737 max... what now?
- Thread starter Tdog02
- Start date
- Status
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Originally Posted by 4WD
They did that to troll edyvw
LOL. Good for them. My point was, they cannot ask govt. for money and set conditions. They decided not to take money from govt. and go their way, great.
They did that to troll edyvw
LOL. Good for them. My point was, they cannot ask govt. for money and set conditions. They decided not to take money from govt. and go their way, great.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by 4WD
Surreal is calling anything a bail out in the unprecedented circumstances …
It is surreal. They are negotiating, but at the same time saying: we have other sources. There is growing number of those that will make that decision that are saying: you know, those 16.6 million people that filed for unemployment do not have other sources. So yeah, it is bail out.
So the government called Boeing's bluff and Boeing covered it?
I guess Calhoun wasn't just whistlin' Dixie when he said that Boeing had other options available.
This also gives Boeing a number of powerful cheerleaders to aid it in any future attempt at government assistance.
Originally Posted by 4WD
Surreal is calling anything a bail out in the unprecedented circumstances …
It is surreal. They are negotiating, but at the same time saying: we have other sources. There is growing number of those that will make that decision that are saying: you know, those 16.6 million people that filed for unemployment do not have other sources. So yeah, it is bail out.
So the government called Boeing's bluff and Boeing covered it?
I guess Calhoun wasn't just whistlin' Dixie when he said that Boeing had other options available.
This also gives Boeing a number of powerful cheerleaders to aid it in any future attempt at government assistance.
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
They might ask for help on a Teflon coated composite body single aisle running algae derived fuel …🎄
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Originally Posted by fdcg27
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by 4WD
Surreal is calling anything a bail out in the unprecedented circumstances …
It is surreal. They are negotiating, but at the same time saying: we have other sources. There is growing number of those that will make that decision that are saying: you know, those 16.6 million people that filed for unemployment do not have other sources. So yeah, it is bail out.
So the government called Boeing's bluff and Boeing covered it?
I guess Calhoun wasn't just whistlin' Dixie when he said that Boeing had other options available.
This also gives Boeing a number of powerful cheerleaders to aid it in any future attempt at government assistance.
Sure, do not disagree. It is the political game in the end.
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by 4WD
Surreal is calling anything a bail out in the unprecedented circumstances …
It is surreal. They are negotiating, but at the same time saying: we have other sources. There is growing number of those that will make that decision that are saying: you know, those 16.6 million people that filed for unemployment do not have other sources. So yeah, it is bail out.
So the government called Boeing's bluff and Boeing covered it?
I guess Calhoun wasn't just whistlin' Dixie when he said that Boeing had other options available.
This also gives Boeing a number of powerful cheerleaders to aid it in any future attempt at government assistance.
Sure, do not disagree. It is the political game in the end.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
I think it's more like Boeing doesn't want a partner/stakeholder like the gov't because they don't want them trying to steer the company.
I think it is more complicated than that.
As Bob Gates, former SecDef wrote in his book: it would be nice if congressional delegation from Washington state would show up at the meeting with notes that are not printed on Boeing memorandum.
I think it's more like Boeing doesn't want a partner/stakeholder like the gov't because they don't want them trying to steer the company.
I think it is more complicated than that.
As Bob Gates, former SecDef wrote in his book: it would be nice if congressional delegation from Washington state would show up at the meeting with notes that are not printed on Boeing memorandum.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
I think it's more like Boeing doesn't want a partner/stakeholder like the gov't because they don't want them trying to steer the company.
I think it is more complicated than that.
As Bob Gates, former SecDef wrote in his book: it would be nice if congressional delegation from Washington state would show up at the meeting with notes that are not printed on Boeing memorandum.
That kind of communication went out with Scoop Jackson and Warren Magnuson . The people in place now have other priorities.
Plus it's not a Washington company any longer.
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
I think it's more like Boeing doesn't want a partner/stakeholder like the gov't because they don't want them trying to steer the company.
I think it is more complicated than that.
As Bob Gates, former SecDef wrote in his book: it would be nice if congressional delegation from Washington state would show up at the meeting with notes that are not printed on Boeing memorandum.
That kind of communication went out with Scoop Jackson and Warren Magnuson . The people in place now have other priorities.
Plus it's not a Washington company any longer.
