KC-46 Peg...
• See Boeing Starliner L...
• Modernizing our Fleet ...
• Producing the P-8
• Boeing geared up to bu...
• Airbus Atlantic Rochef...
• Jet mega-orders put In...
• Building Boeing’s Next...
• Video from 737 MAX Cer...
• New Boeing 737 MAX
• MAX 8 Delivery | South...
• Boeing's 787 Dreamline...
• United Airlines CEO: B...
• 2023 Modernization Yea...
• FAA Says Boeing Needs ...
• In the Air with FedEx:...
• Conversion of Air Cana...
• United - Ready for you...
• Elected Officials Meet...
• Farnborough Internatio... 
Развлечения
Use code "mentournow" and the link below to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan: incogni.com/mentournow
don't tell me what to do xD
Video: 14 minutes ago, comment: 2 hours ago
Yep, it’s uploaded hidden first so my Patreon can preview it. They have had it since Friday.
what have you been drinking?
China map has Kyrgistan in it too...@@MentourNow
Boeing could make a profit at the last quarter of 2023 because of huge savings on bolts.
🤔😂😂
In fact Mentour made a small mistake: Boeing did NOT make a profit in Q4. Only the commercial Aviation division did. But your point is still valid: it’s in the commercial Aviation division that they saved on bolts!
Not to mention the enormous training cost savings from MCAS!
Top 'management' needs to forgo any and all bonuses, be replaced and move back to Seattle.
😂😂😂😂
Using expert accountants to assure quality control was brilliant.
Ludicrous, isn't it? 😳😐😔
They killed all their major competition (except Airbus) and spread out production all over the country. They axed quality control and cut corners to save money. They overworked and underpaid employees causing huge turnover so all the employees were new and had little experience, and so product quality went down the toilet.
It's the same slow hypercapitalistic death every big company eventually dies, it's just scary when it happens to airplanes. Same reason Japanese made cars (Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc) are so much better these days than American brands like Ford or Chevrolet.
@@altaccount4697 Don't include the embarrassment that is Nissan in that list, plus it is no longer Japanese (it's more French than Japanese).
@@altaccount4697 Indeed. Just, capitalism. No need to even add the "hyper" adjective...
@@altaccount4697 Yeah, old news. The quality difference between Japanese cars and American cars is negligible. Of course, that wasn't always the case, but it's up to you to stay informed.
Boeing: I need a boring year.
Boeing door: this is too boring, let me go
😂😂
Bloopppp adiosssssss
Boeing door: boring huh? Lemme show you something fun
6:54 oh man that’s hilarious
“Boeing just needs a boring year in 2024”
[spongebob French voice] ONE DAY LATER
And now a whistleblower just happened to end up dead. Yeah I think Boeing is in for far less than a boring year.
@@reinasherman8009 just when Boeing is under a microscope, what a year for boeing
And another Boeing incident with Southwest today. A boring year indeed.
I think the fact that flight search engines let you filter out maxs now is going to be their biggest challenge.
Really? The max is so unsafe that thousands of professional flight crews who make a living flying airplanes, get on board Max's everyday and do their job. The only thing that the unnamed search engine you speak of is doing is catering to mass hysteria fed by the media and RUclips channels like this one to score likes. I'm pretty sure if the Max was unsafe that the pilot and flight attendant unions would be screaming bloody murder to get their members off of these airplanes.
No doubt many of those who are anxious about flying at all, will be less comfortable if they see it is a Boeing plane scheduled for their flight. I don't know how much having cheaper fares, say, for Boeing flights would make a difference or whether an airline would even be willing to do something like that as it would mean that having Boeing aircraft would be less profitable..
Oof!
Is this true? Ouch, that's gonna leave a mark.
@@georgedyson9754Despite following so many pilot channels and reasonably understanding that crashes/accidents/dangerous situations are rare, I still decided to cancel my flight for spring break because neither my boyfriend nor I feel comfortable flying right now.
Boeing is an absolutely glaring example of Pournelle's iron law of bureaucracy. "In any bureaucracy, the people devoted to the benefit of the bureaucracy itself always get in control and those dedicated to the goals that the bureaucracy is supposed to accomplish have less and less influence, and sometimes are eliminated entirely." I believe one way to improve this situation would be to increase the salaries of the engineers and all workers who actually build the planes. Then fire half the managers and executives, and cut the salaries of the managers and executives remaining.
Jerry Pournelle was a great writer. RIP
....and who would administer your plan?
Referring to Pournelle’s iron law of bureaucracy, there is no clearer example of this pronouncement than the Combo of the NATO/European Union Warmongering/Economic(Sanction) Barbarism, but multiplied Boeing’s scenario x 1000’s.
@@NAP795 Economic sanction barbarism? Damn, it must hit you hard.
During a tour of an old castle I was shown the bureau from which the estate was administered.
The ruler was a bureaucrat.
Boeing will survive because Airbus simply cannot supply the entire market alone.
