Their biggest issue right now is reputation. They pre-emptively get blamed by press and public for incidents that might not be their fault. Jeju Air is a great example.
@@MentourNow JEJU Air had black boxes stop recording convineantly few minutes before the landing ... Wonder why . Boeing is not "issue free" in JEJU. Chrash
Hopefully this is true. Focusing on your core business is the only real way for a successful future. Wringing as much money put as you can is a recipe for failure.
@@seanrodgers1839 i would argue that having at least some degree of control over every aspect of your buisness is more important than focussing on the core buisness. Because if boeing took this "focussing" to the extreme they would buy complete aircraft from elsewhere, have a guy slap the boeing logo on them (and obviously that guy is a subcontractor), and then sell them as boeings. cause selling aircraft is their core buisness.
As a retired QA inspector, who worked in manufacturing my entire life, I admit to be unfamiliar with the term "traveled work'. But statistically, moving any assembly outside of a carefully studied and documented process sets off alarm bells. Also, not mentioned here is worker morale. In manufacturing in this country, workers are constantly asked to work faster and more efficiently, which causes stress, while the rewards flow almost entirely to management and shareholders.
@@reubenmorris487 It is obvious that in that case a fuselage was received that was supposed to be finished to a certain degree and wasn't.......or the work was undone by another station to get other work done and not put back correctly !!!
My favorite corp-speak and financial term is "productivity gain". While a subset of productivity gain can be ascribed to improved technology, I would wager that the majority of the productivity gain over the last 40 years has been achieved entirely by not replacing workers that retire and dividing their work among all the workers that are left behind in the department . My sister works at Coca Cola Consolidated, and that is the pattern they have followed. My sister is now doing the work of about 10 people she once knew when she was hired 35 years ago.
@@evogsr4807it's bold to be so certain that nothing changes when the plane has been moved outside and exposed to the elements after undergoing assembly steps that are meant to happen later. If the travelled work requires disassembly (to get access to the location) then there's duplicate QA.
As a retired Boeing 30 year production worker I am actually glad to see this slow ramp up back into production. This gives the managers, production engineers and particularly line workers to get the various aircraft that had traveled work done and completed before doing the actual line back up and running. Having all the various "traveled" work done and the workers back to the various spots on the production line where they belong will also make it a smoother transition to full production. This also gives the company time to get the safety and production inspections back up to speed on the line. This is actually a positive for the long term. I have other things I think about the way things were done in the past and one of them is after strikes of which I was personally involved in that maybe looking at the penny wise but pound foolish got Boeing to the state that they came to be.
Interesting how working in the aviation industry can give someone a certain sensitivity and almost…. Instinctive ability to look at the reason for something happening. I looked at how Boeing was being slow to resume production and thought. “Oh they’re probably just updating their safety culture and processes given all that’s happened.” And then I felt a sense of being too optimistic and naive. That’s how bad the reputation of Boeing has gotten. We out on the ramp are obsessed with safety. We’re not sure what happened at Boeing to stray so far. We know some of the things we do could cause bad things to happen and nobody wants to be “that person” whose shoddy work caused a plane crash.
@@mikoto7693 We had the safety culture from the beginning and the entire 30+ years that I worked there from 1987 to 2017 but what happened was the culture above us in the ivory towers that bleed down to line managers. I once had a manager that should never have been in the job as more then once I was assigned to traveled work and it had no required prior inspections done before it was to be covered by my installations. I would always refuse to even put my name on the job and was treated like dirt by the manager. I then reminded him that you can not pull over at 30,000 feet and fix the problem and if this was to be the way he continued to do what he was doing I could easily go to the FAA
Petter isn’t only a master aviator but also a master storyteller! He could narrate a random owners manual and I would probably watch it! Like I always say Petter is part man, part machine!
I am 87years old and have been with computers in one form or another since 1964. I have flown (as) stand-by in five continents and dozens of countries - my daughter works for one of the three biggest airlines in the US. I'm a retired process engineer for a hospital in the central US - specialized as an Oracle DBA. Some of the things we always looked for in the health areas was the same as the processes you speak of in this clip - -- it's one very bad thing to have a side door blow off, but put a person on the operating table and you don't want to blow out a computerized tool on the table. A second role I had after retiring from health care was about five years I worked for General Electric Aviation in their offices in Dayton and Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. Any engine part that was returned to GE for repair or improvement had its own serial number. ANY work done on a part, from getting the request, to opening the box it came in, to the ID of every person that did ANY work on it, was documented in the data base. I like to tell people that if that were ever in a plane crashed due to the failure of a part in a GE engine in our data base, they could RIP that it was possible to find what repair worker messed up - in jest, but true.
You've made an excellent comparison between aviation and healthcare. You're right to note that virtually everything in aviation from part manufacturing to cockpit conversations is recorded. When something goes wrong, the problem can be traced back to its source. That is good. The difficulty with healthcare is that patient privacy has to be respected. Many patients would not want their conversations with their physicians or nurses recorded. Most would not want their surgeries video recorded. Virtually the only data trail depends on what staff type into computers or what they can recall weeks or even months later. That makes it much more difficult to trace problems back to their source. That said, there is much that healthcare can learn from aviation. In aviation, the words used are carefully chosen to prevent mistakes. "Cleared to takeoff" is only used when that is meant. In contrast, when I worked nights on a pediatric hem-onc unit it bothered me no end that the terms were easy to confuse. "Afebrile" was difficult to distinguish from "febrile" despite being of vital importance. The same is true of the "hypo-" and "hyper-" terms. They sound alike but have opposite meanings. And unlike the conversations between pilots and ATC, orders were typically ill-defined. I might be told to monitor a child's blood pressure but given no numbers to watch for. The possibilities ranged from "doesn't matter" to the need to insist that a child's attending physician should be awakened in the middle of the night. The communication lacked the clarity of that in aviation. I describe some of that experience in a book I wrote, _My Nights with Leukemia._
Great, great comment. So many parallels and medicine has a lot to learn from aviation, especially in terms of an open, no blame safety culture where everyone learns. @@Inkling777
Not only would they be able to find the part and workers, they'd almost certainly find _why_ that worker(s) messed up, due to the notes or the process or both. I seem to recall an incident in the Southeastern US where a prop plane went down, and they traced the issue back to the technician who'd worked on the prop blade that failed (who was horrified, rather unsurprisingly)--but it wasn't him that got the blame as much as the process or lack thereof with what he was doing. I worked at a space company for a few years, and we'd leave notes, lots of notes. If an engine fouled because some debris was left, they'd be looking for: where did the debris come from, who noted it or missed it before it busted loose, what process was used, did this person(s) have proper training and/or a history, and if there's a bunch of us on a particular area then who did what? Fortunately, never happened while I was there. I think I got tracked down once because someone didn't like the work I'd done--at which point, I pulled the drawing and the inspection tool and showed that my work was in compliance with the drawing, which means it's Not My Problem that they didn't like it. (Drawings were revised fairly shortly after that--while they were being revised I had the opportunity to provide input, which allowed me to point out that certain "critical" dimensions were just going to get cut off anyways so WTF engineers, among other things that made that particular task both faster and higher quality.)
Great analysis Petter...you're spot on. The old expression holds true here: you need to learn how to walk before you can run. Changing one's culture, revamping QA programs and production protocols/procedures doesn't happen overnight. This is not an environment where you hit the ground running. Taking slow and deliberate steps is appropriate and will bear fruit in the long run. Getting it right now is dollar wise, as opposed to their former penny wise philosophy. Kelly Ortberg seems to be the right person for the Job. I'm sure he's rifling through Boeing's corporate management ranks and weeding out the bad apples. Cheers!
I have friends at both Boeing and Spirit Aerosystems. The problems run much, much deeper than can be "fixed" in one year. The McDonnell-Douglas executives and accountants that took over after the 'merger' took almost 20 years to ruin Boeing and it will take a decade to recover the worker and engineering base that cares about the product, and that can only happen after the executive row is purged, preferably suffering the same demises as the victims of their profit taking. Boeing, the corporation, will not and cannot be chastised. They exist because of Faultless Capital (a concept, not a company) - basically money is non-moral, and the corporation exists to make money for investors, therefore no corporate action or omission can be evaluated from a moral standpoint. So planes that crash, plane with self-actuating door plugs, parts that fall off.. only "the market" can judge. My response is that Boeing (executives and board members) and its investors need to experience devastating personal losses to understand that monetized decisions have physical consequences for humans.
this should be the top comment, the problem with boeing is culture. it takes them decades of culture change to become this problematic slob, and that's not gonna get fixed in mere years.
Very enlightened comment. I like that "faultless capital" concept. I would like to add that it's doesn't stop only at Boeing. It's the reason Boeing hollowed out it's engineering capabilities - they are costs to be cut regardless of any long-term effect. It's a symptom of the "financialization" of everything in the US. Companies are no longer production entities. They're financial entities. An executive posture that's very harmful to the long-term health of any company, and the consequences happen well after these decision makers have retired.
It is not in the best interest of the board, shareholders to make a faulty product which damages shareholder value as well as the reputation of the company.
