SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
https://www.npr.org/2019/12/17/788775642/boeing-will-temporarily-stop-making-its-737-max-jetliners
Production will stop in January. The jets were grounded after two crashes that killed nearly 350 people. Despite being grounded, Boeing continued cranking the planes out at its factory near Seattle.
(The interview had more good information, but at time of submission, the transcript wasn't available. There may be better articles out there.)
There are. Here's one:
Boeing will suspend 737 Max production in January at CNBC:
Boeing is planning to suspend production of its beleaguered 737 Max planes next month, the company said Monday, a drastic step after the Federal Aviation Administration said its review of the planes would continue into next year, dashing the manufacturer's forecast.
Boeing's decision to temporarily shut down production, made after months of a cash-draining global grounding of its best-selling aircraft, worsens one of the most severe crises in the history of the century-old manufacturer. It is ramping up pressure on CEO Dennis Muilenburg, whom the board stripped of his chairmanship in October as the crisis wore on.
The measure is set to ripple through the aerospace giant's supply chain and broader economy. It also presents further problems for airlines, which have lost hundreds of millions of dollars and canceled thousands of flights without the fuel-efficient planes in their fleets.
Boeing said it does not plan to lay off or furlough workers at the Renton, Washington, factory where the 737 Max is produced during the production pause. Some of the 12,000 workers there will be temporarily reassigned.
Previously:
Boeing's 737 Max Troubles Deepen, Taking Airlines, Suppliers With It
Review of 737 Max Certification Finds Fault With Boeing and F.A.A.
American Airlines Says It Will Resume Flights With Boeing’s 737 Max Jets in January
AP Sources: Boeing Changing 737 Max Software to Use 2 Computers
Boeing Falsified Records for 787 Jet Sold to Air Canada
Boeing Pledges $100M to Families of 737 Max Crash Victims
Capt. 'Sully' Sullenberger and Boeing 737 Max News
Boeing’s Own Test Pilots Lacked Key Details Of 737 Max Flight-Control System
Boeing CEO Defends 737 Max Flight Control System
Analysis: Why FAA-Approved Emergency Procedures Failed to Save ET302
Initial Findings Put Boeing's Software at Center of Ethiopian 737 Crash
Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 Max Flight Makes Emergency Landing (While Carrying No Passengers)
Airline Cancels $4.9 Billion Boeing 737 MAX Order; Doomed Planes Lacked Optional Safety Features
Pilot Who Hitched a Ride Saved Lion Air 737 Day Before Deadly Crash
DoJ Issues Subpoenas in 737 Max Investigation
Boeing 737 Max Aircraft Grounded in the U.S. and Dozens of Other Countries
Second 737 MAX8 Airplane Crash Reinforces Speculation on Flying System Problems
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 17 2019, @08:05PM
> Boeing Will Temporarily Stop
> Making its 737 Max Jetliners
And the Paradise Theater [pristineauction.com] is temporarily closed.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Ethanol-fueled on Tuesday December 17 2019, @08:21PM (33 children)
This kind of thing is exactly what happens when companies get rid of their expensive Whites and pack their factories with diversity-hires. Even Bloomberg [bloomberg.com] is admitting that.
Boeing claims that the outsourcing firms' code had nothing to do with the issues with the 737 Max, but then again we know nothing of the team who coded the MCAS software with regard to work-visa status and diversity statistics.
Businessmen love Indians in particular because they'll hand you the code when you ask for it and tell you that it works without objecting to the fact it works only 50% of the time, and they make great fall-guys. You may have noticed that a lot of these big Silicon Valley companies started packing their CEO positions with Indians, and for good reason -- Indians have to answer for all the bad shit those before them started and have no problems with lying to regulators or congress.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday December 17 2019, @08:27PM (17 children)
The hell with the programming. It's hard to get past that one single sensor - single point of failure. FFS, no one ever gave a thought to sucking a bird feather into the damned thing? No need to even go into the stupidity of building a plane that can be described as "out of balance". Even auto manufacturers have learned that raising the center of gravity a few inches can be disastrous.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Tuesday December 17 2019, @08:33PM (12 children)
If I recall correctly the bird already had a lot of redundant inputs (from other types of sensors) which could be fed into the control computer as sanity checks to any malfunctioning sensors. They probably just chose not to do that because management wanted bonuses rather than safe aircraft.
There was also a package that did make the aircraft more safe with those specific issues, but Boeing charged extra for it. Redundancy is a hard and non-negotiable safety feature in large aircraft and should never be sold as an option.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Sulla on Tuesday December 17 2019, @08:43PM (1 child)
Found this video interesting. AvE taking apart an AoA sensor from a C-130.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhZ0D-JRtz0 [youtube.com]
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Wednesday December 18 2019, @03:32AM
Thank you so much. I've seen a few of this guy's vids and I forgot to bookmark him. His narration kills me. I don't know if that stuff just pours out of him or if he scripts it or kind of makes notes. Thanks again!
