this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2024
87 points (100.0% liked)
Spaceflight
609 readers
9 users here now
Your one-stop shop for spaceflight news and discussion.
All serious posts related to spaceflight are welcome! JAXA, ISRO, CNSA, Roscosmos, ULA, RocketLab, Firefly, Relativity, Blue Origin, etc. (Arca and Pythom, if you must).
Other related space communities:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Related meme community:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Since there will be no one on it, I'm sort of hoping it crashes and burns so NASA is justified in their decision and Boeing gets in more shit.
I hope it doesn't just because of all the pollution
Your hope is nothing but a circlejerk attitude. Your hate is directed at a brand, rather than at the actual people responsible, who have all already dropped the bag and run away from business. Your misdirected malice does nothing to make anything better, and instead lets the real villains get away.
I can't think of an example of a corporation that came back from such a state of disrepair.
Also, never seen a company that upped their product quality after bringing it below a decent level.
This seems theoretically possible, but must be very hard to pull off. Maybe it's better to just let it fall, and let a new organization/competition take it's niche.
I can't think of any successful examples in manufacturing, but maybe others could pitch some in.
Starliner isn't going anywhere, the flaws so far have been identified and mostly addressed. The only outstanding one is the doghouse arrangement of control thrusters, which has apparently led to overheating. This likely isn't anything anyone could have predicted.
The failures so far:
Boeing as a brand is heavily tarnished, primarily from the MCAS and door plug issues, however it's also not going anywhere. The company is too heavily entwined with the US military.
Meanwhile the old guard have mostly left the company and dropped the bag, leaving the remaining investors to feel the brunt of everything while they run off with the short term profits. They've won, and all the bitterness people are displaying isn't affecting them.
I'm all for hating on the bullshit from Boeing - and have a particular bug in my bonnet against the former McDonnell Douglas C-suite levels who have dragged the company through the mud, performing the same antics they did at MDD - but the fact is the issues with Starliner have been massively overblown by people looking to jump on a hype bandwagon.
That isn't to say the craft is without issues, nor that some of the issues (1 & 2) shouldn't have happened, but just that people aren't being rational, and the anti-PR noise is annoying and counterproductive.
There are 5779 people I'm more sympathetic toward than investors:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_incidents_involving_the_Boeing_737
Most of those weren't anything to with Boeing.
The Max was a stupid, stupid set of mistakes, really the line needs to be cancelled, and they need to tear the manufacturing management down to the studs.
But Boeings used to be the safest plane, until they bought MD, which made some of the least safe planes this side of Tupolev (A plane so fast it can take you all the way to your grave in 5 minutes).
Let's fire all the shit managers from the merger and start again. Better yet hire one of the senior managers from Lockheed and have them go to town with a blowtorch.
Sure, I share your displeasure with Boeing's airline division. However a significant portion of those were just accidents, ones that couldn't have reasonably been predicted and were readily learned from and corrected. And many of those were not the fault of Boeing's design.
The crimes started after MDD and Boeing merged, when the MDD directors came onto the Boeing board and then performed the same antics they'd done at MDD that run that business into the ground. Things like ignoring issues at design stage, refusing to acknowledge the issue until after 2 major fatal accidents had occured, and "gentleman's agreements" with the FAA to get around safety rules. These happened with the DC-10, and then they happened with the MAX.
But Boeing was at one point one of if not the most respected engineering aviation companies. Don't revise history based on current events. In any case, we're talking about the space division here, where they do maintain some of the original professionalism and standards Boeing used to have running in its blood. This is evidenced by the fact it was Boeing engineers who raised the issues, rather than trying to cover them up and leave them for NASA to find.
Also, I was merely pointing out that your malice should be pointed at these directors - the people who let people die and then ran off with all the money before the business started to fail.
The directors belong in prison. Slagging off the Boeing brand and jerking off over it is not in pursuit of that goal.
I'm holding out some hope that if Boeing stops winning any new space contracts that the next generation of bean counters will learn some kind of lesson about not gutting a company. I'm probably too optimistic.
The thing is they're entwined with the military, eg the X-37, so they probably will keep getting things like that. No other company makes space vehicles for the US that I'm aware of. Maybe Lockheed Martin have some secret stuff, but with space it's incredibly difficult to get things up there and remain unnoticed.
They won't, their options already vested a decade ago.
It's like seeing the light from a star thousands of years ago, they booked the earnings from slashing engineering and nailed their compensation package.
All it taught them was to be careful to get out at the peak.
Damn dude/dudetre, you're really committed to your username.
So uh, is this a performance art, like acting, or are you actually really geeked up right now?
Nah lol it's a name I chose donkey's years ago, when I was naive and didn't know about the drug reference. I wanted a username that was somewhat non-descript and like a 90's hacker name.
Never tried meth, never will.
In any case, do you actually have a point that's on topic to the discussion? Or are you just hoping your ad hominem attack will lead to people jerking you off in a circle?