To flesh out what you have said, the JUDICIAL SYSTEM has taken over 100 years to entrench this terrible amoral concept in Corporations. It seems that Henry Ford tried to pay his workers a "living wage" approximately 100 years ago. I have no idea if he was doing this for moral reasons or just to screw over his competitors with his superior capital leverage. But the result was a shareholder lawsuit that said that Henry Ford was endangering the shareholder return on their investment, and they argued that Henry Ford's fudiciary duty was to the shareholders, NOT to his workers or the customers. The lawsuit went all the way to the SCOTUS. SCOTUS ruled in favor of the stockholders and enshrined profits as the primary legal imperative to be considered in all corporate decision making. The SCOTUS has compounded that amoral decision with other decisions against corporate environmental policies and in the even most infuriating Citizens United decision that created an equivalence between a human citizen and a "corporate citizen". Citizen's United equated corporate political contributions with "free speech" and the SCOTUS ruled that a corporation is equivalent to a PERSON and so they had "free speech" rights to contribute to political campaigns and lobby government officials. So couple that with the Henry Ford decision and you have a corporate imperative to manipulate elections and lobby lawmakers if it improves the profit of a corporation. Ludicrous.
I think Ortberg's experience heading up development of the turboencabulator at Rockwell prepared him well for this job. He was the one who identified the side-fumbling issue, which lead to process improvements in production of the spurving bearings.
Our company extensively used turboencabulators. We were especially impressed with the prefabulated Amulite base plate and the panadermic semi-boloid stator slots. Solved so many otherwise indefinable problems for us! Definitely look into one if you are having issues with quasistatic regeneration oscillators.
@quinnocent @@miketo09 These comments literally made me laugh out loud! You two captured the melodramatically pseudo-serious nature of the whole Turboencabulator project perfectly!
boeing will never go bankrupt they will find a way to shovel more money into it kinda like how they shoved 4.6 billions through nasa to boeing to built the capsule
Boeing will not go bankrupt. Boeing is one of three top military corporations in the world supplying the US military as well as other countries. Boeing supplies all US wars, including Ukraine, Gaza, Syria. As a result, Boeing is fully backed by the US gov, including Boeing's commercial division.
@@poruatokin No, that simply will not happen. The US categorically will not allow Boeing to lose out to competition from other countries. In addition Boeing passenger aircraft are used in the US military with aircraft designed for military use as well, and there is also technology sharing.
@ But if the US supported a company with taxpayers money that is going bankrupt, wouldn't that be socialism? Like they did with the banks and the auto industry.
I believe during the 1995 strike it allowed the company to replace obsolete equipment and organize the assembly process to be more efficient and to be honest I have a feeling that strike would have ended sooner if this shuffling of equipment and process had gone faster? ;-) At the time it was rumored that the company had asked the strike leaders to continue the strike so they could finish the upgrade of the factory (soon after some of the strike leaders suspiciously became corporate managers). ;-)
Using the strike as a "reset" button for the whole company seems like a pretty smart move strategically - wonder if that's one piece of advise given from Ortberg's small council?
At 21:30 you ask what can Boeing do besides production quality? I would like to see what you can uncover about Boeing Engineering/Business decisions that set-up Boeing production and the Airline Mtc and Operations for failure. Ie: Per FAR 25; Autopilot (hidden or not) is specifically not allowed to compensate for aerodynamic stability problems And Boeing should also start to follow the intent of FAA design standards even if they are able to navigate around them such reinstalling door lock indications on door that are not being used.
Boeing needs to do these two things: 1) Truly fix the issues in production quality which includes management changes, and getting engineers back in charge of the company. 2) Come up with clean sheet designs for new aircraft to replace the 737 and the 757.
The first takes too much time. The second costs too much money. They will muddle along for the next 5-7 years being propped up directly or indirect by government support (many politicians and infuential people hold Boeing shares and won't standby and watch them crash) and try to latch on to the next generational change in commercial aviation when it happens rather than bringing in such change on their own terms.
@@nrml76 It's been called a moonshot by one of the bean-counter CEOs. The bean-counters made all the wrong decisions. Time to change the culture. Boeing needs to design and produce a new airplane, maybe something based on the 757. They have all the tooling still for the 757, which would make it cheaper, relatively anyway.
@@Saml01 Petter has a secret star trek transporter room. I believe the procedures were tested already in the 1970s. Transporter technology uses destructive teleportation. What you do is just to rig the machinery to forget to destroy the ingoing copy. Then you have two copies of the same person. Costly in energy, but simple in principle. There are legal issues though, like which one has the right to the spouse and the Porsche. cheers! / CS
the 777f and 767f -- both pre Douglas Designs. are the only stable production lines right now. the 757,767,777 are really the best planes boeing has ever built. all 80s or 90s well before the unsafety culture
From someone who had their great grandfather be one of the engineers in the original 737 and 747 up in Seattle it is nice that Boeing is finally working towards getting over their mistake of letting McDonald Douglas management ruin Boeing by putting them in power over the engineers that used to prioritize their engineering/safety over profits. Hoping to continue to see safety and workers/employees working together to keep everyone and everything safe! Hoping they instill a culture of letting people speak up when they see problematic things again. Good on Boeing to take the time needed to fix their problems.
@@dknowles60 That was a long time ago. We are talking about now. Saying it won't work now because a certain person wasn't hired more that 20 years ago does not make sense.
You might think that we in SC weren't affected by the strike-and you could be right in certain terms-but we ALL were affected by the strike in various ways. Those suppliers you spoke of? Well, they supply us also & we struggled with their struggles. There are materials that we obtain thru our west coast facilities & with the strike, these materials were in short supply. Layoffs began to affect workers here, even though we werent on strike. I know what you meant; I hope you can see what I'm saying.
After working in manufacturing for over 40 years, I would like to say that we called JIT, just in trouble. It is only great if everything is in perfect sync, which it is often is not.
I retired in 2007 the month the lawyer became ceo instead of a. Mulaly. After 38 years as an engineer then manager. I could tell in 2007 that they would destroy the company, Alan should have been ceo, as he proved at ford. I am glad to see he has been brought in to help the recovery. GREAT idea. Maybe there is hope.
The main reason is the timing of when we returned. The last two weeks of December is vacation for all the workers. It was easier for everyone to focus on certs and maintenance than production. Power on for the first 777x for a customer was scheduled for the middle of December and this was pushed back to, well, this previous week or so. Edit: I will add that workers also refuse to do anything at or below their job code because it is “out of their job code scope” even though the contract says they can be required to do it as needed.
as they have had issues with quality control in their production, it really seems to be a good thing. They need to change things. And when people do changes, things will be a bit slower. But the quality will be higher, and the pace will get better when they have the new way of working in their fingers so to speak.
When you show the Renton, WA Boeing plant and the Renton Airport runway, it brings back fond memories of doing many touch-and-gos and emergency procedures work on that runway when I was working towards my PPL. Loved the approach in over Lake Washington!!!
One sad fact is that airlines and public have the relationship between production speed and safety backwards. Both MAX crashes and AS1282 showed that refusing to delay production for any reason will lead to safety problems. However, in the eyes of some airlines and public, it’s the delays that make a plane seem unsafe. Also worth mentioning that Airbus is also starting to be complacent on qualitybecause of this (as highlighted by hydraulic issues on a brand new Malaysian A330NEO), and the reputational double standard
@@MentourNow I think it sadly goes beyond that. People aren't really aware of the difficulty and timescale or airline R&D and production. The only point of comparison tends to be entertainment, where those kind of delays are often show of a mess behind scenes, and where long development often ends in poor products.
@@heidirabenau511 the MAS A330NEO had 2 issues: one with hydraulics and one with engines. Engine issues are on RR, hydraulics are on Airbus because the A330NEO was fresh from the factory.
Honestly, the Max crashes were caused by Boeing slapping a band aid on a problem that didn't exist, while insulting the intelligence of the pilots that fly their plane, and refusing to just update the outdated technology in the 737... That is simply make the plane fully FBW decades ago.
In their buyback of Spirit Aerosystems I expect to see both Ex Spirit Facilities ( One in Wichita and one in Tulsa which was an Ex-McDonnell-Douglas Facility. Tulsa / KTUL is the longtime home of American Airlines MX base (Largest Aircraft MX base in the World). Hopefully we see both the Wichita and Tulsa facilities be utilized to the fullest. And give Boeing employees from Seattle another, more affordable place to live.
Suggestion for a "Classic Aircraft" episode: The Boeing 314! Or maybe an overview of flying passenger boats in general. Also, while not an passenger plane, I think folks would be interested in a look at the Martin Mars, as the Philippine Mars is attempting to make it's way from Canada to its future home at the Pima Air And Space Museum.
19:22 Holy crap. I always know that Boeing company-related videos are going to bring up my hometown of Wichita, but I am SHOCKED to see a former coworker of mine, Jeff Herndon, on your channel. I worked on the production staff at KAKE-TV, the ABC station in Wichita, when he was anchoring there, before he moved to KKSN, the NBC affiliate. Such a small world.
Ortberg is the right guy at the right time. I'm glad he's getting away from all the Jack Welch style management history inherited fromMcDonal Douglas executives. The 'working together' style he's adopted and 'kitchen cabinet' of past Boeing Commercial CEOs is very smart. Boeing and Ortberg have just one opportunity to pull out of the stall the company entered after The McDonald Douglas acquisition fiasco and subsequent technical issues. He's wise to take his time now as he won't get another chance once Boeing has returned to full production. The crisis at Boeing isn't over. Not by a long shot. Ortberg's challenge is to redesign the Boeing 'aircraft' while it's still in flight. Possibly a 'mission impossible' situation. I wish him well, but for now, when I fly I'll be taking a bus. An Airbus.
