737 Max

[DSP_Geek]

BTW- the avionic hardware in an airliner must also satisfy DO-254 (software is handled by DO-178). I'm sure the mechanical construction of the aircraft must go through similar standards. So, I'm really disappointed at the lack of manufacturing standards of quality at Boeing.

Think the 737 Max is bad? The 787 has almost as many problems thanks to beancounter outsourcing, derived from contempt for actual knowledge:

CEO Jim McNerney, who joined Boeing in 2005, had last helmed 3M, where management as he saw it had “overvalued experience and undervalued leadership” before he purged the veterans into early retirement.

“Prince Jim”—as some long-timers used to call him—repeatedly invoked a slur for longtime engineers and skilled machinists in the obligatory vanity “leadership” book he co-wrote. Those who cared too much about the integrity of the planes and not enough about the stock price were “phenomenally talented ***holes,” and he encouraged his deputies to ostracize them into leaving the company. He initially refused to let nearly any of these talented ***holes work on the 787 Dreamliner, instead outsourcing the vast majority of the development and engineering design of the brand-new, revolutionary wide-body jet to suppliers, many of which lacked engineering departments. The plan would save money while busting unions, a win-win, he promised investors. Instead, McNerney’s plan burned some $50 billion in excess of its budget and went three and a half years behind schedule.

https://prospect.org/infrastructure/transportation/2024-03-28-suicide-mission-boeing/

Violations of safety regulations, falsified inspection data, faulty parts sent on supposedly flight-worthy aircraft, and now this increasingly suspicious "suicide": Boeing is looking less and less like a manufacturing corporation and more like a multi-billion dollar crime scene.

And oh look, James McNerney is a Harvard Business School graduate. What a surprise. I am shocked.

If a foreign institution had sent people to America to wreak as much damage as HBS grads have, a long time ago the Marines would have razed the place to the ground and buried the perpetrators in the rubble. As it stands these malefactors are fêted and honoured for their contributions to "a vital part of the free enterprise system".

Meanwhile the business press is full of wonderful ideas for Boeing's next CEO:

Culp, who had previously been the CEO of Danaher Corporation, introduced a methodical strategy for streamlining operations and an intense concentration on profit and cash flow to his position at GE.

Boeing could learn a lot from Larry Culp's strategy at GE, which prioritized paying down debt, selling off non-essential assets to streamline the company's structure, and establishing a culture of openness and accountability.

Read the entire article to check out what a cesspool of BS smells like. Bring a barf bag:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimosm...need-a-rockstar-ceo-larry-culp-fits-the-bill/
Note the "experienced investor who has watched the rise and fall of two American industrial giants" just happens to be its author penning the referenced article. Is there no bottom for these self-serving schmucks?

Aaaaaand Culp is Yet Another Harvard MBA. Quelle surprise. I am certain he will repeat the marvelous success of all the MBAs before him. Where are the engineers? Hounded to retirement, it's now beancounters all the way down. Ladies and gentlemen, witness the triumph of the Friedman Doctrine: formerly great companies hollowed out for short term gains and to Hell with vision beyond the CEO's stock grants.

 

[Stuey]

Bonsai, agreed! Excellent read.

We see Captain de Crespigny on TV here (with Qantas being Aussie) fairly often since that happened, being interviewed about airline safety stories such as the Boeing saga.

 

[Bonsai]

I'm afraid when the stock market is allowed to dictate how companies are run, there will be problems. You can get away with it if you are making chocolates or bricks, but you won't get away with it making airplanes or anything else that has to work perfectly every time.

 

[Bonsai]

If this is what a turnaround looks like, I’d hate to see what they call a disaster:-

 

[tonyEE]

...
That there seems to be little (maybe I'm wrong here) rigorous testing of software by external bodies is troubling. ...

You're wrong.

Requirements based avionics firmware testing is extremely rigorous and well developed. See DO178B/C

The trick is to make sure the Systems people develop a good set of requirements.

 

[billshurv]

Simple, the 380 was using a RR engine huh?

The 787 uses GE.

Maybe the 787 will tell the pilots: "Good day, you can relax, you are flying GE".

I should have known you would not read the question. Let us assume that, despite all the best analysis a disc burst can occur on a GE engine and said disk holes the plane in 3 places and severs a good chunk of the loom. What error message will the pilots get on a 787? Just one for multiple system failures?

I have to say it's a shame you are making what could be a really interestingly nuanced discussion black and white. Could we try and find some common ground to discuss the fascinating engineering challenges that face a modern commercial jet?

Aside: in London we prefer to hang people off bridges rather than lamp posts but this has rather gone out of fashion since the 80s (see Roberto Calvi).