And this is effing sad
lol 😂 airbus actually could that’s the funny part
@@tomasinasau3309did you watch the video?
Boeing will survive because serious airlines do not want to see a monopolistic market.
So in summing up, your tankers have clothes, parts and tools left in their internal spaces, you bid on VC-25s at 20% (so far) of their actual cost, your years delayed crew capsule is optimistically 2 years behind it's most recent years delay, people are randomly drilling holes in your aft pressure bulkheads, and after all that your door plugs are flying out of your brand new airplanes.
Boeing started to go downhill when they concentrated on building shareholder value rather than building aircraft.
Doesn’t Airbus also have this issue?
@@aycc-nbh7289About 25% of shares are state owned, several countries. They also have an ongoing program for employees getting shares.
Not saying this is “better”, but it may contribute to transparency, and ability / bravery to report issues without losing your job / influence, by not focusing solely on nominal growth.
Most employees think a little differently if they also “own” a small representation - very “unamerican”, but more “european” as values go…?
@OP: Doesn’t this go for *every* huge enterprise - private or state…? 😂
@@aycc-nbh7289apparently no, airbus have a better reputation than boeing nowadays and their plane is better in almost every variable
Did Boeing achieve either?
-Warning, I’m a Boeing fan. I have worked at Boeing and now fly the 787 for a living. Here’s my opinion:
Boeing management insists in operating under a business model that has been disastrous for decades now. This started way before the MD merger. They now find themselves in the awful position of not having money to bring more of the manufacturing back under their control, not being able to certify new airplanes on time and much less being able to develop a new design to replace the troubled and tired 737.
Their management has to go. From the board of directors to their top management, all should be replaced with competent leaders. That is the only way to fix Boeing. Unfortunately, I do not see it happening. The company is run by arrogant people that know the government will keep them afloat no matter what.
I feel terrible for the Boeing employees. Working there used to be a source of pride. I hope for their sake that things do change.
Thank you Pieter for another amazing video.
Will probably get better when their DIE projects are completed!
@@elbuggo All you DEI people commenting all over every single RUclips video citing it as the cause of ALL problems in the world is getting really old. You should understand that all rational people reading your comments are annoyed and simply see you as a programmed politically tribal mindless parrot suffering from a persecutory paranoid delusion that FOX News and the politicians they serve brainwashed you with. In other words, all you are doing is advertising the inner workings of your psychology to the world. The people reading the comments under a video about airplanes really aren't interested in what you think or how you feel with regard to your political brainwashing and your "done to" psychology.
But I do hope that you have a wonderful day!
@@elbuggo This is an issue of cost-cutting, shareholder focused greed. ‘It’s the gays’ is a cop out argument. Take a closer look at the problem and come back with a smarter, well thought-out take.
@@Evan.01 That's is what I am saying. The DIE projects will be a HUGE improvement, probably!
👍
Lockheed needs to get back in the game!!!!!!!!!
The more Boeing is in the news, the more people will actively look at what aircraft are being flown to their destinations.
I recently booked a trip from LAX to PDX on United Airlines, based on the two legs of the trip consisting of Airbus and Embraer aircraft, vs Alaska and Southwest flying 737 Max.
I think more people are coming to the same conclusions
Noticed that too. Before you'd be a weirdo nerd if you talked about airplane types but now more and more normies are aware of what's flying them around
Right. I'll fly to Asia in the fall and will try hard to avoid flying on any Boeing aircraft.
@@PennPearson You probably won't be flying to Asia in a 737.. there's nothing wrong with flying on a 747, 767, 777, or 787.
@@n118nw I see. Thanks for the information.
Your average individual doesn't know jack, about aircrafts, let alone about maintenence, design, etc.
From what I have seen, MBA managers tend to regard quality control as a negative item in their balance sheets. The problem is that those balance sheets usually don't take into account the kind of blowback that is possible from two crashed Max-8's and a blown door plug on the Max 9.
It is difficult to quantity their worth if not much happens.
Similarly research will be represented as a Cost Centre.
Indeed, exactly.
The Quality of amazon electronic garbage is finally sucessfully scaled up to airplanes. 😂
If your claim to your job as a manager is an MBA you've already failed. An MBA, in my book, is a negative on a CV unless there are clear long term technical and other qualifications and education and clear experience being successful.
Oh but they got their bonus that year! That's all that matters I guess. I don't know how they can sleep at night.
The problem is that Boeing seems dead set on continuing along the same path that got it into trouble in the first place. Instead of fixing their current product line, developing new aircraft, and getting back into focus as an engineering centered company, it still has a CEO who is primarily a private equity bean counter oriented towards profits. It moved its headquarters closer to Washington DC so its leaders could lobby Congress better and more easily, making it harder for them to keep a closer eye on its factories. Until it changes its ways, for instance, like Intel did by firing its CEO and hiring Gelsinger, who was a former Intel engineer, I don't see Boeing ever recovering. Instead, it's just going to go the way of Curtiss-Wright, North American Aviation, and other formerly great aviation companies as they stopped focusing on excellent engineering and instead went for the profits.