Manufacturing enterprises world-wide have adopted the Just-In-Time and Lean Manufacturing practice originated from Japan, for good reasons. American car manufacturers (GM, Ford) have, however, skipped one important aspect of such practice: giving the assembly worker the power to stop production for QC & QA, as a result their products quality are still second rate. Boeing, similarly, have adopted JIT and LM mainly to cut costs, at the expense of QC & QA their products. An important component for the success of JIT and LM practice -- seen in Japanese manufacturers -- is the total buy-in by both management and workers. It is practically unheard of for a strike to take place at a Japanese company like Toyota/Honda/Mitsubishi, etc. Management and unions will work overtime years before any contract come to expire to resolve differences between the 2 sides and come to compromises to avoid a strike which serves no one's interest. This holistic viewpoint is TOTALLY missing in companies like Boeing, GM, Ford which still see things in zero-sum mindset. It will take some time to see if Boeing Management would become a bit more enlightened in how they run Boeing.
Bro, this isn’t a “deliberate” slow ramp up. We just can’t. We don’t have the trained personnel. Boeing lowered the barrier of entry to get hired that we were taking literally anyone that applied. And it shows. I’m a traveler QA inspector and it’s atrocious on the recovery ramp.
The problem with Boeing is the same as other US companies that are listed on the stock exchange. They hired CEO whose only priority is to protect the interest of shareholders. Meaning they will cut headcount to save labor cost in order to boost share price. They retrench many QC inspectors that are suppose to ensure the quality of the plane build at Boeing. That is the reason why the quality of Boeing 737 drop. Therefore, to solve Boeing problem is to delist Boeing from the stock exchange and get rid of the shareholders. Hired a CEO who can focus on the aircraft production quality and don't care about the share price.
Part of this problem, is that the senior executives of most companies get sweetheart deals on stock, and thus own a lot of it themselves. For a lot of senior executives, they make more from the stock than their salaries. This is also a problem. De-listing Boeing cannot really happen at this point anyway, as what happens to the shareholders? You have to realize that there are a lot of peoples retirement plans invested in these companies, through mutual funds and the like. If you just said, these shares no longer exist, you are just out the money you paid for those shares, you'd cause a massive recession, and ruin a lot of peoples lives. This situation sucks, but it's the world we live in. This is why i like a company who owns a majority of it's own stock, that way they aren't beholden to share holders. Which is also why i own a fair bit of shares in the company i work for. So that i can help stop stupid stuff happening when a vote comes down.
"Meaning they will cut headcount to save labor cost in order to boost share price" - Ironically, it always seems to be the workers -- the ones who make the products or directly provide the services -- that are cut, never the management level. In fact, the management level is usually given raises and bonuses while cutting workers (and, of course, it's never explained how those raises and bonuses benefit the company, since the explicit reason for cutting workers was to reduce costs).
@@nomore6167 You aint lying. There are companies out there who don't have that culture, but it is few and far between. The only major corporation i ever worked for that had a flat management structure was Nucor steel. I was a maintenance worker, and there was my supervisor (for my area of the mill), the maintenance manager for the entire site, and then the CEO. That was it. We were expected to be able to do our jobs with a minimum of supervision, because we were ADULTS. Our HR department was 3 people (out of over a 1000 hourly workers), and they mostly handled insurance issues. Amazingly, that company is hugely successful, and is continuing to make money today.
"and not profits at the expense of everything else" - Such is the life of a publicly-traded company. You have to do everything you can to keep the shareholders happy, no matter what, and that means profit ALWAYS growing (never staying the same, no matter how much the profit is). It would be an interesting test if they ever became emotionally secure enough to ask their shareholders what they want as the company's top priority (profit, quality, reputation, etc).
Don't cite just in time, they rarely have things just in time=They are very good at accepting incomplete components and changing suppliers to reduce costs without managing the risk and cost for not having a robust inventory and quality management system
This approach certainly is the best given the past problems Boeing has to overcome. An analogy is that when you are juggling and the balls begin to come at you too quickly, it's best to catch them one by one and start again before you drop them in a messy cascade. Boeing has a number of problems that all have to be overcome and doing them properly means that each has to be given full attention.
You work for 42yrs to have $2m in your retirement, Meanwhile some people are putting just $20k in a meme coin for just few months and now they are multi-millionaires I pray that anyone who reads this will be successful in life...
Well explain thank you for bringing up this video Financial education is indeed required for more than 80% of the society in the country as very few are literate on the subject. The value of the US🇺🇲 dollar is declining due to inflation, but it is increasing in comparison to other currencies and commodities such as gold and real estate. I'm worried that rising inflation will cause my 550k in my retirement funds to lose value, But with the help of Mrs Katie Walters I hit 220k this week from my investment of 45k, I am truly grateful for all the knowledge and nuggets you have given me over the past few months.
Alan Mullaly graduated with a degree in aerospace engineering from my alma mater so his name is still respected at the University of Kansas' aerospace program. He was the one who pushed for the adoption of the use of aluminum in Ford trucks, applying aerospace materials technology in motor vehicles. With an engineer going back in position of power, the culture should change back to what made them successful over the years. Issues with the union might be interesting to look at and the deal Boeing offered vs what the union wants could be key to why Ortberg is playing hardball.
Lack of competition and alternate suppliers has increased these risks. A lot of the specific problems at Boeing are attributed to the replacement of engineers with MBAs in the decision making. This was driven in part by the treatment of stock options by income tax, and the decision, approved by the Government to eliminate competition by authorizing the merger of Boeing with MD, described as "MD purchasing Boeing with Boeing's money." The lack of competition in the airliner business creates openings for the PRC to exploit, which does not strike me as a good idea.
Your program is wonderful. I’m an airplane junkie and your episodes explain issues clearly. And I’m impressed at your English fluency, särskilt för en Svensk. Tack.
Perhaps Ortberg could acknowledge the devastating effect the Boeing/McDonnell Douglas take over of Boeing was to the Boeing culture. The short term financial strategies that were implemented by Stonecipher et al after they bought Boeing with Boeing's money in the merger started Boeing on a downward spiral. Stating that this management style was wrong and is now changed would IMHO have a very strong effect on the workforce. I grew up in Seattle with Boeing, my father worked for Boeing, and I was hired as an engineer by Boeing but decided no, so this topic is close to my heart. Good luck to Boeing.
This reminds me of my addicted patients who are now in Drug Court (they get tossed in jail automatically for a short time if they use drugs). They can generally stay sober for the length of the program but when they "graduate" most of them relapse. Boeing has the PO all over them and will get a serious consequence if they F up. So they are fine. Like Drug Court this supervision will come to an end as it's expensive and unpleasant. Boeing (or any now "financialized" organization) is a zombie and will be back on the path of destruction as soon a the "adults leave the room". AND THE EXECUTIVES WILL STILL BE REWARDED!
Suggestion: Jeppesen is a legend. When I worked on my Instrument, my instructor insisted that I use the "Jepp" plates in lieu of the NOAA plates of yesteryear. My suggestion is if you could turn your team out to research the history of Jeppesen. I always marveled at the monumental effort to edit/create/retire plates from all over the world and then distribute the updates like a clock. What do you think? If I were looking for a thesis to get a Master's in Business, an analysis of what made them what they were and their advancements into the future.
This is a really smart move as Boeing cannot afford another factory floor screw up. Getting the supply chain delivery to be on time so travel work is minimized removes a production a serious production risk. And no doubt is one of may practices that are being changed -This all takes time. Also seeing the CEO walk the production floor and lives close to the factory sends the message that he wants planes built to the highest production standard which will restore ultimately restore Boeings reputation. I am sure Boeing clients are prepared to wait a few more months for a plane knowing down the track its not going to fall out of the sky.
I spent 14 years as a manufacturing engineer (doing various roles) for a company that made safety critical parts for Toyota and scania, I know all the terminology from kaizen to man hours and I have never heard of “traveled work” because we didn’t do it, it’s not something we would have ever considered doing. Anything done off the production line was rework and treated with the same level of respect that you would expect from having to re-manufacture parts. Scania required TS16949 quality standard certification and I can’t believe that the aviation industry would allow standards for commercial to be more stringent than aviation ones. Sadly I’m no longer in engineering or I’d be able to contact someone at Airbus, at their wing assembly plant (which is local to me) and ask them if it’s normal for them to have traveled work too.
I think that the slower restart is precisely correct. As you said, Boeing must do two things at once: restart production and correct past mistake inherited from the merger with McAir (ie. they must change their culture) and that will take time.
Excellent lecture on where Boeing is in its recovery. I can not think of any reasons why it might be slower than expected other than those mentioned. Perhaps Spirit valuation with its high inventory of work in progress. Its reintegration in to Boeing might cause a hiccup. Is it unionized ? In any case one should expect that Boeing will want to get its production lines back up to capacity in order to return to profitability.
We already know the issue with that door plug, it was a spirit defect but boeing removed the plug to fix the bad rivets. The guy fixing the door installed it and needed the locking pin bolts, it was the end of his shift before vacation. Some simple yellow tape would have warned the next shift that there was a hold on reinstalling the interior trim. Bad tracking and simple stuff like some cheap yellow caution tape type fixes.
In 2018 before the crashes “travel work” was over 1,000 work orders per plane coming out of the factory. They parked those planes everywhere, Renton field, Everett, Boeing Field and Moses Lakes that had over 250 planes partially finished. I was there until 2021. It was chaos and management did not care. We knew something bad would happen - and it certainly did. Hopefully the new CEO knows how to listen, if he doesn’t, nothing will change.