(Score: 4, Informative) by SpockLogic on Tuesday December 17 2019, @08:50PM (7 children)
Yet no one has been indicted, tried or jailed. Start with the chairman, board of directors and senior management and lets begin with say, felony murder. Should get their fucking attention.
Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Sulla on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:02PM (6 children)
Corporate Jail
1. All assets frozen
2. Debt owed to the company and debt payments they owe are put on hold
3. Liable for Employee wages while frozen, except CEO and Board of Directors
4. Haven't decided if in the case of manufacturing work can continue, can probably depend on industry
How will a bank feel about not receiving their Line of Credit payments for three, six, twelve months? This would make your creditors in the corporate environment forced into the role of a watchdog against company misconduct
Sarbanes-Oxley's goal was to hold the CEO and CFO accountable for certain finance errors, but the result was just putting fall guys in that position and focusing the real power elsewhere. The above would perform the same function, but make it harder to shift blame within the company or set up a fall guy. I suppose shell corporations could be used to hide these kind of things, I need to look into the various laws put in place after Enron to see what is there to prevent this that is already on the books.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:44PM (4 children)
You kidding, right? Or else you are having the wettest dream of your last decade.
Let me put it in the context: we are speaking about Boeing, the second largest defense contractor in the world in 2011 [wikipedia.org] and the fifth largest in 2017 [wikipedia.org] - a prominent figure in the MIC.
The same company that gets away with milking the Americans double the initially contracted cost in SLS core stage, bringing the cost to $8.9 billion [nasa.gov] - you can't do that without having enough politicians in your pocket. His Orangeness himself didn't dare to utter a word against them, even if they are squandering away his "get to the Moon and raise a starshit troopers army" dream.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Tuesday December 17 2019, @10:46PM (3 children)
Then, as the people, buy your own politicians. Crowdsource lobbying.
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?cycle=2018&id=d000000100 [opensecrets.org]
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday December 17 2019, @11:29PM (2 children)
Do you really want it? Really-really?
Because if this become legal, your democracy will become (again [wikipedia.org]), "one dollar, one vote". Which has the consequence of "no dollar, no vote".
Guess who's gonna win?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Tuesday December 17 2019, @11:54PM (1 child)
It is already legal and to some extent done by PACs, the difference between this and PACs is that PACs support the candidate without giving them money directly where as I am suggesting using PAC (or something similar) to make direct contribution for cause. Currently any single person or PAC or Corp can donate their limit toward a cause directly to an elected official's campaign, they are already buying votes. Be they corporate like Boeing or private like Koch or Soros. All you are doing different is a group of non-wealthy people are getting together to pool their money and pay a politician for a specific issue. If me and five people want our congressmen to be aggressive toward Boeing, nothing stops us from each pooling 2k and sending it to her with a letter telling them how important you feel X issue is.
So your complaints are valid, but what you are complaining about we already have
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday December 18 2019, @12:18AM
And you are so happy with it that you want more of the same?
Instead of getting away from the "corporation buying voting influence", you maybe want to take one more step into the insanity and get to, e.g., "corporations casting votes" as a preliminary step towards "wealth/class based suffrage"**?
---
** (you already have a bit of that: it's highly unlikely that the US homeless can actually cast votes [howstuffworks.com], even if they are theoretically entitled. So, one only needs to get enough Americans homeless and the defacto "wealth based suffrage" is done without modifications of the current laws).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 20 2019, @10:53AM
Why punish the whole company and all employees when only a minority are responsible?
Just start throwing people into prison and don't be surprised when you start to find out who else is really responsible.
Are those "fall guys" really ending up in prison though?
http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/2012/07/27/sarbanes-oxleys-lost-promise-why-ceos-havent-been-prosecuted/ [reuters.com]
Just throw into prison the ones that you have evidence on. More evidence may "magically" start surfacing when those heading to prison are trying to reduce their jail times...
Fines and "Corporate Jail" won't do shit as long as the culprits can keep their $$$$$$$ and get new jobs.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:56PM
Problems started when they put those assholes from McDonnell Douglas in charge after the merger, ruined everything, should have never happened. Now everything they make is as crappy as the DC-10.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 18 2019, @02:59PM
And how non-white and non-expensive was the management involved?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by sjames on Tuesday December 17 2019, @10:41PM (3 children)
It's even worse (if you can believe that). The plane is already equipped with a second AoA sensor, they just didn't bother to have MCAS check it, so they didn't even save any real money.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by darkfeline on Wednesday December 18 2019, @06:10AM (2 children)
Having a second sensor is pointless. Say one sensor reading is 5 and the other 10. Which one do you trust? You must be able to form a consensus for redundancy to be useful.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 18 2019, @06:55AM
If they disagree then you warn the pilot and disable both, the same as you do if you have three that all disagree with each other. Even then, the biggest problem was that the software override didn't reset properly, so every time it fired it pushed the plane even further towards crashing.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday December 18 2019, @07:56PM
As the AC said, then you trust neither one. Warn the pilot, disengage MCAS, then log the failure so it can be repaired.