Absolutely. Nothing will improve while the same people are in charge.
Changing the CEO isn't going to do much. You have to change the board too, and anyone in management positions that have been incompetent or felonious at their job.
@@fighter5583 Well, yes. They need to move their headquarters back to Seattle for that matter. Why is their entire management staff on the opposite side of the American continent?
Yep, if they are really big on safety, they would be stopping the development of 737 Max 7 and 10, instead start a brand new design.
Boeing has died out because of the 1997 merge but they have still have a chance to beat Airbus by basically reengineering the 737 MAX with the following:
The new engines will be smaller but will be 10% more efficient and powerful compared to its competition (still the CFML).
MCAS will be removed after they have tested all 737 MAX variants with the new engine with the MCAS disabled and should have no high attitude upon takeoff.
With the door problems on the 737-9, Boeing will either replace the door with a window panel (with tight bolts ofc) or use a custom fuselage with no emergency door instead.
Boeing will recommend airlines to use the new standards I just said and it should have no problem.
This is their chance to beat Airbus and to fix the 737 MAX problems with better engineering and no profits made by the CEO.
If Boeing didn’t start work on a composite based, genuinely modern 737 replacement as soon as the 797 fell through and the issues with the 737 MAX line started showing up, I truly don’t know what they’re doing over there.
Rest in peace mr barnett
Well, as Juan, a Boeing 777 pilot in his channel “Blancolirio” says, trying to save pennies, they lose billions 🤦
Tripping over a quarter to pick up a penny
That's the new math of the century....COMMON CORE... PPL stop being such a jellyfish, it's a joke about common core
Juan was also a 737 captain before he converted up to the 777. This all started with trying to screw the engineers on their pay and pensions, that was a small cost of a few hundred million over ten years compared to what Boeing lost on the 787 (development went from $10 billion to $34 billion). Every Boeing disaster is related to the damage they did to their engineering capability and each one comes with a multi billion dollar price tag.
Agreed, but he also once said US pilots are better than all others because of the 1500hr requirement, even if those 1500hr is in a cropduster 🤣
@@MQT-oml shut up that's not the point
One of the major problem that has been ignored here is that this is the type of things that will make extremely difficult to get young people to want to work for the company in the long run. Even smaller plane manufacturers will probably seem like a better bet.
If I was an engineer or a mechanic out of university I'd rather have daher, piper, texxtron or gulfstream on my CV than boeing. At least potential future employers wouldn't assume my work experience is synonymous with bad habits
Come on, you are being unfair. Bad habits are mainly at management level and at that level they are not even seen as bad habits!
@@danp576what has the GA accident rate to do with the CV of an engineer?
(Unless those accidents are linked to manufacturing defects. Which I don't think they are)
@@Jehty21those where mainly maintenance or Pilot Errors.
Those huge costly birds have way more Error mitigation systems and current trained pilots than those GA Planes. And Higher cost and lower staff in maintenance has Just drawn more mechanics out of GA and risen Ticket prices.
I said the same elsewhere in these comments. How boring it would be to work for a company that subordinates mathematics to greed! I would be afraid to fly in my own plane!
@@danp576 Your assertion that airliner design quality and GA accidents caused by pilot error somehow relate to each other or somehow indicate anything regarding engineering quality in commercial vs. GA is illogical. Data is very important.
It'd be good if you could cover what Airbus is doing differently to avoid the pitfalls of Boeing's management style (or any other detractors)
Installing bolts for starters. 🤣
I think it's partially that the worker protection laws in EU and Europe are stronger and way way more protective towards workers than in the US, so Airbus can't actually make the same little greedy games Boeing does with their own engineers and staff.
For example, the unions here have a very strong political and negotiating power, even if there's only one supplier and the workers have no alternative, they will still fight and are thus feared by businesses.
This usually can push greedy businesses away to China or other less protected countries, but in the case of companies that *need* to be on european soil, it forces them to not cheapen out on things and makes their quality stronger and more reliable.
I haven't checked but would assume there are more engineers and scientists in senior positions at Airbus. In France and Germany these professions are higher status and not dominated by clueless lawyers, accountants and MBAs.
@@DeadKraken Remember that the governments of France, Spain, and Germany have a large stake in Airbus. According to 1 site, they collectively make up about 25% ownership in Airbus. I'm sure that any of those would be less than happy in Airbus if they were to have fundamental QA issues. Also, Airbus has assembly facilities in the US and China as well.
@@No-mq5lw If it's even partially government owned, then it makes even more sense that the workers in Europe have major benefits and are more protected. Working in companies either totally or partially owned by the government in Europe means your job is 100% safe, the company will have more problems trying to fire you than just paying better or respecting your rights. And usually european companies export parts of their worker protection rules as well, especially if they need both the european and the non-european parts to work in harmoniously.