Eh, from the perspective of a ramper or aircraft services worker I haven’t understood how the higher ups at Boeing think for a very long time now. My first thought when I heard about the slow restart of production was “probably just taking the time to update the safety culture” and immediately reminded myself that this was Boeing and safety isn’t their strong suit. It’s weird how they strayed so far from the rest of the aviation industry (or at least the parts I have access to) because out on the apron/ramp everyone is obsessed with it. Make a mistake and the rest of the team will gently point it out and correct it. Do something stupid or dangerous on purpose and we’ll take you to the manager’s office ourselves.
I appreciate your views on Boeing's careful moves for recovery, which although being frustrating for suppliers and customers are short term. Unless they also announce plans for a new aircraft to replace the 737, their long term future would continue to look hazy...
The hardest part of any job is making it look easy. The grunts on the floor made it look easy and the suits in another state had no idea how the magic worked. So, the screwed with it until it broke. If it ain't broke...
Brilliant explanation, as a big fan of Boeing I hope that they come back out of their management stupid strategy that lead them to the safty issues they got into.
The problem with relying on "in-time" part supply and multiple suppliers, it only takes one link in the chain to fail, to start lining up unfinished aircraft waiting for parts. It's better to have an inventory of parts ready to go when they start the ball rolling. Spirit was sending their problems to Boeing. They should clean house of any stragglers from MD just for good measure.
I don't think they will go in the direction anytime soon because they still need to sell their -10. Between the 737 family 787 and 777/x they have a plane for each market. They just need to get them certified
Boeing actually needs two new single aisle planes in the long term. One with 5 seats abreast, another with 6. The question is if Boeing can find the funds and engineers necessary for this.
Excellent video. Always thought stimulating and informative. Thank you for your perspective, I value it highly. I would offer one slight variance on your comment @20:24 of "handling mistakes" and how Boeing's slowing may them to allow them to "catch mistakes" which will always happen but your "procedures" are critical to catch them before they cause impact. I mostly agree but wish to respectively add; one must be very careful to rely on perfecting procedures that CATCH mistakes and start to loose focus on creating cultures, actions, motivations and discipline that ANTICIPATE environments and opportunities that are conducive to the CREATION of mistakes in the first place. PREVENTION MUST ALWAYS be the primary focus. In terms of proficiency, safety, efficiency and $$.. There is always a terrible and unacceptably high cost to catch a mistake once it happens. MUCH MUCH better and safe to ANTICIPATE and DESIGN with purpose, "procedures" and "environments" which MINIMIZE (with the goal of eliminating) the opportunities for mistakes to be made in the first place. Slow down. Like you said.. TAKE THE EXTRA TURN IN THE HOLD. Bravo Boeing!
This is so exciting, I'm really looking forward to Boeing taking their time and eventually finally recovering from this several decades long nightmare since the merger.
There's no problem with Just-in-Time delivery, the issue is managers don't understand it. The stock you hold of a part should be proportional to the risk to supply. Parts available from multiple suppliers and easily obtained, then you don't hold a massive amount of cover. Single supplier, subject to possible disruption and an essential part, you hold significant cover. An organisation blaming JiT is incompetent.
At some point, with all these issues, you have to wonder, are the quality of engineers going down, or is there sabotage, or both? I can tell you from personal experience, the quality of civil engineers is definitely decreasing, to the point, they can't do basic math, like how to estimate (literally).
I like to see that finally Boeing may have found the right path, although its troubles are far from being over. The reputation damage is huge and I can't see how Boeing can recover from all its issues without a bail out from the US gov.
What I think Boeing need to do is work on a replacement for the 757 immediately, this should replace the 757 currently in service. It would place many of these737-900s and potentially even give them a competitive advantage against the A321 XLR Then they should redesign a smaller jet to replace the 737-700 and 800, if they do this right, they could even compete with Airbuses in increasingly growing A220 In order to do this, they would likely have to pull the plug on 767freighter production but Airbus don’t really have a true competitor for that so Boeing customers will still likely stay with Boeing on the freight side
I worked at the Charleston 787 plant in 2011 and left because I was in the wrong position there. I was hired as a QA gathering workmanship defect metrics. Not a very encouraging thing to be doing there. I hold an A&P certificate and would have been better served as training some of the newer mechanics in proper proceedures and attention to details. I left after 6 months feeling very unfulfilled in my job not to mention the the high volume fo workmanship defect metrics I was collecting.
I have a question, you've sort of touched on it before but I couldn't find a deep dive on it. Why have large planes gone away from 4 engines? The new 747, 2 engine has been in the news again in recent days and it got me curious about the engineering mindset behind it. Thank you, I'm just a civilian who loves planes and enjoys learning from your excellent content.
It's actually very simple, it's cheaper for the airlines to operate a 2 engine aircraft. It really hasn't to do much with engineering, it's simply what the airlines want.
Safety must always come first, rather than risking costly errors that could put lives and company reputation at risk... (or even helping to repair it too) So it is good that Boeing are proceeding with caution, with their new manager, even though it is slowing production. Think of it as playing the long game, like how a sports team wants to be at their best at the business end of a season come finals.
Everything that you’ve mentioned in this video I believe is critical for Boeing to start to rebuild their reputation. Get back to their core roots and get back to the basics.
The person at the top sets the tone for the department, or if that is the CEO, the busisness. The best keep personal contact with ALL departments under them. Sir John Harvey Jones was my model of how to do it.
If Boeing cuts 30% of its executives salaries starting with the CEO Boeing would have enough money to pay all raises and even employed more workers, so that, there is no down production, But Boeing rather pleased a 5% than 95% of employees. The 95% that are really productive...
Your figures are way off. Boeing CEO has a total package of about 20 millions a year including stock options, there are a total of 177 000 employees. If all of the CEO compensation was divided equal among the workers it would be a little more than a 100 usd per year, or about 10 dollars a month. It's not nothing, but compared to the amounts the workers were on strike for, it's a more or less meaningless amount. Socialists can't do math or understand economics, that's why they still are socialists.
If you have a lot of quality issues but also falling behind in schedule, would you really want to start to make things faster risking more and more mistakes and mishaps? Keeping the pace slow even when the pressure of your customers increase is a really smart move. Drawback is clearly you will have a bigger financial problem this way but in my opinion this could be the only way out cause Boeing can't afford another big blow in therms of aircraft safety, functionality or quality.
Get an Exclusive NordVPN deal here ➼ nordvpn.com/mentournow It's completely risk-free with Nord's 30-day money-back guarantee! ✌
❤❤
Attack the d point!
How is this comment 3 days old on a 1 hour old video😂.
Love the content as always Petter!
Re-wing and Re-engine the 757-200/300 & continue with the series. I guarantee this will save the company. Quit giving the 737 makeovers!
He probably scheduled video ipload and commented before it went publicly live@@justanotheraviator2357
Their biggest issue right now is reputation. They pre-emptively get blamed by press and public for incidents that might not be their fault. Jeju Air is a great example.
Yep, I would tend to agree with that
This should be the top comment.
Confirmation bias on a mass scale
@@MentourNow JEJU Air had black boxes stop recording convineantly few minutes before the landing ... Wonder why .
Boeing is not "issue free" in JEJU. Chrash
@@soulsbourne oh here we go.
Boeing seems to be refocusing on aerospace engineering vs financial engineering. About time!
Hopefully this is true. Focusing on your core business is the only real way for a successful future. Wringing as much money put as you can is a recipe for failure.
@@seanrodgers1839 i would argue that having at least some degree of control over every aspect of your buisness is more important than focussing on the core buisness. Because if boeing took this "focussing" to the extreme they would buy complete aircraft from elsewhere, have a guy slap the boeing logo on them (and obviously that guy is a subcontractor), and then sell them as boeings. cause selling aircraft is their core buisness.
As a retired QA inspector, who worked in manufacturing my entire life, I admit to be unfamiliar with the term "traveled work'. But statistically, moving any assembly outside of a carefully studied and documented process sets off alarm bells. Also, not mentioned here is worker morale. In manufacturing in this country, workers are constantly asked to work faster and more efficiently, which causes stress, while the rewards flow almost entirely to management and shareholders.
Although I agree, nothing is lost during travelled work. Every bolt and nut is scrutinized and by no means is any less quality than factory work
@@evogsr4807 And then Alaska flight 1282 happens. You must have a short memory...
@@reubenmorris487 It is obvious that in that case a fuselage was received that was supposed to be finished to a certain degree and wasn't.......or the work was undone by another station to get other work done and not put back correctly !!!
My favorite corp-speak and financial term is "productivity gain". While a subset of productivity gain can be ascribed to improved technology, I would wager that the majority of the productivity gain over the last 40 years has been achieved entirely by not replacing workers that retire and dividing their work among all the workers that are left behind in the department . My sister works at Coca Cola Consolidated, and that is the pattern they have followed. My sister is now doing the work of about 10 people she once knew when she was hired 35 years ago.
@@evogsr4807it's bold to be so certain that nothing changes when the plane has been moved outside and exposed to the elements after undergoing assembly steps that are meant to happen later.
If the travelled work requires disassembly (to get access to the location) then there's duplicate QA.
It’s like crew resource management for the executives.
Yep! If more people thought about it like that, we would move forward much quicker.
Greed kills. People and companies alike.
🤷
Overworked, very busy time of year, especially for low cost carriers.
Marriages could also use CRM training. My best relationships were other commercial or military pilots😂
@@ChopperChad this!
As a retired Boeing 30 year production worker I am actually glad to see this slow ramp up back into production. This gives the managers, production engineers and particularly line workers to get the various aircraft that had traveled work done and completed before doing the actual line back up and running. Having all the various "traveled" work done and the workers back to the various spots on the production line where they belong will also make it a smoother transition to full production. This also gives the company time to get the safety and production inspections back up to speed on the line. This is actually a positive for the long term.
