737 max... what now?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by PimTac
The Boeing 777x just made its first test flight. A couple of videos here. Note the folding wingtips. The first video is long and shows the taxiing part. The second one shows the takeoff. That is one big airplane.

https://youtu.be/fRpUQHoQ_oE

https://youtu.be/z1PlgNwYeWc


Post flight interview of the pilots showed they were very impressed with the 777X performance and handling. Hopefully, it's trouble free from here on out to the point they start making customer deliveries for use.


Well, what else could Boeing factory pilots say?
I hope that Boeing got its mojo back with this program.
The MAX has proven a disastarous quagmire while the 787 may prove to be the highest volume unprofitable transport program in history.
The 777X is supposed to enter service in 2021. I hope that flight testing and opening of the envelop goes well without any gotchas found.
Boeing could use a win and for those who favor larger airliners this is the largest one on current offer.
 
Originally Posted by PimTac
She did look impressive taxiing past the other aircraft. Those wings are huge.


It's definately a nice looking aircraft.
 
Originally Posted by PimTac
She did look impressive taxiing past the other aircraft. Those wings are huge.



That whole aircraft is HUGE!
 
Saw a photo in the Omaha World Herald this AM of a 737 Max landing in Lincoln yesterday. Went on to Kansas City. Boeing engineers checking out the new software updates.
 
Originally Posted by Yah-Tah-Hey
Saw a photo in the Omaha World Herald this AM of a 737 Max landing in Lincoln yesterday. Went on to Kansas City. Boeing engineers checking out the new software updates.


According to what I can glean reading here and there, Boeing has come up with a software and crew training solution that should make all of the regulators happy.
Meanwhile, the FAA has seemingly adopted an old Who ballad as their mantra and so will not be rushed in reaching any decision on RTS.
 
Originally Posted by Mr Nice
So 737 MAX should be flying passengers before the end of the year ?


Well, one operated by WN flew us MCO>SJU about a year ago, but RTS should happen by the third quarter of this year.
Getting all of the grounded delivered aircraft as well as those built but undelivered flying again will be quite a project along with the need to get production going, especially among the many suppliers Boeing needs.
When all the costs are calculated, this will end up as Boeing's second consecutive money-losing program, with the 787 being the first.
 
Last edited:
The harder they try to save money the more they will they lose. So the solution is they did not cost cut hard enough. Next one they cost cut and outsourced even more. This fiasco happened. So for their next act??????


Rod
 
Originally Posted by ragtoplvr
The harder they try to save money the more they will they lose. So the solution is they did not cost cut hard enough. Next one they cost cut and outsourced even more. This fiasco happened. So for their next act??????


Rod


Those executives needed that cash for their bonuses!

And to think they were about to pull the trigger on the wide body (two row) 797/NMA. That would have made 5 widebodies in production and 1 embarrassingly outdated narrowbody. They'd be absolute fools not to make an all-new, state of the art narrowbody to replace the 737 now.

I see Airbus had a record 274 orders in January 2020. Boeing? Zero.

Classic corporate greed. Executives make out like bandits, tens of thousands of workers gets completely screwed.
 
Originally Posted by E365
Originally Posted by ragtoplvr
The harder they try to save money the more they will they lose. So the solution is they did not cost cut hard enough. Next one they cost cut and outsourced even more. This fiasco happened. So for their next act??????


Rod


Those executives needed that cash for their bonuses!

And to think they were about to pull the trigger on the wide body (two row) 797/NMA. That would have made 5 widebodies in production and 1 embarrassingly outdated narrowbody. They'd be absolute fools not to make an all-new, state of the art narrowbody to replace the 737 now.

I see Airbus had a record 274 orders in January 2020. Boeing? Zero.

Classic corporate greed. Executives make out like bandits, tens of thousands of workers gets completely screwed.


Oh so cynical.
Do you really believe that the suits in Chicago haven't had an epiphany after two financially disastrous programs?
I think that they must have had, since those same suits don't get well compensated for producing money losing product.
The BOD has a fiduciary responsibility to the common shareholders, not to corporate management.
This is a legal obligation and is enforceable through shareholder suits, which could pierce the corporate veil and fall upon board members and management personally.
 
Originally Posted by fdcg27
Originally Posted by E365
Originally Posted by ragtoplvr
The harder they try to save money the more they will they lose. So the solution is they did not cost cut hard enough. Next one they cost cut and outsourced even more. This fiasco happened. So for their next act??????


Rod


Those executives needed that cash for their bonuses!

And to think they were about to pull the trigger on the wide body (two row) 797/NMA. That would have made 5 widebodies in production and 1 embarrassingly outdated narrowbody. They'd be absolute fools not to make an all-new, state of the art narrowbody to replace the 737 now.

I see Airbus had a record 274 orders in January 2020. Boeing? Zero.

Classic corporate greed. Executives make out like bandits, tens of thousands of workers gets completely screwed.


