My channel is about military ,airline and civilian flying, also military, civilian, and airline test flying. In addition, videos about my Great Lakes biplane and flying aerobatics and just general flights. Also videos from my Cessna T310R.
The StarLiner was just supposed to have fixable bugs and kinks to work out…What’s going on ? ! - I believe Boeing said the risk was 1 in 200 or something to bring the astronauts back on the StarLiner ?
Mcdonnell Douglas only had one clean sheet design... The C-17. Everything else was Douglas Aircraft IP. 30 years as a combined entity of nothing but milking Douglas ip.
The problem with Boeing, as with many other American corporations is that they give away big money to Brainless and useless managers and CEOs But pay cents to the smart employess who actually do the job of design, build and test aircrafts....
In the winter of 2017, my business associate (Frank) and I were returning home from a New Jersey business trip back to Los Angeles (from Newark Airport). It was cold and snowing very hard as we boarded the plane. Normally you could see the neighboring concourses from the gate, but not on this day due to the snow storm. Our pilot did the "usual", that is to say we taxied out to the deicing station in preparation for takeoff. I have been on dozens of commercial aircraft being deiced but this one was an "event". The technician conducting the deicing not only hit the wings and empenage but applied copious amounts to the fuselage ... and I couldn't believe it, but he was spraying a volume of deicing liquid directly into the starboard running engine (our side). I had never seen that before, but presumed due to the volume of snowfall he must have been directed to do so. We taxied away from the station toward the runway. It was comforting to see that we were in short sequence for takeoff. We taxied onto the numbers and the pilot applied takeoff power. About half-way down the runway and at rotation speed, the cabin "instantly and completely" filled with smoke. Because of the smell, I knew immediately it was deicing fluid being vaporized and entering the ventilation system. The pilot initiated an abort. I was absolutely astounded that he was able to get the plane stopped just before it would pile off the end of the runway. While we remained stopped, seemingly every piece of emergency equipment in New Jersey arrived in full emergency display. The pilot shut down the engines and we were tugged back to the ramp. Even today, I'm still amazed the pilot got the plane stopped. We had to be moving at 110 knots and the nose wheel off the ground. With our aborted takeoff, we were the last plane to get clearance ... the airport was immediately closed. Luckily ... we found accommodation at a Marriott where we were snowed-in for three days.
You won't be able to relate ... In 1972 I graduated from General Motors Institute in Flint, Michigan with Buick Motor Division and was assigned to my 1st work assignment as District Manager in El Paso, Texas. My District geography was all of West Texas and the Southern half of New Mexico. I was assigned two cars (one in El Paso and the other at the Midland / Odessa Airport) and an air travel card enabling me to traverse my District. My Buick Dealer in Odessa (Oran Britt) was a hunter (as was I) and I would take my Browning Shotgun on that trip. I would drive to the airport in El Paso, park (no fee) in the lot in front of the Continental Airlines building, carry my Shotgun and suitcase into the building (never stopped at the counter) and went directly to the boarding gate. On every occasion, I would purchase my ticket at the gate, request my luggage be boarded from the gate, and my Shotgun (in a scabbard) be placed behind the 3rd seat (pilot cockpit) on the 727. I would then take my seat for the 38 minute flight, which gave just enough time for the airline breakfast to be served. As I stated ... You can't relate to these events due to the "progress" of American society since then. Today, I refuse to fly on commercial airlines due to the complete mistreatment forced upon American Citizens. Also, in those days, women wore dresses, men wore suits, and we were welcomed aboard by the Captain and Airline Stewardesses. If America gets much better I will be walking to every destination.
Jack Welch has done more to destroy capitalism than socialists could ever hope to......... His antics and the antics of the people emulating him have ruined dozens of great companies.....
The one year business model is an American model. Other companies in some foreign countries plan for 5 years and even longer. There is also a saying that I have heard about Toyota that goes like this, most American car companies would like to sell you your next car. Toyota would like to sell you your next ten cars. In an industry like aviation, having some engineers close to the top would seem a prudent choice but since office politics plays such an important part of these decisions this probably doesn't happen except to smaller companies that keep the top staff lean and close to what the original founder was like. All these large aircraft companies have gotten so big and far away from the original ideas that made them great.