I have other things I think about the way things were done in the past and one of them is after strikes of which I was personally involved in that maybe looking at the penny wise but pound foolish got Boeing to the state that they came to be.
Interesting how working in the aviation industry can give someone a certain sensitivity and almost…. Instinctive ability to look at the reason for something happening.
I looked at how Boeing was being slow to resume production and thought. “Oh they’re probably just updating their safety culture and processes given all that’s happened.” And then I felt a sense of being too optimistic and naive.
That’s how bad the reputation of Boeing has gotten. We out on the ramp are obsessed with safety. We’re not sure what happened at Boeing to stray so far. We know some of the things we do could cause bad things to happen and nobody wants to be “that person” whose shoddy work caused a plane crash.
@@mikoto7693 We had the safety culture from the beginning and the entire 30+ years that I worked there from 1987 to 2017 but what happened was the culture above us in the ivory towers that bleed down to line managers. I once had a manager that should never have been in the job as more then once I was assigned to traveled work and it had no required prior inspections done before it was to be covered by my installations. I would always refuse to even put my name on the job and was treated like dirt by the manager. I then reminded him that you can not pull over at 30,000 feet and fix the problem and if this was to be the way he continued to do what he was doing I could easily go to the FAA
Petter isn’t only a master aviator but also a master storyteller! He could narrate a random owners manual and I would probably watch it! Like I always say Petter is part man, part machine!
I am 87years old and have been with computers in one form or another since 1964. I have flown (as) stand-by in five continents and dozens of countries - my daughter works for one of the three biggest airlines in the US. I'm a retired process engineer for a hospital in the central US - specialized as an Oracle DBA. Some of the things we always looked for in the health areas was the same as the processes you speak of in this clip - -- it's one very bad thing to have a side door blow off, but put a person on the operating table and you don't want to blow out a computerized tool on the table.
A second role I had after retiring from health care was about five years I worked for General Electric Aviation in their offices in Dayton and Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. Any engine part that was returned to GE for repair or improvement had its own serial number. ANY work done on a part, from getting the request, to opening the box it came in, to the ID of every person that did ANY work on it, was documented in the data base.
I like to tell people that if that were ever in a plane crashed due to the failure of a part in a GE engine in our data base, they could RIP that it was possible to find what repair worker messed up - in jest, but true.
You've made an excellent comparison between aviation and healthcare. You're right to note that virtually everything in aviation from part manufacturing to cockpit conversations is recorded. When something goes wrong, the problem can be traced back to its source. That is good.
The difficulty with healthcare is that patient privacy has to be respected. Many patients would not want their conversations with their physicians or nurses recorded. Most would not want their surgeries video recorded. Virtually the only data trail depends on what staff type into computers or what they can recall weeks or even months later. That makes it much more difficult to trace problems back to their source.
That said, there is much that healthcare can learn from aviation. In aviation, the words used are carefully chosen to prevent mistakes. "Cleared to takeoff" is only used when that is meant. In contrast, when I worked nights on a pediatric hem-onc unit it bothered me no end that the terms were easy to confuse. "Afebrile" was difficult to distinguish from "febrile" despite being of vital importance. The same is true of the "hypo-" and "hyper-" terms. They sound alike but have opposite meanings.
And unlike the conversations between pilots and ATC, orders were typically ill-defined. I might be told to monitor a child's blood pressure but given no numbers to watch for. The possibilities ranged from "doesn't matter" to the need to insist that a child's attending physician should be awakened in the middle of the night. The communication lacked the clarity of that in aviation.
I describe some of that experience in a book I wrote, _My Nights with Leukemia._
Great, great comment. So many parallels and medicine has a lot to learn from aviation, especially in terms of an open, no blame safety culture where everyone learns. @@Inkling777
On a 3 month old YT account? I call BS
Not only would they be able to find the part and workers, they'd almost certainly find _why_ that worker(s) messed up, due to the notes or the process or both. I seem to recall an incident in the Southeastern US where a prop plane went down, and they traced the issue back to the technician who'd worked on the prop blade that failed (who was horrified, rather unsurprisingly)--but it wasn't him that got the blame as much as the process or lack thereof with what he was doing.
I worked at a space company for a few years, and we'd leave notes, lots of notes. If an engine fouled because some debris was left, they'd be looking for: where did the debris come from, who noted it or missed it before it busted loose, what process was used, did this person(s) have proper training and/or a history, and if there's a bunch of us on a particular area then who did what? Fortunately, never happened while I was there. I think I got tracked down once because someone didn't like the work I'd done--at which point, I pulled the drawing and the inspection tool and showed that my work was in compliance with the drawing, which means it's Not My Problem that they didn't like it. (Drawings were revised fairly shortly after that--while they were being revised I had the opportunity to provide input, which allowed me to point out that certain "critical" dimensions were just going to get cut off anyways so WTF engineers, among other things that made that particular task both faster and higher quality.)
Great analysis Petter...you're spot on. The old expression holds true here: you need to learn how to walk before you can run. Changing one's culture, revamping QA programs and production protocols/procedures doesn't happen overnight. This is not an environment where you hit the ground running. Taking slow and deliberate steps is appropriate and will bear fruit in the long run. Getting it right now is dollar wise, as opposed to their former penny wise philosophy. Kelly Ortberg seems to be the right person for the Job. I'm sure he's rifling through Boeing's corporate management ranks and weeding out the bad apples. Cheers!
I have friends at both Boeing and Spirit Aerosystems. The problems run much, much deeper than can be "fixed" in one year. The McDonnell-Douglas executives and accountants that took over after the 'merger' took almost 20 years to ruin Boeing and it will take a decade to recover the worker and engineering base that cares about the product, and that can only happen after the executive row is purged, preferably suffering the same demises as the victims of their profit taking.
Boeing, the corporation, will not and cannot be chastised. They exist because of Faultless Capital (a concept, not a company) - basically money is non-moral, and the corporation exists to make money for investors, therefore no corporate action or omission can be evaluated from a moral standpoint. So planes that crash, plane with self-actuating door plugs, parts that fall off.. only "the market" can judge. My response is that Boeing (executives and board members) and its investors need to experience devastating personal losses to understand that monetized decisions have physical consequences for humans.
this should be the top comment, the problem with boeing is culture. it takes them decades of culture change to become this problematic slob, and that's not gonna get fixed in mere years.
What kind of devastating personal losses do you and, I guess, your friends have in mind…please be specific as it is the main thrust of your comment.
Very enlightened comment. I like that "faultless capital" concept.
I would like to add that it's doesn't stop only at Boeing. It's the reason Boeing hollowed out it's engineering capabilities - they are costs to be cut regardless of any long-term effect.
It's a symptom of the "financialization" of everything in the US. Companies are no longer production entities. They're financial entities. An executive posture that's very harmful to the long-term health of any company, and the consequences happen well after these decision makers have retired.
It is not in the best interest of the board, shareholders to make a faulty product which damages shareholder value as well as the reputation of the company.
To flesh out what you have said, the JUDICIAL SYSTEM has taken over 100 years to entrench this terrible amoral concept in Corporations. It seems that Henry Ford tried to pay his workers a "living wage" approximately 100 years ago. I have no idea if he was doing this for moral reasons or just to screw over his competitors with his superior capital leverage. But the result was a shareholder lawsuit that said that Henry Ford was endangering the shareholder return on their investment, and they argued that Henry Ford's fudiciary duty was to the shareholders, NOT to his workers or the customers. The lawsuit went all the way to the SCOTUS. SCOTUS ruled in favor of the stockholders and enshrined profits as the primary legal imperative to be considered in all corporate decision making. The SCOTUS has compounded that amoral decision with other decisions against corporate environmental policies and in the even most infuriating Citizens United decision that created an equivalence between a human citizen and a "corporate citizen". Citizen's United equated corporate political contributions with "free speech" and the SCOTUS ruled that a corporation is equivalent to a PERSON and so they had "free speech" rights to contribute to political campaigns and lobby government officials. So couple that with the Henry Ford decision and you have a corporate imperative to manipulate elections and lobby lawmakers if it improves the profit of a corporation. Ludicrous.
I think Ortberg's experience heading up development of the turboencabulator at Rockwell prepared him well for this job. He was the one who identified the side-fumbling issue, which lead to process improvements in production of the spurving bearings.
Our company extensively used turboencabulators. We were especially impressed with the prefabulated Amulite base plate and the panadermic semi-boloid stator slots. Solved so many otherwise indefinable problems for us! Definitely look into one if you are having issues with quasistatic regeneration oscillators.
@quinnocent @@miketo09 These comments literally made me laugh out loud! You two captured the melodramatically pseudo-serious nature of the whole Turboencabulator project perfectly!
Being number 2 in commercial plane brand is better than being bankrupt and being out of production
boeing will never go bankrupt they will find a way to shovel more money into it kinda like how they shoved 4.6 billions through nasa to boeing to built the capsule
Boeing will not go bankrupt. Boeing is one of three top military corporations in the world supplying the US military as well as other countries. Boeing supplies all US wars, including Ukraine, Gaza, Syria. As a result, Boeing is fully backed by the US gov, including Boeing's commercial division.
@@zeniktorres4320 Boeing Defence may not go bankrupt, but the civilian airliner division has a less promising future.
@@poruatokin No, that simply will not happen. The US categorically will not allow Boeing to lose out to competition from other countries. In addition Boeing passenger aircraft are used in the US military with aircraft designed for military use as well, and there is also technology sharing.