Now after they assassinated The Whistleblower they're really screwed
I worked as a contractor in Boeing engineering over 10 years ago. At the time i was tasked with evaluation of the production processes of the 787 tail section. After listing major issues with the design that would lead to near Impossible manufacturing challenges, I was asked to look into other areas as well in the next month. 2 months s later, an executive order came down, that would stop the whole project. That is all you need to know about manufacturing challenges at Boeing and their attitude towards quality.
Much thanks for the post. NOTHING LIKE HEARING FROM THE GUY THAT WAS ON FRONT LINE.
Much thanks for the post. NOTHING LIKE HEARING FROM THE GUY THAT WAS ON FRONT LINE.
Exactly. Wall Street doesn't care how many people die.
If I were a young engineer I would be ashamed to work for Boeing. Now if Elon Musk saw the opportunity to bring in a better product, I would work for him.
@@ejt3708 Yeah, you'd choose to work for an inveterate, pathological liar. Good call. Just terrific.
@@ejt3708 What? Because you think Musk is better? He's a total charlatan and capricious billionaire hack. And that's being polite. Holy molly, for the love of God, stop dick riding that snake oil salesman. And billionaires in general.
maybe the union should consider writing a clause that requires 51% or more of boeing's senior management to be aircraft engineers. I mean, the biggest change made between their years of dominance in the airplane industry, and their current series of unfortunate events is that their management went from people who build airplanes to people who build profits.
And people that assumed they could increase those profits while divesting quality and logistics to new subcontractors and at the same time telling them to charge less for parts, or else. Boeing's accountant profiteering managers and planned "You have to give them to us cheaper as you need us.", are still scratching their heads over Spirit saying the heck with that and are now are building Airbus parts at increasing rates, forcing Boeing to compete for factory space. Irony at its finest.
@@zakirsiddiqui1 everyone jumps on 'it was the greedy business people' bandwagon
@@smalltime0 maybe it's because if all the times we've heard, "we can increase profits by reducing quality" from all directions, not just boeing.
@paulholmes672 every time i hear so.ebody say they can contract things out cheaper than they can do it in house, the math requires a reduction in quality to offset the cost of adding a middleman.
Problem is, in todays world they more probably negotiate 51% or more woman, aliens, green etc. species than engineers. They are now push this in Europe… Instead capabilities and qualification we are hiring thru some strange and idiotic criteria.
Thanks!
Yes, F-15EX Eagle II
We need more of these informative videos. Thank you Petter.
Excellent, comprehensive analysis, Petter.
Thanks!😊
Thank you!
Until these companies start getting jail time for involved persons or fines that actually hurt them, this will never stop.
13:30 Boeing is redesigning the engine in case a pilot forgets to follow the checklist and leaves the de-icer on in hot dry weather.
This sounds ridiculous, perhaps they should speak to someone from the car industry. If my car can switch off the heating on my rear window if I forget to do it, I am certain a company that installs systems to fly a plane and detect engine fires can find a way to deactivate the de-icing when not needed. Or a sign that Boeing has even bigger issues with design and engineering than it is admitting!
I'm really digging your map of China at 2:49 , where, somehow, it annexed both Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.
and Taiwan
+10 social credit points for Mentour
CCP APPROVED!
Also recognises Kashmir, except the bit China controls
It's a map from 2040.
Whistleblower about to testify gets “suicided”. Hmmm
Airbus CEO - a pilot and engineer 😃
Boing CEO - accountant 😩
Profit over safety
If I threw 340 people out of a plane to make a profit, I wonder how far I would get before I was arrested. Boeing does just that(and more), and hardly anything happens.
Great video Petter! Thanks for providing this information! Learned a lot! 🙂
No mention of COMAC.
Embraer was very luck to don’t have been brought by Boing
Always felt they started going downhill after the Dreamliner battery fires in 2013. Probably started well before that, but that was my WTF moment
I feel like it started earlier, with the new composite rudder delaminations on 737s.
The icing in the cake for me was calling that 2 out of 3 failed space capsule chute deployment a success 😂
When you let shareholders and profits cut corners can’t bitch when it bites you. They took the risk for profits it’s their own fault.
Oh how I miss McDonald Douglas!
Airbus needs to get an A322 design out there as soon as they can.
One of the Elephant in the room for this full story is Southwest (and to a certain degree, Ryanair in Europe). They are single type fleets and Boeing simply updated the 737 instead of going for a clean sheet design just to help them keep fleet commonality. I don't see how Boeing could squeeze out a new iteration from the basic 737 type certificate, so both will need to switch to a new type. If Boeing succeed in bringing them to a new design, they have a fighting chance, if not, they are relegated to a slow decline. Surely, we are talking of a change that will happen 10+ years from now, but they need to start planning for it now if they want to make it happen.