How did Boeing go broke or have so many engineering issues? First; One just has to look at the early shortcuts and cost cutting in the DC 10 program in the late 60’s early 70’s. They ruined an otherwise great aircraft in the context of safety. This was foreshadowing for what was to come decades ahead. When MD went broke and Boeing took over, the inept MacDonnell Douglas upper management actually took over Boeing. They have slowly and systematically destroyed the company with the same cost cutting men, with all things coming to a head with the new Death Capsule 10, the Boeing MAX series.
@ronrogers - do you have any knowledge of how good or not good the management at Lockheed Martin or Northrop is these days? It would be a tragedy if all of the remaining great American aircraft manufacturers were following in the same direction as Boeing or rather should we say McDonnell (I don’t even want to say Douglas, since Douglas built some quality aircraft, and it was only after the McDonnell takeover that we began to see problems with cost cutting in a systemic way, for example, the defective cargo door design that killed over 200 people on the THY crash near Paris, and other problems on the DC-10, and the MD-11 had more of the same. By the way, did you ever do an evaluation on the MD-11, or did that enter into service before you were running the aircraft evaluation committee?
I never personally evaluated the MD-11 but I had a committee member who was in charge of that aircraft's evaluation. He brought up many issues re the flight controls.
Lockheed hasn't built a commercial aircraft since the L-1011...... The military aircraft they're building seem to be up to snuff mostly, but I'd be surprised if we ever see a commercial bird from them anytime soon, even if Boeing does go under.
@@RMSTitanicWSL Indeed, as delightful as a new Lockheed Constellation would be it is a pipe dream of enthusiasts. But I am more interested in how their military products and space systems compare (if I recall they are a major contractor on the SLS alongside Boeing).
My first boss at Beech flight test had a great airline story. At one time he was a one- man ticket agent, ramper, and baggage handler for Ozark somewhere in Arkansas. A DC-3 came in with cargo including a shipment of frogs for the university biology department. Apparently some turbulence opened the box and when he opened the baggage door hundreds of frogs poured out and proceeded to jump all over the ramp.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe that Boeing had much to do with the space program until it acquired McDonnell Douglas. It seems to me, and my memory is a little bit hazy, but McDonald Douglas acquired North American, and North American built the Apollo space capsule and designed the S2 rocket. The S1C rocket was engineered and constructed by Rocketdyne, and the S2 was constructed by Rocketdyne, following the design specifications provided by North American. I'm not sure if Rocketdyne was acquired by McDonnell Douglas or by Boeing. I'm not sure who constructed the third stage of Apollo, but it was not Boeing. The lunar excursion module was designed and constructed by Grumman. I can't speak much on project Mercury or project Gemini, but the rockets for both of those programs were based on ICBMs which I do not think Boeing had anything to do with designing or building. The space shuttle was designed and constructed by Rockwell international. I'm not sure whatever happened to that company. The solid rocket boosters were built by Morton Thiocol. I'm not sure whatever happened to Morton Thiocol, but again, Boeing had little or nothing to do with the space shuttle. In any case, Boeing's resume, when it comes to space exploration, is based on the resumes of the companies it acquired. That's nothing to brag about. A lot of people crap on the management from McDonnell Douglas who became part of the governing board at Boeing. I used to feel that way, but I'm not so sure that McDonnell Douglas was such a terrible company. The DC-8 was no more and no less safe than the 707. The DC-10 got a bad rap because of that Chicago incident, but that turns out not to have been the fault of McDonnell Douglas. Rather, that was the fault of American Airlines. Nevertheless, any aircraft with engines built into the flight control surfaces are aircraft that I would rather not travel in. I mean, the Sioux City disaster probably would not have happened if one of the under wing nacelles had blown open, rather than the center engine on that DC-10. Of course, Boeing did the same kind of engineering work with the 727. The number two engine was built into the fuselage of the 727 which is equally dangerous. The DC-9 and its variants were pretty safe. That Alaska airlines fiasco was not