@ But if the US supported a company with taxpayers money that is going bankrupt, wouldn't that be socialism? Like they did with the banks and the auto industry.
I believe during the 1995 strike it allowed the company to replace obsolete equipment and organize the assembly process to be more efficient and to be honest I have a feeling that strike would have ended sooner if this shuffling of equipment and process had gone faster? ;-)
At the time it was rumored that the company had asked the strike leaders to continue the strike so they could finish the upgrade of the factory (soon after some of the strike leaders suspiciously became corporate managers). ;-)
Using the strike as a "reset" button for the whole company seems like a pretty smart move strategically - wonder if that's one piece of advise given from Ortberg's small council?
At 21:30 you ask what can Boeing do besides production quality? I would like to see what you can uncover about Boeing Engineering/Business decisions that set-up Boeing production and the Airline Mtc and Operations for failure. Ie: Per FAR 25; Autopilot (hidden or not) is specifically not
allowed to compensate for
aerodynamic stability problems And Boeing should also start to follow the intent of FAA design
standards even if they are able to navigate around them such reinstalling door lock indications on door that are not being used.
If they are deliberately slowing production, and so prioritising quality over quantity, then they are taking a step in the right direction.
Boeing needs to do these two things:
1) Truly fix the issues in production quality which includes management changes, and getting engineers back in charge of the company.
2) Come up with clean sheet designs for new aircraft to replace the 737 and the 757.
Spot on, it really is this simple!
The first takes too much time.
The second costs too much money.
They will muddle along for the next 5-7 years being propped up directly or indirect by government support (many politicians and infuential people hold Boeing shares and won't standby and watch them crash) and try to latch on to the next generational change in commercial aviation when it happens rather than bringing in such change on their own terms.
But stock buybacks make the C Suite more money and we can't have poor CEOs only making 20 million per year instead of 50 million per year.
@@gikigill788 How would they afford the 4th lake house on 20 million?
@@nrml76 It's been called a moonshot by one of the bean-counter CEOs. The bean-counters made all the wrong decisions. Time to change the culture. Boeing needs to design and produce a new airplane, maybe something based on the 757. They have all the tooling still for the 757, which would make it cheaper, relatively anyway.
Do you ever get rest? Your channel is amazingly productive, and taking the quality of production into account I simply doubt you get enough sleep
I have a great team of people that help with that! But thank you
It’s someone else’s body with Petars face superimposed with CGI.
Mentour wouldnt post quality videos without rest haha
@@Saml01 Petter has a secret star trek transporter room. I believe the procedures were tested already in the 1970s. Transporter technology uses destructive teleportation. What you do is just to rig the machinery to forget to destroy the ingoing copy. Then you have two copies of the same person. Costly in energy, but simple in principle. There are legal issues though, like which one has the right to the spouse and the Porsche. cheers! / CS
@@thecrazyswede2495 “This mf’er ain’t real”
Also slowing down production is the fact that Boeing laid off 17,000 workers, 2,199 alone at the 737 plant in Renton.
No IAM Union members have been laid off as of yet. Soon to come
That, and IAM layoffs, are in inevitable. They staffed up for a production rate of 54/mo, but are now limited to 38/mo. Something's got to give.
So Boeing has problems with the 737, 777X and 787. Isnt this more or less all of their planes in production?
All their commercial aircraft, yes
I came here just to write this! 'mainly with the 737, 777x and 787`...thats all their commercial aircrafts?
@@franklaumen77nope, they produce the 767 f and 777f as well
the 777f and 767f -- both pre Douglas Designs. are the only stable production lines right now. the 757,767,777 are really the best planes boeing has ever built. all 80s or 90s well before the unsafety culture
@@liambengif7663i wouldn't call the 767 or 777 freighters stable, more like least troubled. They're still not ideal.
From someone who had their great grandfather be one of the engineers in the original 737 and 747 up in Seattle it is nice that Boeing is finally working towards getting over their mistake of letting McDonald Douglas management ruin Boeing by putting them in power over the engineers that used to prioritize their engineering/safety over profits. Hoping to continue to see safety and workers/employees working together to keep everyone and everything safe! Hoping they instill a culture of letting people speak up when they see problematic things again. Good on Boeing to take the time needed to fix their problems.
It's all about leadership. With the right person in charge, the company will recover, eventually.
wount work Boeing did not even tryed to keep its best Person Alan Mulallly from leaving to become CEO of Ford
More about culture, and i dont think the 1000% capitalist culture works with high safety products. Modern America cannot make an airliner.
Its not one person. The leadership role is held by all executives. Unless, the CEO has full authority, its the executive mindset that matters
@dknowles60 I guess time will tell.
@@dknowles60 That was a long time ago. We are talking about now. Saying it won't work now because a certain person wasn't hired more that 20 years ago does not make sense.
10:48 Good old “The Toyota Way” (JIT - Just-In-Time) manufacturing. Oh the experiences I’ve had. 😂 Great video, Petter.
You might think that we in SC weren't affected by the strike-and you could be right in certain terms-but we ALL were affected by the strike in various ways. Those suppliers you spoke of? Well, they supply us also & we struggled with their struggles. There are materials that we obtain thru our west coast facilities & with the strike, these materials were in short supply. Layoffs began to affect workers here, even though we werent on strike.
I know what you meant; I hope you can see what I'm saying.
30 years ago, the bean counters took over GM and look what has happened to them since.
Robert Stempel was the last engineer CEO of GM 1990-92.
After working in manufacturing for over 40 years, I would like to say that we called JIT, just in trouble. It is only great if everything is in perfect sync, which it is often is not.
I retired in 2007 the month the lawyer became ceo instead of a. Mulaly. After 38 years as an engineer then manager. I could tell in 2007 that they would destroy the company, Alan should have been ceo, as he proved at ford. I am glad to see he has been brought in to help the recovery. GREAT idea. Maybe there is hope.
The main reason is the timing of when we returned. The last two weeks of December is vacation for all the workers. It was easier for everyone to focus on certs and maintenance than production. Power on for the first 777x for a customer was scheduled for the middle of December and this was pushed back to, well, this previous week or so.
Edit: I will add that workers also refuse to do anything at or below their job code because it is “out of their job code scope” even though the contract says they can be required to do it as needed.
as they have had issues with quality control in their production, it really seems to be a good thing. They need to change things. And when people do changes, things will be a bit slower. But the quality will be higher, and the pace will get better when they have the new way of working in their fingers so to speak.
Exactly.
Hopefully Boeing and Intel are at long last doing the right thing by employing engineers to take control again.
When you show the Renton, WA Boeing plant and the Renton Airport runway, it brings back fond memories of doing many touch-and-gos and emergency procedures work on that runway when I was working towards my PPL. Loved the approach in over Lake Washington!!!
One sad fact is that airlines and public have the relationship between production speed and safety backwards. Both MAX crashes and AS1282 showed that refusing to delay production for any reason will lead to safety problems. However, in the eyes of some airlines and public, it’s the delays that make a plane seem unsafe. Also worth mentioning that Airbus is also starting to be complacent on qualitybecause of this (as highlighted by hydraulic issues on a brand new Malaysian A330NEO), and the reputational double standard
I think communication is key. Delays are frustrating but people hopefully appreciate information and honesty...
@@MentourNow I think it sadly goes beyond that. People aren't really aware of the difficulty and timescale or airline R&D and production.
The only point of comparison tends to be entertainment, where those kind of delays are often show of a mess behind scenes, and where long development often ends in poor products.
The issues on the A330neos are due to a part made by Rolls Royce.
@@heidirabenau511 the MAS A330NEO had 2 issues: one with hydraulics and one with engines. Engine issues are on RR, hydraulics are on Airbus because the A330NEO was fresh from the factory.
Honestly, the Max crashes were caused by Boeing slapping a band aid on a problem that didn't exist, while insulting the intelligence of the pilots that fly their plane, and refusing to just update the outdated technology in the 737... That is simply make the plane fully FBW decades ago.
In their buyback of Spirit Aerosystems I expect to see both Ex Spirit Facilities ( One in Wichita and one in Tulsa which was an Ex-McDonnell-Douglas Facility. Tulsa / KTUL is the longtime home of American Airlines MX base (Largest Aircraft MX base in the World).
Hopefully we see both the Wichita and Tulsa facilities be utilized to the fullest. And give Boeing employees from Seattle another, more affordable place to live.
The problem is the union. The union protections are better in seattle.
Suggestion for a "Classic Aircraft" episode: The Boeing 314! Or maybe an overview of flying passenger boats in general. Also, while not an passenger plane, I think folks would be interested in a look at the Martin Mars, as the Philippine Mars is attempting to make it's way from Canada to its future home at the Pima Air And Space Museum.
Agreed! Would love to hear about the PanAm flight to Auckland that got rerouted west to the US in the wake of Pearl Harbor.
19:22 Holy crap. I always know that Boeing company-related videos are going to bring up my hometown of Wichita, but I am SHOCKED to see a former coworker of mine, Jeff Herndon, on your channel. I worked on the production staff at KAKE-TV, the ABC station in Wichita, when he was anchoring there, before he moved to KKSN, the NBC affiliate. Such a small world.
Thanks for the early Friday drop, Pedder! Have a great weekend.