(Score: 3, Informative) by epitaxial on Tuesday December 17 2019, @08:31PM (4 children)
You didn't read your own source. They outsourced because it was much cheaper. They didn't care what color skin the coders had.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:31PM
#include <dev/stdin>
#include <dev/null>
#include <dev/random>
#include <dev/urandom>
#define while if // saves cpu cycles!
#define struct union // saves memory!
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday December 17 2019, @10:15PM (2 children)
ET only really cares about race.
Apparently he thinks that when a poorly regulated company breaks the rules and kills people, it is somehow the fault of some programmers, if that programmer happens to have a brown face.
Ignoring of course that fact that a white man made the decision to cut costs in the first place.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 17 2019, @10:54PM (1 child)
Where is he blaming brown programmers for the 737? He is blaming Boeing for making that choice.
You have just rewritten Ethanol-fueled's point with politically correct language.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday December 17 2019, @11:13PM
Do you not understand the implication?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 17 2019, @08:44PM (3 children)
You better have another drink. You're sounding stupid again.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:26PM (2 children)
Assumes facts not in evidence.
I can assure you it is possible to sound stupidly without a drop of alcohol.
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 18 2019, @03:01PM (1 child)
Guess you're sober and stupid?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday December 18 2019, @04:40PM
They're not mutually exclusively.
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:52PM (2 children)
That kind of thing happens when you get scammed into adopting fake money, let banks print money, let it compete with actual wealth, or worse require it to pay taxes. Banks raise a class of people reasoning in purely financial terms, and will make them compulsory at the helm of whatever bigger enough company. Other people will not be recognized by the banking system no matter their knowledge of the actual fucking product or service.
People reasoning in financial terms will consider sales the oxygen and product development the necessary evil. Note that this is the exact OPPOSITE of the old school great company, where sales is what you gotta do to keep the thing afloat, if you want to keep churning out good stuff. Mr. Ferrari (guy with a good business acumen nonetheless) sold the cars to raise money for the races.
We should have a quality mark on stuff: you can get the mark only if your CEO can tell you in detail how a random damage/fault to any of its products is to be repaired. If there are too many products for the single CEO, it means the company is too big.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Tuesday December 17 2019, @10:05PM (1 child)
On the other hand, I never understood certificates of conformance. It should be implied that your product has specifications and that your product meets or exceeds those specifications, no?
Most expensive gadgets ship with their test and calibration data anyway. So what good does a CoC do? The tech signs it, maybe a quality manager (who knows less about the system than a tech does) gives it a brief look-over and pencil-whips his signature on the CoC? Or, even more funny, the pre-stamped signature of a C-level executive who has even less of an idea than the quality manager how the gadget works.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday December 19 2019, @08:54AM
I think those certifications are only meant to raise a class of bureaucrats and make it more difficult to startups to compete with the incumbent. An effective legal system and randomized checks render any certification redundant, as you know that if you sell crap you end up in jail, no matter what. The certification is a way for the politicians to have a seat for his cronies and proclaim 'we have done something for safety'.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Coward, Anonymous on Tuesday December 17 2019, @10:26PM
But Boeing has kept their most expensive white guy (Muilenberg). Maybe one of those Indian CEOs would have done better.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 17 2019, @10:54PM (1 child)
Paging all racists! Come git yer dog whistles, all racists your fascist overlord is calling you!
Sure is a good thing the US has freedom of speech and the ideals of freedom. You serve as an example for kids everywhere of what real stupidity is. Not doing well at math? It's ok Johnny, just don't become a racist fuckwit and you'll still get dates and job offers.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday December 19 2019, @08:57AM
Technically the post wasn't racist. It is not racist to say America was owned by natives until they were genocided by whites.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by barbara hudson on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:13PM (18 children)
The tires will have flat spots, hydraulic lines need to be purged of old lube and all seals checked to make sure that they're still flexible, etc. As long as it was supposed to be delivered this year, it was considered as sold inventory on the books. Not any more. This is going to mess up their accounting. Airlines are going to refuse to take old stock unless given sizeable discounts - and they are going to want their pound of flesh for losses from Boeing's screwups.
How long until KKR or some other vulture fund comes in with an offer to buy it and break it up? After this, the civil aviation business is a drag on their defence and space businesses.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:28PM
It will end up being longer than a year.