the fault of McDonnell Douglas. It was the fault of Alaska Airlines. Just this past week, I spoke with the retired air traffic controller who had the card in hand for that Alaska Airlines flight as it somersaulted into the Pacific just off of Anacapa Island -- you know, those cards the ATC guys shuffle around as aircraft come and go to and from their airspace. Boeing's involvement with the space program is insignificant. The company never should have acquired firms, the missions of which had to do with space. Those just don't align with Boeing's core mission. The latest fiascoes with the 737, I absolutely do not understand. Nobody wants to talk about it, either. Right now, with a masters degree in occupational studies and an undergraduate degree in speech communication, I sell auto parts. In so doing, I encounter the occasional jumbo jet pilot who is also a classic car enthusiast. Whenever I raise the issue about the MCAS system failures in the Boeing 737 Max, they just don't want to go there. The reality is that the people who were in charge of designing that system did not, and still do not, have a decent plan for a failure of the angle of attack sensors built on the outside of that aircraft. Why has no one tied angle of attack information to ADI (artificial horizon) information? It seems pretty simple to me that if the nose of the aircraft is already horizontal with the ground, then you don't auto-magically push the nose further forward, and information from the ADI would ensure that such a logic error could not occur in the event of incorrect information coming from the angle of attack sensors. What I see with Boeing is a general malaise that has taken over that company since its acquisition of McDonnell Douglas, eliminating the last American jumbo jet manufacturing company to compete with Boeing. I seriously questioned the acquisition of McDonnell Douglas when it took place, not because I was concerned about McDonnell Douglas' management, but because a lack of competition is what results in corporate malaise and corporate malaise leads to bad engineering and manufacturing processes. Those design failures in Boeing's entire aero and space program portfolio are the direct result of managerial malaise.
The people that push the idea that McDonnell-Douglas ruined Boeing forget that it was a Boeing engineer - Phil Condit - that put together the merger, moved the headquarters out of Seattle, and arguably began the decline. GE, and now Boeing, are a good illustration that a solid company can take a deceptively long time to destroy. The damage that the Jack Welch types inflict on companies takes so long to manifest, and looks so good in the short term, that it inspires other executives to do the same thing. That said, another major factor in the overall decline was the "Last Supper" in 1994 that drove the drastic consolidation of the defense industry. That event turned all of the industry players into a few companies that are so big that they couldn't be allowed to fail and therefore have no incentive to innovate or improve.
Captain, very interesting insight. On the outside looking in it's amazing what a downturn that Boeing has taken. When Airbus first started I would have bet anything that they wouldn't last 5 years. Now they are company of choice for so many carriers. UA just signed up for a pretty big order of 321's which seems to be the hot single aisle at the moment.
Jack’s hand picked successor at GE- Jeff Immelt proves Welch’s overall incompetence. Immelt pretty much wrecked GE. The GE division heads that lost out to Immelt went on to wreck havoc at Home Depot, Boeing, and 3M
You don't put an Admiral in an F-104. Rocketry is way outside Boeing's wheelhouse. In the 50's, my Uncle (wave 2 Omaha Beach June 6, 1944) became a mechanical engineer for NASA assigned to quality engineering on the fuel control valves for the 5 Atlas Booster Engines. Talk about irony ... He reported (2nd level) to Wernher Von Braun, his enemy during the WAR. But I digress ... My Sister, Brother, and I visited the NASA Facility (went all through it) in 1958. We toured the entire facility with our Uncle, which couldn't happen today. Even at a young age, it seemed obvious there was tremendous waste in terms of resource application. Even today, NASA hasn't improved on this waste of tax-payer funds. With launch success and the publicity wave surrounding the Astronauts, the funding was endless. Today, we watch the way it should have been done via Elon Musk and the rapid success while on a budget. Elon's budget versus the allocation to Boeing is about 1/3rd. The waking of America will likely never happen regarding the cartel corporations versus Mom & Pop (Elon) but the evidence and accomplishment are in plain sight for all to see.