Ortberg is the right guy at the right time. I'm glad he's getting away from all the Jack Welch style management history inherited fromMcDonal Douglas executives. The 'working together' style he's adopted and 'kitchen cabinet' of past Boeing Commercial CEOs is very smart. Boeing and Ortberg have just one opportunity to pull out of the stall the company entered after The McDonald Douglas acquisition fiasco and subsequent technical issues. He's wise to take his time now as he won't get another chance once Boeing has returned to full production. The crisis at Boeing isn't over. Not by a long shot. Ortberg's challenge is to redesign the Boeing 'aircraft' while it's still in flight. Possibly a 'mission impossible' situation. I wish him well, but for now, when I fly I'll be taking a bus. An Airbus.
Manufacturing enterprises world-wide have adopted the Just-In-Time and Lean Manufacturing practice originated from Japan, for good reasons. American car manufacturers (GM, Ford) have, however, skipped one important aspect of such practice: giving the assembly worker the power to stop production for QC & QA, as a result their products quality are still second rate. Boeing, similarly, have adopted JIT and LM mainly to cut costs, at the expense of QC & QA their products. An important component for the success of JIT and LM practice -- seen in Japanese manufacturers -- is the total buy-in by both management and workers. It is practically unheard of for a strike to take place at a Japanese company like Toyota/Honda/Mitsubishi, etc. Management and unions will work overtime years before any contract come to expire to resolve differences between the 2 sides and come to compromises to avoid a strike which serves no one's interest. This holistic viewpoint is TOTALLY missing in companies like Boeing, GM, Ford which still see things in zero-sum mindset. It will take some time to see if Boeing Management would become a bit more enlightened in how they run Boeing.
Bro, this isn’t a “deliberate” slow ramp up. We just can’t. We don’t have the trained personnel. Boeing lowered the barrier of entry to get hired that we were taking literally anyone that applied. And it shows. I’m a traveler QA inspector and it’s atrocious on the recovery ramp.
The problem with Boeing is the same as other US companies that are listed on the stock exchange. They hired CEO whose only priority is to protect the interest of shareholders. Meaning they will cut headcount to save labor cost in order to boost share price. They retrench many QC inspectors that are suppose to ensure the quality of the plane build at Boeing. That is the reason why the quality of Boeing 737 drop. Therefore, to solve Boeing problem is to delist Boeing from the stock exchange and get rid of the shareholders. Hired a CEO who can focus on the aircraft production quality and don't care about the share price.
Part of this problem, is that the senior executives of most companies get sweetheart deals on stock, and thus own a lot of it themselves. For a lot of senior executives, they make more from the stock than their salaries. This is also a problem.
De-listing Boeing cannot really happen at this point anyway, as what happens to the shareholders? You have to realize that there are a lot of peoples retirement plans invested in these companies, through mutual funds and the like. If you just said, these shares no longer exist, you are just out the money you paid for those shares, you'd cause a massive recession, and ruin a lot of peoples lives.
This situation sucks, but it's the world we live in. This is why i like a company who owns a majority of it's own stock, that way they aren't beholden to share holders. Which is also why i own a fair bit of shares in the company i work for. So that i can help stop stupid stuff happening when a vote comes down.
"Meaning they will cut headcount to save labor cost in order to boost share price" - Ironically, it always seems to be the workers -- the ones who make the products or directly provide the services -- that are cut, never the management level. In fact, the management level is usually given raises and bonuses while cutting workers (and, of course, it's never explained how those raises and bonuses benefit the company, since the explicit reason for cutting workers was to reduce costs).
@@nomore6167 You aint lying. There are companies out there who don't have that culture, but it is few and far between.
The only major corporation i ever worked for that had a flat management structure was Nucor steel. I was a maintenance worker, and there was my supervisor (for my area of the mill), the maintenance manager for the entire site, and then the CEO.
That was it. We were expected to be able to do our jobs with a minimum of supervision, because we were ADULTS. Our HR department was 3 people (out of over a 1000 hourly workers), and they mostly handled insurance issues.
Amazingly, that company is hugely successful, and is continuing to make money today.
Boeing flatly needs to get back to building Planes and not profits at the expense of everything else, which has almost cost them everything.
"and not profits at the expense of everything else" - Such is the life of a publicly-traded company. You have to do everything you can to keep the shareholders happy, no matter what, and that means profit ALWAYS growing (never staying the same, no matter how much the profit is). It would be an interesting test if they ever became emotionally secure enough to ask their shareholders what they want as the company's top priority (profit, quality, reputation, etc).
Don't cite just in time, they rarely have things just in time=They are very good at accepting incomplete components and changing suppliers to reduce costs without managing the risk and cost for not having a robust inventory and quality management system
This approach certainly is the best given the past problems Boeing has to overcome. An analogy is that when you are juggling and the balls begin to come at you too quickly, it's best to catch them one by one and start again before you drop them in a messy cascade. Boeing has a number of problems that all have to be overcome and doing them properly means that each has to be given full attention.
You work for 42yrs to have $2m in your retirement, Meanwhile some people are putting just $20k in a meme coin for just few months and now they are multi-millionaires I pray that anyone who reads this will be successful in life...
Well explain thank you for bringing up this video Financial education is indeed required for more than 80% of the society in the country as very few are literate on the subject. The value of the US🇺🇲 dollar is declining due to inflation, but it is increasing in comparison to other currencies and commodities such as gold and real estate. I'm worried that rising inflation will cause my 550k in my retirement funds to lose value, But with the help of Mrs Katie Walters I hit 220k this week from my investment of 45k, I am truly grateful for all the knowledge and nuggets you have given me over the past few months.
I have been seeing so many recommendations about Mrs Katie Walters, she must be really good.
I'm glad to write her tay I do hope she will help handle my paycheck properly.
Can I start with as low as $3000
YES!!! That's exactly her name (Mrs Katie) so many people have recommended highly about her😊 and am just starting with her from Northern Ireland
Alan Mullaly graduated with a degree in aerospace engineering from my alma mater so his name is still respected at the University of Kansas' aerospace program. He was the one who pushed for the adoption of the use of aluminum in Ford trucks, applying aerospace materials technology in motor vehicles.
With an engineer going back in position of power, the culture should change back to what made them successful over the years.
Issues with the union might be interesting to look at and the deal Boeing offered vs what the union wants could be key to why Ortberg is playing hardball.
Lack of competition and alternate suppliers has increased these risks. A lot of the specific problems at Boeing are attributed to the replacement of engineers with MBAs in the decision making. This was driven in part by the treatment of stock options by income tax, and the decision, approved by the Government to eliminate competition by authorizing the merger of Boeing with MD, described as "MD purchasing Boeing with Boeing's money." The lack of competition in the airliner business creates openings for the PRC to exploit, which does not strike me as a good idea.
Your program is wonderful. I’m an airplane junkie and your episodes explain issues clearly. And I’m impressed at your English fluency, särskilt för en Svensk. Tack.
I appreciate your optimism here. It would be a real shame, tragic in fact, if Boeing were to fail.
Perhaps Ortberg could acknowledge the devastating effect the Boeing/McDonnell Douglas take over of Boeing was to the Boeing culture. The short term financial strategies that were implemented by Stonecipher et al after they bought Boeing with Boeing's money in the merger started Boeing on a downward spiral. Stating that this management style was wrong and is now changed would IMHO have a very strong effect on the workforce. I grew up in Seattle with Boeing, my father worked for Boeing, and I was hired as an engineer by Boeing but decided no, so this topic is close to my heart. Good luck to Boeing.
This reminds me of my addicted patients who are now in Drug Court (they get tossed in jail automatically for a short time if they use drugs). They can generally stay sober for the length of the program but when they "graduate" most of them relapse. Boeing has the PO all over them and will get a serious consequence if they F up. So they are fine.
Like Drug Court this supervision will come to an end as it's expensive and unpleasant. Boeing (or any now "financialized" organization) is a zombie and will be back on the path of destruction as soon a the "adults leave the room". AND THE EXECUTIVES WILL STILL BE REWARDED!
It is very encouraging that Boeing is focusing more on engineering, quality, and safety. Makes me smile.
I hope you're doing absolutely fantastic!
I am, and I hope the same for you, too!
@@MentourNow👍
Time for Embrear to release a 737 replacement
Will the FAA allow it especially with the protectionism touted by the incoming administration.
@@gikigill788the rest of the world could still buy it. It’s not all about the USA
Suggestion: Jeppesen is a legend. When I worked on my Instrument, my instructor insisted that I use the "Jepp" plates in lieu of the NOAA plates of yesteryear. My suggestion is if you could turn your team out to research the history of Jeppesen. I always marveled at the monumental effort to edit/create/retire plates from all over the world and then distribute the updates like a clock. What do you think? If I were looking for a thesis to get a Master's in Business, an analysis of what made them what they were and their advancements into the future.
sounds like that would get an audience on one
Your videos are very instructive, they teach clearly, and we can easily understand everything, thank you for sharing your knowledge.
Mentour Pilot is TOP 👍❤!!!!!! Stay Awesome!!!!! Xx..........
Really good video. Explaines some really important issues in complex production.
This is a really smart move as Boeing cannot afford another factory floor screw up. Getting the supply chain delivery to be on time so travel work is minimized removes a production a serious production risk. And no doubt is one of may practices that are being changed -This all takes time. Also seeing the CEO walk the production floor and lives close to the factory sends the message that he wants planes built to the highest production standard which will restore ultimately restore Boeings reputation. I am sure Boeing clients are prepared to wait a few more months for a plane knowing down the track its not going to fall out of the sky.