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:33PM (11 children)
The only way I'd ride in one is if they were converted to standard 737's, or at the very least use a smaller engine so that the nacelles could be scooted back where they belong. They could probably sell all of those LEAP engines to a competitor (according to the Wikipedia Airbus and another manufacturer also use them) as spares.
Would probably hinder performance and efficiency while adding safety, would be a damn shame to let those shiny new airframes go to waste. But yeah, if they want to salvage the situation they're gonna have to redesign that bitch and re-name it something else. I wonder how easily they could be converted to 797s?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:48PM (1 child)
Well, if you are prepared to pay, it can be arranged. So... how many retrofitted planes you said you want to buy? (grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Wednesday December 18 2019, @05:32AM
Parked aircraft burn money just sitting still. I'll probably put in an expression of interest when they get to offering $US1M with each airframe...
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DannyB on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:52PM (4 children)
Move the wings from the side of fuselage to the top. Cool fashion statement AND gives plenty of room to hang even bigger engines! No special software needed. Engineers can be found who will sign off. Marketing can communicate how much safer the new design is because you can't bang your head on the wings when walking under to test if it is possible to get sucked into new engines. Landing gear tires can now be white wall or rainbow stripe. Cockpit upgrade to Windows 10. All set.
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Tuesday December 17 2019, @11:31PM (3 children)
I hope and pray that no cockpit has windows 10 as it's main operating system. The thought is truly horrifying.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday December 18 2019, @04:20PM (2 children)
Stick with XP which is "mature".
When trying to solve a problem don't ask who suffers from the problem, ask who profits from the problem.
(Score: 1) by DECbot on Wednesday December 18 2019, @07:19PM (1 child)
I think you spelled 'manure' wrong.
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday December 18 2019, @10:53PM
(Score: 5, Funny) by Bot on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:55PM
You can convert them to 787, as the 3 can be painted into an 8 quite easily.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 18 2019, @01:28AM (1 child)
Just mount the engines on top of the wings. ;)
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Wednesday December 18 2019, @04:51AM
No, you'd ruin the balance. Put one on top and one underneath so it all evens out.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Wednesday December 18 2019, @06:32PM
I would very happily fly in one today. Because there ain't a 737 pilot who hasn't heard of the issue now and the situation is readily understood (unexpected loss of altitude with no other discernable cause) and therefore employ the temporary solution they had to fix the issue (wasn't it pull a breaker to disable the stabilizer trim, therefore cutting the ability of MCAS to control? More than one source has said the runaway stabilizer checklist cures the problem, anyway.) That said, making them go back and touch base for safety isn't a bad idea at all.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:54PM (2 children)
Airplanes aren't like cars, and airliners aren't like people. When you buy a plane, you aren't just buying a plane, you are buying a relationship. There is warranty, ongoing Operations and Maintenance work, and everything. If Boeing says the plane is good to use, then the airline is going to accept that; especially because if it doesn't work, Boeing is on the hook to fix it.
If your shiny new iPhone had a huge scratch on the back, people would complain and return it. If an industrial combine harvester had a big scratch along the side, the farm is going to shrug and say "that's annoying, oh well." Airlines are closer to the later than the former.
At worst, the airlines will have a few more contracts specifying exactly how much Boeing is assuring that the plane will work, and what they will pay back if it doesn't. (Excepting the recent damage to Boeing reputation, etc, etc, etc... that's a "don't trust Boeing" thing, though, not a "these aren't factory new planes" thing.)
(Score: 3, Interesting) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 18 2019, @12:56AM
Oh well, back to the drawing board. Wonder how much of a hit they'll take for scrapping the entire run when customers say "we're canceling and suing ".
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Wednesday December 18 2019, @05:37AM
Boeing DID say it was good to use, and the airlines DID accept it. The amount of wriggling going on just says the hook (a) isn't big enough, and (b) hasn't been used enough times.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:57PM (1 child)
Ummm but isn't a plane basically rebuilt after x hours of use as it undergoes deep checks repairs and whatever? or was it only the good ol days?
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Wednesday December 18 2019, @05:44AM
Still goes on, but it costs a bit more than a car service...
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 2) by Rupert Pupnick on Wednesday December 18 2019, @12:46AM (2 children)
Why?
Grounding and retrofitting the existing fleet isn’t good enough?
Or is it because they figure they aren’t going to get enough future incremental sales to justify the operating costs?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 18 2019, @05:26AM
I think they will go further and kill 737 Max entirely. Airliners don't want to buy a plane with a name that strikes fear in the hearts of passengers.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Wednesday December 18 2019, @06:43AM
> Grounding and retrofitting the existing fleet isn’t good enough?
Most everyone has rightly lost confidence in Boeing's ability to fix it.