I don´t know if I heard it in another video of Petter or readed it somewhere else: Another problem of Boeing is indeed that they have a narrower range of customers for their most important product: The 737-MAX-Production depends mostly on a relatively small number of really big customers like Southwest, Ryanair, United and Alaska. If only these four customers would jump off from their orders it would be a huge blow for Boeing at a whole. The whole 737MAX8-200 program is specialized on the needs of Ryanair. The whole 737MAX7 program will be specialized on the needs of Southwest. There´re of course other customers, but they would never be able to compensate these few big ones. This is dangerous for Boeing.
In opposite Airbus has a much wider range of customers for their A320neo-family program. Even if all the Indian Airlines, who ordered more than 1500 A320family-aircrafts only in the last year, would jump off as customers, this would of course be a loss for Airbus, but not a really threatening beat. So Airbus does not depend from special wishes of a few big customers.
@@NicolaW72 Long line of airlines waiting to snap up those 1500 A320, too
@@NicolaW72 United has already a few A321 in its fleet and is eager to take more as Petter said. Alaska had A320 in its fleet till a few years ago from the Virgin America merger (such a pity, Virgin America was awesome) so only SWA and Ryanair are really "safe" customers for now. But I doubt Boeing leadership has the leadership skills to play this game.
Both airlines should buy enough Boeing stocks to get a seat at the table and steer the company in the right direction, that might be a matter of survival for them
I don’t on any of their stock and I never will. I don’t buy penny stocks.
Boeing needs to return to being an engineering company first. The world of aviation needs the competition.
They have burned too much cash. Now they deperately need to sale, fast and a lot.
Proper engineering strategy and R&D are just wishful thinking, no time for this, Airbus is way ahead. Plus new various regulations on emission and so on will soon be a new burden.
I agree, I would also bet on Comac too, in a decade or so, I am sure we will have Comac-, exciting times for aviation
@@vikos78 problem is, we're seeing what comes of doing it the other way. If Boeing keeps trying to do that, I doubt things will get better for them.
This is the problem in healthcare also. C-suite is focused on profits only. They have removed the doctors and the humanity from the leadership positions
@@RohankrishnaBcan we please, PLEASE not bring a CCP company into this conversation 😭😭😭
Lockheed should start making large planes again.
2:48 China annexed Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan?
They need to cut out this 60+ year old model and start with a new plane in this segment
That's crazy, I didn't know the laws of physics changed within the last 60 years
Laws of physics don't change, but engineering standards do. Back in the 60s, the engines were a lot smaller and less efficient. And the current airframe just cannot be fitted to modern ones properly anymore. The thinking that a design could be infinitely upgraded killed 338 people. So far. @@robroilen4441
@@robroilen4441well aerodynamics certainly changed lol. We saw how well that bodied with first maxes crashed because there has to be installed MCAS because plane was prone to stall of putting bigger engines on 50+ year old design ;)
It has nothing to do with laws of physics @@robroilen4441
@@tonisimeunic7717 I encourage you to read the actual crash investigations and original certification materials about the plane. It was found multiple times from 2012 to 2022 that the plane is completely stable with or without MCAS.
They waste too much time saving a Cent, instead making quality aircraft
@@danp576 yeah you live in a former nation turned out country that is now run by israelis, extremely decrepit old folks and women. so yeah, not a great outlook.
During my last several years at Boeing, the saying "stepping over dollars to save dimes" was common around many areas...
@@danp576 What exactly are you even trying to say?
And it's costing them billions.
Quality and safety over profits
Maybe Embraer could get a piece of the pie
For a company that 5 years ago, after the MCAS disaster, stated that they were going to focus on safety, they keep dropping the ball and they keep asking for exemptions. Boeing is going to be second place for years to come. I can only hope that their next, clean sheet design, will really start with a clean slate and give them a new start so that by the middle of the next decade, they can claw back out of the pit they dug for themselves.
They didn't drop the ball.
They dropped the bolts.
I don't see how that's possible when the CEO stated that they don't plan on even starting development of a new model within this decade. They may have a new type ready by mid 2040s if all goes reasonably well.
A clean sheet design with an inexperienced workforce could be problematic.
Not only did they not focus on safety, they fired all the QA staff causing door plugs to start falling out of aircraft.
I think their position is perilous. They need a clean sheet replacement of the 737 in the long term. When the new plane launches it will have a few crashes as most new systems do and then Boeing will really struggle in credibility. Especially if basic things like bolts etc. The malaise, sadly, is in the corporate culture. Safety first means a short term hit on shareholder return. There's the rub.
787 isn't built in everett. It is rebuilt right in everett
LOL!
what do you think will be the impact of the C919 aircraft?
RIP John Barnett
I spent my career in the pharmaceutical industry, in quality and regulatory affairs. Safety disasters in pharma may not normally be as dramatic and well publicised as in the aero industry, but if anything I'd guess more lives are potentially at risk. Even so, management, and especially those in sales and marketing, wanted us to bend the rules as far as possible, and the constant pressure can be difficult to resist, day in, day out. In one company I worked at, we were known by marketing as the "sales prevention department". I wonder if it's like that at Boeing.
There have been some safety disasters in pharma that have been dramatic and well published (e.g. Thalidomide).
@@apveening I said "not normally".
@@apveening Sure, but that is 60 years ago. If the the example in your mind is that old, they are doing reasonably good job.
Rofecoxib is a more recent example of a company withholding info about problems with the drug.
@@apveeningno mention of the recent one that's causing 10% excess deaths in the populations that took it then? The fact is that the pharmaceutical industry kill more people than any other.
Uh yeah the scamdemic that just happened a few years ago?
All of the losses suffered from fixed-price defense contracts are clear indication of Boeing's engineering weaknesses and/or serious disconnects between Engineering/Manufacturing Departments and Sales/Marketing (and Upper Management)! Alarm bells went off years ago about losses incurred from the USAF KC-46 aerial tankers (based on the Boeing 767) and to lesser extent USN P-8 (based on the Boeing 737-800).
It is interesting to note that Airbus took 8 years, from cleansheet design in 2006 to flight certification in 2014, for the world leading A-350. Boeing is taking likely 12 years to modernize and upgrade its flagship B-777X from a proven airframe.
Thank you for broadening my knowledge on airliners,procedures and weather condition baswd flying
Is there an airfare discount for sitting at the blow-out plug seat? I can barely get enough fresh air from the overhead vents. Dang Boeing!
Captain Mentor, you are a serious, dedicated, unbiased, and completely honest aviation analyst. As such, we salute you. Your title, "Does Boeing Stand a chance anymore?" is in itself highly significant. The fact that such a subject could even be considered by an observer such as yourself (or any of the rest of us) indicates just how far down the slippery slope Boeing has fallen. Public opinion creates its own reality, and the gradient increases as time goes on. When the slope goes vertical, Boeing is going to be in deep trouble.
I worked with, not for, Boeing on one of the contracts the company I worked for before retirement. It was a only a few years after the McDonnell-Douglas take over. There was still a lot of resentment within the workforce and it showed in various ways, one side not informing the other what was going on, beancounters overruling engineers, etc. I think this has a lot to do with their problems.
when do aircrafts retire? and has that changed over the years?
Hell, there was an inlet cone break off from a SouthWest 737. It wasn't a MAX, but it was the same inlet cone. The debris hit the fuselage and there has been a casualty. So please be considerate!!!!!!!!!!
Here’s some insane food for though, Boeing introduced the 707, 727, 737, AND the freaking 747 in less time than it’s taking for them to release the 777-X.
That’s seriously crazy they managed to design, build, test, and start production of all those ground breaking airframes in such a short time and now the modern Boeing is just truly incompetent. If it weren’t for all the military contracts I don’t see how the company would survive.
GE engine development troubles + Covid?
Yep. And I'd feel safer on any one of those 60s era jets than a brand new Boeing.
@@StratMatt777Excuses.
@@StratMatt777 There were engine development troubles with the B747 as well.
If they were not a major defense contractor I suspect they would have had much harder times at getting repeated bailouts. its not just that they are our only civil airliner company with a huge workforce that gets them easy access to bailouts but its considered a national security issue. They are also one half of ULA which is the only US satellite launch provider other than SpaceX.
"Too big to fail". Here, US government will never let Boeing fail.
US let their metals industries slip away.
Companies like Boeing is the next step.
True. And corruption will secure the US market for them. But if Comac gets serious, the could become the new duopoly (with Airbus) outside the US.
Question is if the public are aboard, after all they are paying the tickets. Or not.
Flight booking pages allowing to sort out flights with the 737 is not necessarily the best foundation to operate with.
Where’s McDonell Douglas? Etc. Yep, they don’t go broke so much as absorbed.
Probably.
If the same route offers an airbus or Boeing option I tend to choose airbus
Looks like they need to start cost cutting measures
Amazing really, once Boeing came up against competition it couldn't crush or buy-out it's really been struggling to keep up.
Americans apparently love competition and believe in market forces dictating, but only when it means American firms are on top.
Airbus is one of the most remarkable projects to emerge out of Europe since WW2, it shows what Europe is capable of when it pools its forces and talents together.
Like the US is an open market anyway - try selling aircraft to the US military without using a US contractor as a front ( and probably having to re-engineer the thing to use local content ).
What do you expect from the most corrupt nation on earth.
Many aerospace companies are effectively part of the Department of Defense. @@Karibanu
@@jamesprice4647 Or the other way around, as it is in other places ( UK waves hi ). Armed forces-govt defence & procurement department-defence contractors are a merry-go-round of carreer posts circling the black hole of defence costs.