Oh so cynical.
Do you really believe that the suits in Chicago haven't had an epiphany after two financially disastrous programs?
I think that they must have had, since those same suits don't get well compensated for producing money losing product.
The BOD has a fiduciary responsibility to the common shareholders, not to corporate management.
This is a legal obligation and is enforceable through shareholder suits, which could pierce the corporate veil and fall upon board members and management personally.

If epiphany happens just like that, no company would go under.
 
Originally Posted by Mr Nice
Is Boeing a good stock buy or will more bad news drag the price lower ?




I would dabble in it.
 
Can't agree.
Most companies that fail go through a long, steady decline, kinda like how you'd boil a frog. By the time BOD and senior management figure things out, it's just too late. We can both think of a couple examples of this.
Others fail because they're little more than Ponzi schemes that are sooner or later revealed for what they are, often after taking huge amounts of investor money into the toilet.
Many examples of this.
Still others decline because they refuse to embark on bold new departures but merely develop the status quo while competitors reach for the next level.
MD is a good example of this and yet there are more of their latest sixties design development flying than there are of Boeing's.
In Boeing's case, it embarked upon a brilliant new program with the 787 that gained a thousand orders before it even flew.
Sounds like a sure thing, right?
We know how that went.
In the second case, Boeing developed an existing aircraft which it knew better than you know the back of your hand.
Through lapses in program management, they ended up with an aircraft that easily equaled the operating efficiency of the single aisle Airbus but that had an inbuilt software problem that had many people crossing their fingers but nobody asking any hard questions before EIS.
We also know how that went.
This is how Boeing management has reached an epiphany.
If they haven't, then these folks are not nearly as bright as I give them credit for being.
I suspect that the days of penny wise and pound foolish program and corporate management at Boeing have ended. It's just too costly to try to be cheap.
You should hope as much that you're wrong as I do that I'm right.
 
I'm sure many heads are rolling at Boeing over all of this. Should be a huge lessons learned. Seems every big company needs one of those about every 10 years to keep them heading in the right direction.
 
Originally Posted by fdcg27
Can't agree.
Most companies that fail go through a long, steady decline, kinda like how you'd boil a frog. By the time BOD and senior management figure things out, it's just too late. We can both think of a couple examples of this.
Others fail because they're little more than Ponzi schemes that are sooner or later revealed for what they are, often after taking huge amounts of investor money into the toilet.
Many examples of this.
Still others decline because they refuse to embark on bold new departures but merely develop the status quo while competitors reach for the next level.
MD is a good example of this and yet there are more of their latest sixties design development flying than there are of Boeing's.
In Boeing's case, it embarked upon a brilliant new program with the 787 that gained a thousand orders before it even flew.
Sounds like a sure thing, right?
We know how that went.
In the second case, Boeing developed an existing aircraft which it knew better than you know the back of your hand.
Through lapses in program management, they ended up with an aircraft that easily equaled the operating efficiency of the single aisle Airbus but that had an inbuilt software problem that had many people crossing their fingers but nobody asking any hard questions before EIS.
We also know how that went.
This is how Boeing management has reached an epiphany.
If they haven't, then these folks are not nearly as bright as I give them credit for being.
I suspect that the days of penny wise and pound foolish program and corporate management at Boeing have ended. It's just too costly to try to be cheap.
You should hope as much that you're wrong as I do that I'm right.

WHat makes you think they are not bright? Question is what are motives of those people? Do not underestimate hubris.
 
My guess is that Boeing planned to try out new technologies on their flagship wide-bodies, eventually gaining enough experience to migrate what worked into a new narrow-body design.

Meanwhile Airbus is doing almost the opposite, pouring a lot of R&D into narrow-bodies. That isn't instantly profitable, but that work gets shared into the whole product line.
 
Originally Posted by mk378
My guess is that Boeing planned to try out new technologies on their flagship wide-bodies, eventually gaining enough experience to migrate what worked into a new narrow-body design.

Meanwhile Airbus is doing almost the opposite, pouring a lot of R&D into narrow-bodies. That isn't instantly profitable, but that work gets shared into the whole product line.


Not really.
The A380 and the A350 are technically more sophisticated designs then is the single aisle Airbus and the A330 is as well.
The difference between the earlier single aisle Airbus and the current model is all in the engines, as is the case with the 737MAX versus the NG.
The primary distinction between the single aisle Airbus and the 737 is that the Airbus was designed from the get-go as a FBW aircraft, so the edge of envelope problems that Boeing found that then necessitated MCAS would never have been an issue with the Airbus.
That the Airbus was designed in a different era and stood much taller on its gear thereby making fitment of larger diameter engines a breeze is yet another point in its favor.
Boeing and Airbus both played the hands they had in bringing these latest development single aisles to market, but Airbus had a much stronger hand to play since they started with a far more modern design.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top