Boeing remains very much a State of Washington company.
The suits may now live in Chicagoland, but the engineers and manufacturing staff mostly remain in Washington along with a few in Charleston.
Congressional delegations remain attuned to the interests of the major employers in their jurisdictions, so I'd doubt that much has actually changed.
The suits may now live in Chicagoland, but the engineers and manufacturing staff mostly remain in Washington along with a few in Charleston.
Congressional delegations remain attuned to the interests of the major employers in their jurisdictions, so I'd doubt that much has actually changed.
Originally Posted by fdcg27
Boeing remains very much a State of Washington company.
The suits may now live in Chicagoland, but the engineers and manufacturing staff mostly remain in Washington along with a few in Charleston.
Congressional delegations remain attuned to the interests of the major employers in their jurisdictions, so I'd doubt that much has actually changed.
Bottom of the page gives the employment location breakdown.
https://www.boeing.com/company/general-info/
Boeing remains very much a State of Washington company.
The suits may now live in Chicagoland, but the engineers and manufacturing staff mostly remain in Washington along with a few in Charleston.
Congressional delegations remain attuned to the interests of the major employers in their jurisdictions, so I'd doubt that much has actually changed.
Bottom of the page gives the employment location breakdown.
https://www.boeing.com/company/general-info/
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Important question: after the 797 … what is the next aircraft series ?
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by fdcg27
Boeing remains very much a State of Washington company.
The suits may now live in Chicagoland, but the engineers and manufacturing staff mostly remain in Washington along with a few in Charleston.
Congressional delegations remain attuned to the interests of the major employers in their jurisdictions, so I'd doubt that much has actually changed.
Bottom of the page gives the employment location breakdown.
https://www.boeing.com/company/general-info/
Thanks for guiding me to some current numbers.
Out of ~143K US employees, Boeing provides the paychecks for 71,829 in the State of Washington and the state accounts for about 45% of Boeing jobs worldwide.
Those kinds of numbers would indicate that Boeing still swings some weight with the congressional delegation of Washington.
Originally Posted by fdcg27
Boeing remains very much a State of Washington company.
The suits may now live in Chicagoland, but the engineers and manufacturing staff mostly remain in Washington along with a few in Charleston.
Congressional delegations remain attuned to the interests of the major employers in their jurisdictions, so I'd doubt that much has actually changed.
Bottom of the page gives the employment location breakdown.
https://www.boeing.com/company/general-info/
Thanks for guiding me to some current numbers.
Out of ~143K US employees, Boeing provides the paychecks for 71,829 in the State of Washington and the state accounts for about 45% of Boeing jobs worldwide.
Those kinds of numbers would indicate that Boeing still swings some weight with the congressional delegation of Washington.
Originally Posted by Astro14
That's what Boeing needs to do.
In the meantime:
We have "factories" churning out "pilots" who can't fly effectively when there is a problem with airplane.
They've never been over 30 degrees of bank.
They don't understand flying, much less crew resource management, effective thinking, or handling emergencies.
Regulatory authorities and airlines need to fundamentally change how pilots are trained.
Teach them to actually fly. To think.
Sadly, neither of those things will happen because they are both expensive and difficult.
Boeing will be the scapegoat.
The quick, specious, simple solution: blame the airplane and its manufacturer.
When the problem lies at the intersection of several factors, particularly pilot training and certification.
Not military trained pilot.
That's what Boeing needs to do.
In the meantime:
We have "factories" churning out "pilots" who can't fly effectively when there is a problem with airplane.
They've never been over 30 degrees of bank.
They don't understand flying, much less crew resource management, effective thinking, or handling emergencies.
Regulatory authorities and airlines need to fundamentally change how pilots are trained.
Teach them to actually fly. To think.
Sadly, neither of those things will happen because they are both expensive and difficult.
Boeing will be the scapegoat.
The quick, specious, simple solution: blame the airplane and its manufacturer.
When the problem lies at the intersection of several factors, particularly pilot training and certification.
Not military trained pilot.
Time to introduce the 737 DGA... (Darn Good Airliner)
![[Linked Image]](https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/attachments/usergals/2020/05/full-45634-44441-boeing737dga1.jpg "[Linked Image]")
Originally Posted by BusyLittleShop
Time to introduce the 737 DGA... (Darn Good Airliner)
Were you trolling to see whether anyone would catch the Benny Howard reference?