Amazing Video and amazing research... Kudos to you and your team... ❤
I spent 14 years as a manufacturing engineer (doing various roles) for a company that made safety critical parts for Toyota and scania, I know all the terminology from kaizen to man hours and I have never heard of “traveled work” because we didn’t do it, it’s not something we would have ever considered doing. Anything done off the production line was rework and treated with the same level of respect that you would expect from having to re-manufacture parts. Scania required TS16949 quality standard certification and I can’t believe that the aviation industry would allow standards for commercial to be more stringent than aviation ones. Sadly I’m no longer in engineering or I’d be able to contact someone at Airbus, at their wing assembly plant (which is local to me) and ask them if it’s normal for them to have traveled work too.
I think that the slower restart is precisely correct. As you said, Boeing must do two things at once: restart production and correct past mistake inherited from the merger with McAir (ie. they must change their culture) and that will take time.
Excellent lecture on where Boeing is in its recovery. I can not think of any reasons why it might be slower than expected other than those mentioned. Perhaps Spirit valuation with its high inventory of work in progress. Its reintegration in to Boeing might cause a hiccup. Is it unionized ? In any case one should expect that Boeing will want to get its production lines back up to capacity in order to return to profitability.
We already know the issue with that door plug, it was a spirit defect but boeing removed the plug to fix the bad rivets. The guy fixing the door installed it and needed the locking pin bolts, it was the end of his shift before vacation. Some simple yellow tape would have warned the next shift that there was a hold on reinstalling the interior trim. Bad tracking and simple stuff like some cheap yellow caution tape type fixes.
In 2018 before the crashes “travel work” was over 1,000 work orders per plane coming out of the factory. They parked those planes everywhere, Renton field, Everett, Boeing Field and Moses Lakes that had over 250 planes partially finished. I was there until 2021. It was chaos and management did not care. We knew something bad would happen - and it certainly did. Hopefully the new CEO knows how to listen, if he doesn’t, nothing will change.
My grandfather was the ceo of what is now Sprit in Kansas. I think that would have been in the late 50's or early to mid 60's.
Eh, from the perspective of a ramper or aircraft services worker I haven’t understood how the higher ups at Boeing think for a very long time now. My first thought when I heard about the slow restart of production was “probably just taking the time to update the safety culture” and immediately reminded myself that this was Boeing and safety isn’t their strong suit.
It’s weird how they strayed so far from the rest of the aviation industry (or at least the parts I have access to) because out on the apron/ramp everyone is obsessed with it. Make a mistake and the rest of the team will gently point it out and correct it. Do something stupid or dangerous on purpose and we’ll take you to the manager’s office ourselves.
Interesting. I watched aloha airlines 243 last night...was great and you've come a long way!....just spreading the love 🙂
I appreciate your views on Boeing's careful moves for recovery, which although being frustrating for suppliers and customers are short term. Unless they also announce plans for a new aircraft to replace the 737, their long term future would continue to look hazy...
The hardest part of any job is making it look easy. The grunts on the floor made it look easy and the suits in another state had no idea how the magic worked. So, the screwed with it until it broke. If it ain't broke...
“And yes, it is round” that literally made me laugh out loud
Quality should be the focus of everybody in the company from the janitor to the CEO. Focus on quality and the $$$ will take care of itself
Will you please talk more about the 76? Please!
Love that plane.
Brilliant explanation, as a big fan of Boeing I hope that they come back out of their management stupid strategy that lead them to the safty issues they got into.
Quality sounds like a good thing to focus on.
The problem with relying on "in-time" part supply and multiple suppliers, it only takes one link in the chain to fail, to start lining up unfinished aircraft waiting for parts. It's better to have an inventory of parts ready to go when they start the ball rolling. Spirit was sending their problems to Boeing. They should clean house of any stragglers from MD just for good measure.
Amazing video Petter!
Your videos are always full of great insights. Keep up the great work!!
Nice to see the 777 team back on the job - the 777 is BRILLIANT :)
If they made a 757 NG with new, more efficient engines it might be able to compete with airbus's new narrowbodies
Not.
An even more powerful 757 🤩
No, even that wouldn't really work, it wouldn't be efficient enough, even with new engines. Too heavy.
I don't think they will go in the direction anytime soon because they still need to sell their -10.
Between the 737 family 787 and 777/x they have a plane for each market. They just need to get them certified
Boeing actually needs two new single aisle planes in the long term. One with 5 seats abreast, another with 6.
The question is if Boeing can find the funds and engineers necessary for this.
Thanks for the video. Boeing certainly needs to do something to improve quality and reduce risk, and what you presented sounds positive action.
Technically security related problems solving!
Great analysis, more quality control is needed to stop the deficiencies . QC inspectors should have more authority to correct issues.
Excellent video. Always thought stimulating and informative. Thank you for your perspective, I value it highly. I would offer one slight variance on your comment @20:24 of "handling mistakes" and how Boeing's slowing may them to allow them to "catch mistakes" which will always happen but your "procedures" are critical to catch them before they cause impact. I mostly agree but wish to respectively add; one must be very careful to rely on perfecting procedures that CATCH mistakes and start to loose focus on creating cultures, actions, motivations and discipline that ANTICIPATE environments and opportunities that are conducive to the CREATION of mistakes in the first place. PREVENTION MUST ALWAYS be the primary focus. In terms of proficiency, safety, efficiency and $$.. There is always a terrible and unacceptably high cost to catch a mistake once it happens. MUCH MUCH better and safe to ANTICIPATE and DESIGN with purpose, "procedures" and "environments" which MINIMIZE (with the goal of eliminating) the opportunities for mistakes to be made in the first place. Slow down. Like you said.. TAKE THE EXTRA TURN IN THE HOLD. Bravo Boeing!
This is so exciting, I'm really looking forward to Boeing taking their time and eventually finally recovering from this several decades long nightmare since the merger.
We all do
Yeah I like the 737-8 rides, so smooth!
There's no problem with Just-in-Time delivery, the issue is managers don't understand it. The stock you hold of a part should be proportional to the risk to supply. Parts available from multiple suppliers and easily obtained, then you don't hold a massive amount of cover. Single supplier, subject to possible disruption and an essential part, you hold significant cover. An organisation blaming JiT is incompetent.
At some point, with all these issues, you have to wonder, are the quality of engineers going down, or is there sabotage, or both? I can tell you from personal experience, the quality of civil engineers is definitely decreasing, to the point, they can't do basic math, like how to estimate (literally).
I like to see that finally Boeing may have found the right path, although its troubles are far from being over. The reputation damage is huge and I can't see how Boeing can recover from all its issues without a bail out from the US gov.
What I think Boeing need to do is work on a replacement for the 757 immediately, this should replace the 757 currently in service. It would place many of these737-900s and potentially even give them a competitive advantage against the A321 XLR
Then they should redesign a smaller jet to replace the 737-700 and 800, if they do this right, they could even compete with Airbuses in increasingly growing A220
In order to do this, they would likely have to pull the plug on 767freighter production but Airbus don’t really have a true competitor for that so Boeing customers will still likely stay with Boeing on the freight side
I worked at the Charleston 787 plant in 2011 and left because I was in the wrong position there. I was hired as a QA gathering workmanship defect metrics. Not a very encouraging thing to be doing there. I hold an A&P certificate and would have been better served as training some of the newer mechanics in proper proceedures and attention to details. I left after 6 months feeling very unfulfilled in my job not to mention the the high volume fo workmanship defect metrics I was collecting.
Thank you for not just bashing Boeing.
I have a question, you've sort of touched on it before but I couldn't find a deep dive on it. Why have large planes gone away from 4 engines? The new 747, 2 engine has been in the news again in recent days and it got me curious about the engineering mindset behind it. Thank you, I'm just a civilian who loves planes and enjoys learning from your excellent content.
It's actually very simple, it's cheaper for the airlines to operate a 2 engine aircraft. It really hasn't to do much with engineering, it's simply what the airlines want.
Yet another great video 👏
Safety must always come first, rather than risking costly errors that could put lives and company reputation at risk...
(or even helping to repair it too)
So it is good that Boeing are proceeding with caution, with their new manager, even though it is slowing production.
Think of it as playing the long game, like how a sports team wants to be at their best at the business end of a season come finals.
Everything that you’ve mentioned in this video I believe is critical for Boeing to start to rebuild their reputation. Get back to their core roots and get back to the basics.
I flew 737 Max for the first time today, it really lessened by Max panic.
They need to sack most of their management.
Concise analysis. I now feel better about "The Lazy Bee".
The person at the top sets the tone for the department, or if that is the CEO, the busisness. The best keep personal contact with ALL departments under them. Sir John Harvey Jones was my model of how to do it.
If Boeing cuts 30% of its executives salaries starting with the CEO Boeing would have enough money to pay all raises and even employed more workers, so that, there is no down production, But Boeing rather pleased a 5% than 95% of employees. The 95% that are really productive...
Your figures are way off. Boeing CEO has a total package of about 20 millions a year including stock options, there are a total of 177 000 employees.
If all of the CEO compensation was divided equal among the workers it would be a little more than a 100 usd per year, or about 10 dollars a month.
It's not nothing, but compared to the amounts the workers were on strike for, it's a more or less meaningless amount.
Socialists can't do math or understand economics, that's why they still are socialists.
If you have a lot of quality issues but also falling behind in schedule, would you really want to start to make things faster risking more and more mistakes and mishaps?
Keeping the pace slow even when the pressure of your customers increase is a really smart move. Drawback is clearly you will have a bigger financial problem this way but in my opinion this could be the only way out cause Boeing can't afford another big blow in therms of aircraft safety, functionality or quality.
Sweet, I'm waiting on passengers to board for a 2h 30m flight then saw this. Can watch this in cruise.
(In Microsoft Flight Simulator)
Awesomeness