Considering the Max still has a historic backlog and has better performance than the 320 family in the -7 and -8 sizes. I think they have a viable and competitive single aisle aircraft.
Sooner or later this issue will be fixed and they will start delivering record numbers of them again.
Yikes, critical 737 MAX software was outsourced to $9/hour programmers while Senior Engineers were being laid off.
https://www.industryweek.com/supply-chain/boeings-737-max-software-outsourced-9-hour-engineers
They were preparing to move away from the 737 airframe when Airbus sold 100 A320 NEO's (new engine options) to United. Boeing didn't want to see that many sales lost so they modified the 737 with a much more efficient engines. Problem is the 737 is too low to the ground for these much bigger engines so they were forced to mount them much further forward which resulted in a tendency for the nose to pitch up so they created the MCAS system to counter for it. Them they only fed this system with one sensor, ( huge mistake in such a critical system) because using 2 or more meant the plane would be reclassified and pilots would need expensive training for the new "type". By using only one sensor the training will only be a 45 minute Ipad session so the airlines were all in on it, don't think they knew about MCAS at all and it's almost criminal IMO to not have pilots know about it, or how it operates. Boeing's excuse was "we didn't want to overburden the pilots" is complete hogwash too.Tried to milk the 737 airframe too long. Reminds me of Intel with the Pentium 4.
It was American that bought the NEO, orders and options for 260 of them. At the time AA was an all Boeing fleet and was blindsided by the order. Boeing rushed out the 737Max, and AA ended up putting 200 orders and options on the Max as well.They were preparing to move away from the 737 airframe when Airbus sold 100 A320 NEO's (new engine options) to United. Boeing didn't want to see that many sales lost so they modified the 737 with a much more efficient engines. Problem is the 737 is too low to the ground for these much bigger engines so they were forced to mount them much further forward which resulted in a tendency for the nose to pitch up so they created the MCAS system to counter for it. Them they only fed this system with one sensor, ( huge mistake in such a critical system) because using 2 or more meant the plane would be reclassified and pilots would need expensive training for the new "type". By using only one sensor the training will only be a 45 minute Ipad session so the airlines were all in on it, don't think they knew about MCAS at all and it's almost criminal IMO to not have pilots know about it, or how it operates. Boeing's excuse was "we didn't want to overburden the pilots" is complete hogwash too.
Ok, OK, I should have checked, I did know the Max's creation revolved around a large domestic purchase. I'll have to re-check because I did see a vid somewhere explain the plan form Boeing (one sensor) as avoiding airline type cert. rating. If it was a "limited" system the malfunction was certainly severe.It was American that bought the NEO, orders and options for 260 of them. At the time AA was an all Boeing fleet and was blindsided by the order. Boeing rushed out the 737Max, and AA ended up putting 200 orders and options on the Max as well.
MCAS using two sensors would not have reclassified the flight deck type cert. It was designed as a limited authority system that didn't require redundancy. The 737 does have two AoA vanes so I don't know why they didn't use both anyways.
Yeah, it was designed as a limited authority system, but obviously that wasn't the reality. An article I read said they increased the gains during flight test and never reviewed the safety analysis.Ok, OK, I should have checked, I did know the Max's creation revolved around a large domestic purchase. I'll have to re-check because I did see a vid somewhere explain the plan form Boeing (one sensor) as avoiding airline type cert. rating. If it was a "limited" system the malfunction was certainly severe.
It's what naturally happens when companies become bloated with no real drive to innovate (lack of competition).
Except Boeing is not a monopoly and has a competitor that's just as big, just as powerful and that fights them for every contract.
And THAT appears to be more to blame here than claim of bloat or laziness caused by lack of competition. Boeing is a big company with a hugely expensive workforce and is under constant pressure to get contracts by being the low bidder. Their troubles smell a hell of a lot more like cutting corners to reduce costs and meet bid prices than it does of them being apathetic because they don't have a strong competitor.
Except Boeing is not a monopoly and has a competitor that's just as big, just as powerful and that fights them for every contract.
And THAT appears to be more to blame here than claim of bloat or laziness caused by lack of competition. Boeing is a big company with a hugely expensive workforce and is under constant pressure to get contracts by being the low bidder. Their troubles smell a hell of a lot more like cutting corners to reduce costs and meet bid prices than it does of them being apathetic because they don't have a strong competitor.
Re Unions:
Toyota is the world leader in manufacturing production systems, highly profitable, and also treats their workers with respect and empowerment. It is a core Toyota value to place the worker at the center, and the highest leadership makes very strong commitments to avoid ever laying off workers.
UAW has tried to organize unions in some of their factories, but they are rejected.
Why? Because the company treats them better than they would get from the unionization. Leadership has built a strong culture of trust backed by results.
Unions can absolutely be a hindrance to companies agility, innovation, culture and overall sustainability.
Unions are created when workers are mistreated and exploited by wrong-headed and ineffective mgmt.
Imo, unionization can be a symptom of internal rot and company illness, they are not a cure.
Better leadership and mgmt to create an effective culture and workforce is the key to longterm company sustainability and shared prosperity.
I wish the Democrats would better recognize this in their campaigns, rather than just advocate for more unions.
I would fly the Max on day 1 of its return to service. The 737 is a time-tested airframe, and now that all the alterations are being put under the microscope, my prediction is that from this point forward, it's going to be the safest plane in the sky.
Thank you for paying to field test it for people like me. I hope it works well.I would fly the Max on day 1 of its return to service. The 737 is a time-tested airframe, and now that all the alterations are being put under the microscope, my prediction is that from this point forward, it's going to be the safest plane in the sky.