Not saying I agree with it all but I assume it’s referring to this. Other articles as well as the book that’s mentioned:
https://qz.com/1776080/how-the-mcdonnell-douglas-boeing-merger-led-to-the-737-max-crisis
Alaska Airlines AS1282 door blow out!
- Thread starter edyvw
- Start date
- Status
https://qz.com/1776080/how-the-mcdonnell-douglas-boeing-merger-led-to-the-737-max-crisis
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Because management merged! Technically, Boeing bought MD. But, in a deal like that, Boeing won't fire MD employees. They stay, and in this case, they profited from it more that Boieng managers. This is good summery. You have numerous sources, documentaries about it:
https://qz.com/1776080/how-the-mcdonnell-douglas-boeing-merger-led-to-the-737-max-crisis
Here is one short paragraph from article:
"given senior positions following the acquisition, with the company’s head, Harry Stonecipher initially appointed chief operating officer and holding more than twice the number of shares in the company as Condit, who remained CEO. Stonecipher and John McDonnell, formerly the chair of McDonnell Douglas’ board, were now the two largest individual shareholders of the merged companies."
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
We might be days from finding out a tech did not do his/her job a few months back - but it’s MD culture from 1997 …
I "liked" the line about buying Boeing with Boeing's own money.
Seems the MD execs held a lot of MD stock and that gave them an outsized amount of power during the merger.
What is hard to say is would many of the culture changes have happened anyway since that was/is the trend. It just took longer for it to impact (pardon the pun) aerospace industries.
What role does Spirit Aerosystems have? Their stock is suffering as well.
Are these planes safe?
Well of course they are because the doors don't blow off.
What about this one?
Well the doors blew off.
Is it safe?
Is it safe to have the doors blow off? Well, no because the doors blew off.
Are other planes safer?
Well, yes because the doors didn't blow off.
Well of course they are because the doors don't blow off.
What about this one?
Well the doors blew off.
Is it safe?
Is it safe to have the doors blow off? Well, no because the doors blew off.
Are other planes safer?
Well, yes because the doors didn't blow off.
Did anyone die?
Because on other planes, when something happens, everyone dies.
So, while this is scary to the uninformed, and makes for sensationalist posts on social media, it isn’t nearly the risk that, say, a flight control flaw presents.
I am always amused at this kind of specious, superficial analysis-
ignoring dozens of far more significant factors, like maintenance practices, pilot training, operating procedures, engine reliability, operating environment - things that have caused fatalities - to focus on one thing, and draw a “conclusion”.
Might as determine airline safety by the color of the airline logo…
I'm from the government and I'm here to help!
I’d love to compile all the times people have said, “I’ll never fly on a ____” after an incident with that type of aircraft.
Happens on these pages as well.
Add up all those “rush to judgement” posts, and every single aircraft type has been mentioned. Every one.
And in every case, the more significant causal factors were ignored.
Let’s not forget the crucial design flaw of the 777… brilliantly analyzed and publicized by CNN…
I don’t see how anyone would ever fly on that airplane again…
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Most RCA’s come out people and process - that’s what audits are for in advance - in fact the Max’s that crashed were airlines I’m not allowed to fly
MolaKule
Staff member
Before coming to Rockwell Collins, I worked at the Boeing Wichita facility as an aerospace scientist for 20 years. At that time you could work in either the commercial division or the defense side.
Later, when Boeing left Wichita, Boeing sold most of the manufacturing facilities to Spirit Aerosystems. Spirit renegotiated the factory union contract. Scientists and engineers were left to fend for themselves, but Spirit hired those people who wanted to stay in the area. The Oliver street facilities where the military engineering was done is now a ghost town.
Here is what Spirit does:
https://www.spiritaero.com/programs/commercial/commercial-programs/
Before the exit from Wichita, some young hotshot manager from St. Louis was installed as the manager of the Military facilities. The managerial staff was then rocked with sex scandals. Our top notch Research facilities were being gutted and closed and most of us on the major Mil projects were going" "WTH?" Then we find we long-term aerospace scientists and engineers were being targeted for lay-offs because of a so-called "downturn" in Defense projects. Again, "WTH?" because we were busy with B1B, B-52, AF-1, KC-135, etc, etc., projects.
Later we find this was a cost cutting measure by this jerk manager in order to impress his superiors. After leaving, we find an Age discrimination Class Action suit was filed against Boeing because we long-term aerospace scientists and engineers were being "paid too much" and this was upsetting his bottom line.
I can say that except for the last year there, I had the most enjoyable and highly technically satisfying job of my career. Aerospace scientists and engineers that I worked with were top notch but the management changes and cost cutting measures really screwed things up.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
The lack of government oversight during certification is one of the major issues. For the last 30 years FAA was grossly underfunded to perform proper certification oversight. MAX development is an example of that. A bunch of things were "self-certified." Basically, the government allowed these manufacturers to check themselves, and they said: "We raise our right hand, we will be honest."
Part of the reason why FAA now is in overdrive mode is trust. During those two crashes where 346 people died, the FAA messed up that, allowing politics to get ahead of it. Now, they are overly cautious because MAX has bad reputation and they want to project confidence. This will help Boing and airlines too. Of course, the stock market does not like it, but the stock market is the reason why Boeing is in this trouble in the first place.
Spirit makes the fuselage.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
MolaKule
Staff member
Exactly. We all know that major media never sensationalizes these type of stories with silly, inaccurate statements, and rarely makes any corrections to their ridiculous assumptions.
Before making armchair judgement calls, let's see what the NTSB report divulges.
I'm just a spare time GA pilot and an aviation enthusiast, and I find the general media's coverage of most things aviation to be frustrating. With your level of experience and knowledge I can image it being downright maddening at times....I’d love to compile all the times people have said, “I’ll never fly on a ____” after an incident with that type of aircraft.
Happens on these pages as well.
Add up all those “rush to judgement” posts, and every single aircraft type has been mentioned. Every one.
And in every case, the more significant causal factors were ignored.
Let’s not forget the crucial design flaw of the 777… brilliantly analyzed and publicized by CNN…
I don’t see how anyone would ever fly on that airplane again…
View attachment 197291
Last edited:
I could say a bunch about that. I will however, wait and learn.
That’s the first I have heard of this - the loose bolts on inspections. So, I doubt it is official. As I outlined above, we are waiting on the AD from Boeing.
- Status
Similar threads