Shame on you!
Also, the "D" in the Howard DGA didn't stand for "darn", but you already know that.
Time to introduce the 737 DGA... (Darn Good Airliner)
Were you trolling to see whether anyone would catch the Benny Howard reference?
Shame on you!
Also, the "D" in the Howard DGA didn't stand for "darn", but you already know that.
Originally Posted by fdcg27
Were you trolling to see whether anyone would catch the Benny Howard reference?
Shame on you!
Also, the "D" in the Howard DGA didn't stand for "darn", but you already know that.
He he he... Dam Good Airline
Were you trolling to see whether anyone would catch the Benny Howard reference?
Shame on you!
Also, the "D" in the Howard DGA didn't stand for "darn", but you already know that.
He he he... Dam Good Airline
...and it's back, at least in production if not flight.
Boeing has announced that it has resumed production of the MAX in limited numbers, although it hasn't provided any numerical value of units to be produced.
This should help Boeing in solving the various production glitches this type has seen and should also provide a glimmer of hope to the supply chain, not that those companies or their now probably furloughed employees have a lot of options in the current economic climate.
I'd also have to think that the logjam around MAX RTS must be near to breaking up, or one would at least hope that to be the case.
Boeing also said that it would halve the 787 rate, although I'm not sure what that means since the rate was already planned to be reduced.
Are we talking about five or six a month?
Boeing is also to create around 13K new Airbus fans by cutting that many workers from its worldwide payroll.
Boeing has announced that it has resumed production of the MAX in limited numbers, although it hasn't provided any numerical value of units to be produced.
This should help Boeing in solving the various production glitches this type has seen and should also provide a glimmer of hope to the supply chain, not that those companies or their now probably furloughed employees have a lot of options in the current economic climate.
I'd also have to think that the logjam around MAX RTS must be near to breaking up, or one would at least hope that to be the case.
Boeing also said that it would halve the 787 rate, although I'm not sure what that means since the rate was already planned to be reduced.
Are we talking about five or six a month?
Boeing is also to create around 13K new Airbus fans by cutting that many workers from its worldwide payroll.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Originally Posted by fdcg27
...and it's back, at least in production if not flight.
Boeing has announced that it has resumed production of the MAX in limited numbers, although it hasn't provided any numerical value of units to be produced.
This should help Boeing in solving the various production glitches this type has seen and should also provide a glimmer of hope to the supply chain, not that those companies or their now probably furloughed employees have a lot of options in the current economic climate.
I'd also have to think that the logjam around MAX RTS must be near to breaking up, or one would at least hope that to be the case.
Boeing also said that it would halve the 787 rate, although I'm not sure what that means since the rate was already planned to be reduced.
Are we talking about five or six a month?
Boeing is also to create around 13K new Airbus fans by cutting that many workers from its worldwide payroll.
Boeing needs desperately MAX version to compete with XLR.
...and it's back, at least in production if not flight.
Boeing has announced that it has resumed production of the MAX in limited numbers, although it hasn't provided any numerical value of units to be produced.
This should help Boeing in solving the various production glitches this type has seen and should also provide a glimmer of hope to the supply chain, not that those companies or their now probably furloughed employees have a lot of options in the current economic climate.
I'd also have to think that the logjam around MAX RTS must be near to breaking up, or one would at least hope that to be the case.
Boeing also said that it would halve the 787 rate, although I'm not sure what that means since the rate was already planned to be reduced.
Are we talking about five or six a month?
Boeing is also to create around 13K new Airbus fans by cutting that many workers from its worldwide payroll.
Boeing needs desperately MAX version to compete with XLR.
Last edited:
Boeing's most desperate need ATM is a MAX version that's considered airworthy by FAA and EASA.
Even then, Boeing has a huge backlog of completed but undelivered aircraft that most airlines will do everything they can to defer accepting in the current environment.
All that inventory sitting on the ground with little likelihood of monetizing most of it for at least a couple of years more.
Even then, Boeing has a huge backlog of completed but undelivered aircraft that most airlines will do everything they can to defer accepting in the current environment.
All that inventory sitting on the ground with little likelihood of monetizing most of it for at least a couple of years more.
- Status
Similar threads
