Another 737 mishap

Status
Not open for further replies.
What do you make of Stephanie Pope? The WSJ had an interesting profile of her. She is finance type which is strike against in my mind, plus from McD, which in mind is where the problems started - strike two in other words. But her dad and grandfather worked at McD, in what appear to be line / production roles, so that hopefully indicates making great airplanes is a genuine calling and not a case of her selling widgets. We shall see.

Amazing the people who made the 777 are now involved in this. (777 is my favorite Boeing plane; 747 is second.)
I’m not yet certain, the proof, as they say, is in the pudding. She has an unimpressive resume. Her experience is as a bean counter.

Not what I would have hoped for in terms of experience, or temperament.

I’m not sure what to make of her official biography paragraph on this:

“Pope is also a passionate advocate for developing and nurturing our talented Boeing teammates and creating a working environment where every person can thrive. As a member of Boeing’s Executive Council, Pope serves as the executive sponsor of Boeing Women Inspiring Leadership, a business resource group dedicated to increasing gender diversity awareness and promoting diverse representation among women.”

Sounds like more of the fuzzy platitudes to which you earlier referred.

Time will tell.
 
Well, it’s quite clear that the best and brightest weren’t attracted by high pay and no risk.

So, what do you propose?

Maybe, instead of the revolving door across corporations, where the same Cabal of names shows up over and over, it’s time to promote from within the company.

You know, like the military does. Develop Subordinates. Teach them leadership. Promote them up.
All of our CEO’s started as an operations engineer - once they show executive potential - they are sent for an MBA - (even if holding post graduate in engineering) - come back on the short list to complete in the senior ranks …
 
I prefer to only buy tickets for my family on Airbus planes as I personally feel safer on Airbus.
Thought of this claim as I perused Aviation Week…

IMG_3104.webp
 
Thought of this claim as I perused Aviation Week…

View attachment 218173
Interesting information...but could that be because 99% of "incidents" are minor issues that aren't caused by poor quality control? Or are they talking mainly just major incidents such as engine failures or missing fasteners etc?

How do you feel about the fact that Boeing just admitted to forging documentation for inspections that never happened?
 
Interesting information...but could that be because 99% of "incidents" are minor issues that aren't caused by poor quality control? Or are they talking mainly just major incidents such as engine failures or missing fasteners etc?

How do you feel about the fact that Boeing just admitted to forging documentation for inspections that never happened?
My reply was directed at the member who only flew Airbus because they’re more safe.

I’m not gonna rehash every single point I’ve made about Boeing, its quality failures, its leadership, failures, and everything else. I’ve been Crystal clear, and I’ve really don’t have time to go through it all.

The point is, that member had said how much safer airbus airplanes are, and the data suggest he is wrong.
 
My reply was directed at the member who only flew Airbus because they’re more safe.

I’m not gonna rehash every single point I’ve made about Boeing, its quality failures, its leadership, failures, and everything else. I’ve been Crystal clear, and I’ve really don’t have time to go through it all.

The point is, that member had said how much safer airbus airplanes are, and the data suggest he is wrong.
I'm sure I haven't read every post in the 8 pages and I imagine that statistically the people on the 2 max 8 crashes don't mean anything (except to their families). I wouldn't be surprised if another Boeing (whether it be a max or a 787) eventually goes down due to quality control. Based on the number of planes flying, statistically it might still mean nothing...but it sure wouldn't help people's confidence flying them.
Don't forget...a lot of people who worked on building them do not feel safe flying on them.
 
Problem is that anything involving a Boeing aircraft now gets media coverage and the general traveler has formed the mistaken impression that Boeing aircraft are to be avoided and there are many reports of travelers booking away from flights involving Boeings.
Something as common as a tire failure may now get attention from the media, and they'll be sure to mention that the aircraft involved was a Boeing, not that the tire involved was a Michelin or Goodyear, and not that the aircraft left the factory long ago and has had many tire replacements by the airline's techs or their contractor over the years of cycles.
 
I'm sure I haven't read every post in the 8 pages and I imagine that statistically the people on the 2 max 8 crashes don't mean anything (except to their families). I wouldn't be surprised if another Boeing (whether it be a max or a 787) eventually goes down due to quality control. Based on the number of planes flying, statistically it might still mean nothing...but it sure wouldn't help people's confidence flying them.
Don't forget...a lot of people who worked on building them do not feel safe flying on them.
I see.

You didn’t bother to read what I’ve said. Didn’t bother to understand the complexities I’ve posted and just presumed a lack of caring.

Nice.
 
I’m not allowed to fly the airlines that crashed - there are better airlines flying way more of them …
I’m on a 787 in a week - so I’m supposed to be nervous ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom