advertisement


Another problem for Boeing 737 Max

I am deeply suspicious about the "apparent suicide" of a man in "good spirits" in the middle of his depositions.
Suicidal people are often in good spirits once they have earnestly decided to end their life. It smells fishy nonetheless.
 
Last year, Ed Pierson was supposed to fly from Seattle to New Jersey on Alaska Airlines. He boarded his flight, but then he had an urgent discussion with the flight attendant, explaining that as a former senior Boeing engineer, he'd specifically requested that flight because the aircraft wasn't a 737 Max:

https://www.cnn.com/travel/boeing-737-max-passenger-boycott/index.html

But for operational reasons, Boeing had switched out the equipment on the flight and there he was on a 737 Max, about to travel cross-continent, and he didn't feel safe doing so. He demanded to be let off the flight. His bags were offloaded and he walked back up the jetbridge after telling the spooked flight attendant, "I can’t go into detail right now, but I wasn’t planning on flying the Max, and I want to get off the plane."


 

Boeing awards outgoing CEO Dave Calhoun a 45% pay rise

$32.8mn package comes as the manufacturer tries to contain a crisis of confidence in its quality (FT).
 

Boeing awards outgoing CEO Dave Calhoun a 45% pay rise

$32.8mn package comes as the manufacturer tries to contain a crisis of confidence in its quality (FT).
In our times, it's the contrary which would be worrying.
 
If every single maintenance error on Airbus aircraft was publicised, the public would be very worried. That just doesn’t suit the agenda. Yet.
 
I can't but help having Bill Watterson spring to mind whenever I catch up on this thread - 'Scientific Progress Goes Boink!'

His observations, sometimes subtle, on the march of technology and the assumptions we make. And how much of it is not only unnecessary, but has adverse effects, or is quite pointless. But we invent a use, or need, for it; come to rely on it; take it for granted; assume it will always be fit for purpose. Until it isn't. . . And then the CEO is awarded a 45% pay rise as a reward . . . for his loyalty to a failing product/business. Pure Watterson.


John
 
Last edited:
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
The two 737maxs that fell out of the sky were not down to maintenance errors.
No, but the fact that an engine cowling (which is removed for maintenance by the airline's own maintenance staff) was not properly reattached is much more likely to be down to a failure of maintenance than a design or manufacturing issue, especially in a 9 year old aircraft. So this one is probably on the airline, not Boeing. Yet it is being touted in some circles as 'yet another Boeing **** up'.
 
Been on a few of those, stuck post it notes on boards, done the role playing (but not unfortunately in the D&D manner - so no “Fireball spells at one hundred paces“), and similar

But to misquote l’empereur Napoleon, “All plans go to rats on first contact with the management.”
 
If every single maintenance error on Airbus aircraft was publicised, the public would be very worried…..

On the other hand, if Airbus had had two planes go down like that, US lawyers would have sued the company into the ground. Not so with Boing of course.
 
On the other hand, if Airbus had had two planes go down like that, US lawyers would have sued the company into the ground. Not so with Boing of course.
But those incidents weren’t the topic at that point in the thread. The constant publicising of any incident they can find achieves nothing for Boeing, airlines, passengers, airport employees, maintenance industry employees,etc etc. It only serves the lying, pointless, moronic media and their moronic readers.
 


advertisement


Back
Top