Jack welch left a culture that is still invested in many companies and business schools today - and is devastating the companies that they purport to support. The short term thinking was paramount - now the companies are declining. This business ‘genius’ has devastated huge swathes of what were wonderful engineering led companies who now can’t work out how to get out of a death spiral - so cost cut as they lack the top tier talent to find innovative solutions.
@@ronrogers I've sky dived, scuba dived with sharks, dated married women, have over 1000 hours of combat flying time in Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam, (ABCCC) been hit on my motorcycle and the closest I have ever come to dying was flying tow. After about 7000 tows I had an airhead 15 year old girl on her first solo, should NOT have been allowed to go solo and I should have refused to fly it but..... She kited hard on me at about 350-400 feet, I was nose down more than 60 degrees and rolled a half turn to the left, went for the release but no luck, throttled back and went for the release again and the rope broke. I recovered BELOW tree top level. Her instructor was a world aerobatic champ, she was confused on the requirement to release in such conditions. When I saw all the data about the Schweizer hook I was infuriated. It should NOT be permitted but it is.
@@Max50ww Yes Pawnee, two 235's and one 260 hp with Schweizer hook and release down on the floor, difficult to get to in an emergency. That system should be banned by the FAA in favor of TOST with handle up near the throttle.
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Boeing lost focus. This company is in a death spiral, it is just an observation exercise now. My sorrow is for all the outstanding engineers and technicians that were discarded and left behind.
I think if all the reports can be trusted it was more NASA than Boeing that decided not to bring the astronauts back on the starliner, in fact i think Boeing argued against it down to the day the decision was made.
I've never really understood the philosophy behind the theory that McDonnell Douglas was the cause of Boeing QC and safety decline, McDonnell Douglas built some great aircraft before the merger and the only high profile safety problem i recall was the early DC 10 cargo door. one of there best designs the F-15, Boeing still hasn't been able to screw up no matter how hard they have tried by redesigning it.
It was the competition between the DC-10, the L-1011, and the 747SP that got Douglas Aircraft Company obsessed with cost-cutting at all costs and led to the failures and safety issues with the DC-10. McDonnell bailed them out by buying them but found themselves overextended and thus adopted the new cost-cutting culture wholeheartedly. Part of the reason is that McDonnell wanted in the commercial aircraft market because they thought that market would be more stable than the military aircraft market. Unfortunately, they failed to appreciate the instabilities of the commercial aircraft market, too. As it was, the L-1011 and DC-10 both proved to be good aircraft, but the market they were both competing for was too small to support two different planes. Boeing's entry into that market with the 747SP only made things worse. All three planes proved to be commercial failures for their builders and lost money. With Boeing, it wasn't quite the crisis because they were doing much, much better financially and the 747SP was, of course, merely a derivative of the successful 747 rather than a clean sheet design.
One of my good friends whose job was mostly purchasing aluminum (Boeing buys a lot!), just announced that he just left Boeing and moved to another company.
Thanks again Sir. Studied this mess for some leasing clients who needed to know more about flying airplanes and what that stabilizer is doing back there. Summarized things in this video, and wanted to see what you think: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-T3cH6RGq_jc.html
One financial analyst was going on about profitability. She claimed the company was “bloated”. If she is right, it implies concentrating on core activities and selling off the rest. Certainly ‘space’, possibly ‘services’ and much of ‘defense’. I didn’t get the impression that she gave a d*nm about the future of the US aeronautical industry, let alone workers or anything else. Where will Ortberg find the money to buy off his workers and especially to develop the next generation or two of aircraft (does Boeing have enough engineers? Remember the attempt to merge with Embraer). I get the impression that Airbus is a long way ahead.
My understanding is that McDonnell brought the “bean counter” ethos to Douglas and then MD brought it to Boeing. Hindsight is 20/20 to be sure but I’m of the mind that a Lockheed/Douglas merger would have been more synergistic than what happened.