That doesn't stop other govts being open to buying abroad ( even France, occasionally! ). I get there's notions of national security, but that also doesn't stop the US buying abroad dressed up as local product... and homegrown contractors are as liable to fail as foreign ones. Just got to have that cut, I guess.
I wonder how many civil Airbus sales there'd be without local construction.
And is highly subsidized with free taxpayer capital infusions
Hmm, wouldn't it make more sense to install a few temperature sensors on the nacelle and have them turn the anti-ice off automatically if it gets too hot? Instead of trying to invent and manufacture new composite parts, they could stop frying them, through the extremely innovative technology of a ... thermostat?
Carbon fiber is not a good heat conductor, isn't it?
@@huwzebediahthomas9193 It is probably better than glass fibers
😂😂😂
Hey up mate I agree totally in this modern world a temp sensor or 50 is a pretty good view ov what's going on with the heat but why wasn't that done on the engine test bed
Then the airplane is grounded when the air temperature sensors fail. Better to design it properly now than to apply a patch to try to prevent the airplane from eating itself.
Thank you. Very intersting
Brilliant analysis, thank you!
‘If you think safety is expensive, try an accident’ - Stelios Haji Ioannou, founder of Easyjet.
Excellent analysis.
Most of the aircraft I travel in are Airbus aircraft, but I have a soft spot for the 737, 747 and 787. I hope Boeing solve their QC issues.. and also stop the bleading out of quality personnel in the design depts and assembly lines.
I agree. Thanks for your nice comment
I prefer Airbus as a passenger, much quieter than Boeing.
Boeing needs to hire Adrian Newey to design the 797 and they will be back on top again!
Once passengers lose confidence in the aircraft product, especially when it involves perceived safety issues, the company took a defensive stand which in the end will be similar to MD's handling of the DC-10. MD eventually addressed the DC-10 safety issues, but by then the damage to the aircraft's reputation was done and the passenger confidence in the product failed. These same executives always delay appropriate decision making to until there is no choice. Since the previous MD executives now run Boeing, I expect a similar outcome, that is Boeing will fail due to shortsighted executives who only have their wallet contents as a priority and to the flying public's reluctance to board their aircraft.
People were flying DC-10s in the 1980s and 1990s with no awareness they were flying on a DC-10. But it took time... time enough for a new generation of people to be produced who hadn't experienced that hadn't experienced the 1970s news cycles (just kidding on that last part). ;)
Well said. At he end of the day "informed" passengers decide the fate of an airline or a type of airplane. Whatever the extra cost I don't want to fly in a plane that has a reputation of losing a door in flight. You might argue it was an accident in a single plane. But the root cause is a lack of QA: if the defect was not detected in a single plane it might occur in multiple planes.
Though it will be hard to measure how many passengers will look ahead of time and make decisions that monetarily affects airlines. As the passenger aren't Boeing's clients accountability from the mass public will be hard.
DC-10s continued to be flown in large numbers long after the celebrated crashes. After the early '80s recession was over, plenty of DC-10s continued to be ordered and sold. It continued to beat the L-1011 in sales competitions, especially for long-haul routes.
"previous MD executives" were gone a long long time ago.
I mean I now look ahead and make sure I’m not on a max or a boeing if I have the option to fly on an airbus
Most international carriers fly the 350 as their flagship now, pretty telling
I'D LOVE IF THE MUSIC DRONING ON WHILE YOU TALK WAS LOWERED.
A lot to unpack
I am relatively new to your channels, and find the content on both your channels really informative and interesting. Keep up the great work!🙂
It's worth mentioning that profit is not just about sales prices for number of aircraft delivered, but also the very significant long-term maintenance profit that comes with each one as well.
Agree, but Boeings focus on short term quarterly numbers is killing them. The guy getting the aircraft delivered on time isn’t concerned about the long term maintenance profits. Removing quality control layers that can be a check on that bias is costing them. I don’t think for a minute that a Boeing employee would intentionally let a defective aircraft leave the plant, but we’re all humans and managers pushing schedule creates a lot of pressure. In this industry 90% quality isn’t good enough.
And now airlines finding problems with the rudder on max's. Amazing
Please do a story about the new engines you mentioned will be coming in 2035. You mentioned this in your Boeing video
The problem may be much deeper. Yesterday I have the production of Steinway Pianos vs. Yamaha Pianos seen. Of course, this is about a completely different product. But the difference was, shortened, Middle Ages vs. Modern times.
Boeing is bust...! Airbus is booming! Emphasis on Quality = $$$ vs Emphasis on Corporate Profit = Ruptured Duck!!!
Boeing needs to scale down the 787 into a Single Isle called 757X. They should also move forward with the Everett 737 line and spread the build limit across their plants.
From ice conditions into a electrical issues and the engine anti ice will stay one ? And if there no more icing conditions exist., Will the engine will melt ?
That word “report / 😮reports” is one that’s used a lot, a very big lot, in Petter’s shows. I love the way he pronounces the end of it. Sounds a bit like “reportsh”. Appart from that, his accent is impeccable! Still his cute Swedish accent slips through from time to time. And I find it charming 😊
I'm Dutch and I do the same...In Nordic languages the trailing "s" is a slightly "hissing" sounds. In English it is closer to a soft "z". It's ed versus ed ;-)
My favourite one is the way he pronounces "jets" ❤
I rather like his pronunciation of zero as "serro" too. :)
If it's Max Boeing, I'm not going!
If it's a boeing, I'm NEVER going!
If it's MAX, I ain't PAX.
I'd rather fly on a Tu-104 than on a 737Max at this point.
@@Pekiii92 should have said: If it's a MAX, I ain't gonna be a PAX
Literally days ago they found that at least 50 737(non-MAX) frames have misplaced rivets that could lead to sudden decompression and hull loss in the air.
Still can't believe they hitmanned that guy
Could it be that management at Boeing is less capable that is needed? Could it be that Boeing is hiring managers from their customers to get more contracts? Is it about Money for managers instead of excellence in the product?
Just having dinner one night with several Boeing gray beards in Renton was enough to really give me pause on flying newer Boeing jets, especially 737 lines. Not just money, but genuine corner cutting. They were more surprised by the recent 737 issues, deadly as they were. These folks were all just waiting out their retirements, struggling to protect the safety of their own work. It was at once so sad and so scary.
Aircraft flight control systems company boardroom meeting when I was there - the MD, head of sales, five senior engineers, and me, R&D department engineering all rounder.
Pilots? A lot of pilots from around the world might have useful views on flight controls.
@@20chocsaday
Really? I worked at several airlines, ran several maintenance bases and we even got into light aircraft manufacturing. Pilots are the last group of people I would call on for wise words, seriously. I remember once having to explain to a senior training Capitan that the reason his car wouldn't move was he was pressing the brake rather than the accelerator.
@@rorykeegan1895in the pilots defense both pedals in an airplane sort of do the same thing. Lol
@@rorykeegan1895 Thanks for that. I had thought it would be easy to get the person involved in the activity thinking of what he needed and what was a distraction.
Once the rot set's in it becomes very hard to stop it. It tends to snowball.
Petter/Mentour,
Fantastic video/analysis - thank you!
Perhaps in a future video you can do an indepth analysis of Airbus. As an American I dont hear much in the media about its strengths/weaknesses/issues.
Paul (in MA USA)
👍 Maybe including the story of Frank Borrman, the man who saved Airbus.
Time to ask for type-rating training on anything Airbus!
there should be a law that bans any company to be listed on NYSE if they are dealing with human safety and transportation.
12:37 "That means that Boeing has gained a lot of new competence around building composite aircraft parts"
I would add the caveat that just because they are building more composite parts, they aren't necessarily gaining competence--having experience and actually learning from and building on that experience are two very different things.
What is the possibility Embraer taking some of the single-aisle market from Airbus and Boeing with its E-Jet family? Seems like Embraer is gaining reputation for quality and efficiency.
The E-Jet cannot compete with the 737/A320. It’s a regional jet
Basically 0. Embreaer deliberately choose to not go toe to toe with Airbus and Boeing by designing the E-Jet family for a niche market segment which wasn't originally served by the two juggernauts. That only changed somewhat with the accuisitaion of the Bombardier C-Series by Airbus.
Another reason for the Airbus & Boeing duopoly is that it's not just about building planes, you need to have the capacity to train thousands of crew on the aircraft type for their certification, the capacity to train the mechanics and the supply and network of parts all over the world
Embraer can realistically only grow slowly developing all that
@@shi01 C Series -> A220, because Boeing tried to abuse "buy america first" to keep bombardier out of the american market. By the time they lost, Airbus had already acquired it. The would try the same... unless they could shallow Embraer. But that is no longer a option.
@@tomstravels520 it can compete with the A220/CSeries though, as intended.
Boeing should be really worried about the A220-500. Maybe they should work on a clean sheet of their own starting now!
Maybe they could either buy Embraer or build a “B717 MAX” plane.
No, there is no 220-500, it would
kill the a320neo
P&W saving boeings ass then with the engine issues with A220
As Mentour Pilot explained in another video, A220 program is not profitable yet. Until they reduce the costs, Airbus will not develop an A220-500.
BTW, did you know that A220 fuselages are manufactured by Spirit?
@@euloge996How? It would likely not hold as many passengers or as much cargo.
Will you be covering the upcoming of Chinese COMAC? Might be a new player in the market in coming years...
Thanks for your amazing work!
I honestly just want to know which boeing planes are absolutely safe to fly on, while which are actually having quality issues consistently.
I've always loved the Boeings I've flown. From KC-135s in the USAF to the B-727, the B-737-200, the 757, 767, and the 777. But Boeing's lost their way. Many have said that they started listening to the MBAs instead of their engineers. I'm sure that's too simple, but an aspect anyway.