 

[tonyEE]

I was not joking.

I did read your post.

As a matter of fact I have pretty intimate understanding of the GE vs RR jet engines. I've been looking at their FADECs in detail lately and at the API between the aircraft and the FADEC. And as such, the internal designs ( and failure modes ) become part of the study. Also, the complexity of the airplane's systems become obvious: Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier, Embraer.. etc...

The GE engines are more advanced and use lighter, more expensive components than RR. Their failure modes are different and will not self destroy like the RR engine did, slicing part of the 380 and shutting down hydraulics...

Meaning the avionics in an aircraft flying GE will not be so overwhelmed by the failures, because the GE won't fail in such a manner. Oddly, this affects both Boeing and Airbus.. and the others.

You know, avionics is a big employer in my profession... so I've been doing this off and on since 1981.

 

[jotom750]

Though I have no wish to get into the middle of this GE Vs RR "Love fest". Is this the event being referred to? Because if it is, the RR fails seem much older, is one to assume that these would have been rectified from a design or manufacturing standpoint by now? It seems to me that both companies products have had issues in their past. Hopefully the use of effective oversight has meant that these problems are now behind us.

"This Airbus A380 occurrence followed two previous incidents involving Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engines. In September 2009, an engine malfunctioned on a Singapore Airlines flight from Paris to Singapore, and a Tokyo-Frankfurt Lufthansa flight in August 2010 had engine trouble that resulted in one engine being shut down due to low oil pressure.[46] In September 2017, an Air France A380 powered by Engine Alliance turbofans (made by General Electric Aircraft Engines and Pratt & Whitney) suffered an engine failure on a flight from Paris to Los Angeles.[47]
An airworthiness directive was issued by the European Aviation Safety Agency on 4 August 2010 that required inspection of the Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engine.[42]"

It's easy and sometimes useful to have a "my product is better than your product" attitude, but it can be misleading, and cause a false feeling of superiority. I remember working in mechanical design at 3Com before the Dot Come bust up. We would regularly tear down opposition products. Our "Superstack" was the market leader, and when compared to the Cisco equivalent seemed miles ahead in technology, cost of production and "expected" reliability. As of today, what company still exists, and are their products of acceptable quality? (Hint, it’s not 3Com).

 

[Bonsai]

I just read the article DSP_Geek linked to above and it reminded me of a similar situation a few decades before the Boeing debacle when there was a push - triggered by some management guru/theorist - to take out middle management. The theory was these were people who were too good to have stayed on the shop floor but not good enough to rise to the top of the organisation. As if there ever was enough room at the top. Also, many of these folk would have spent most of their careers in one company, so they were expensive. So, there was this mad dash to flatten org structures and decimate the middle management ranks. It quickly turned out to be a disaster and someone finally twigged. Most of the working knowledge in any organisation ie how to get things done, who to get involved in problem solving, deep technical knowledge and experience etc resides in the middle management ranks. I was taught this on my MBA: understand where the deep organisational knowledge resides in your organisation and don’t **** with it! (Open University).

It seems McNerny never learnt that lesson and the result is the Boering we see today.

 

[petertub]

Our "Superstack" was the market leader, and when compared to the Cisco equivalent seemed miles ahead in technology, cost of production and "expected" reliability. As of today, what company still exists, and are their products of acceptable quality? (Hint, it’s not 3Com).

I remember these well. Cisco was many years ahead of 3com and other with their software. That's what counted when
we choose cisco. Mechanically and electrically both was adequate and cisco gave no problems.
One of the differences was that cisco was managed with any teminal/telnet session independent of brand
and also had the opportunity to external scripting and save/restore of everything.

 

[gpapag]

The GE engines are more advanced and use lighter, more expensive components than RR. Their failure modes are different and will not self destroy like the RR engine did, slicing part of the 380 and shutting down hydraulics...

Tony, this doesn't describe reality.
Four cases of GE CF6-80 HPT disk brocken in pieces btn 2000 and 2016.
Uncontained failure and all.
All on B767
2 AA (2006, 2016)
1 Air New Zealand (2002)
1 US Airways (2000)

George

 

[jotom750]

I remember these well. Cisco was many years ahead of 3com and other with their software. That's what counted when
we choose cisco. Mechanically and electrically both was adequate and cisco gave no problems.
One of the differences was that cisco was managed with any teminal/telnet session independent of brand
and also had the opportunity to external scripting and save/restore of everything.

Peter, I really don't want this to get into a "this verses that" discussion as seems to have happened with the jet engine issue, I have found peoples posts that infer other opinions, but see them as non-constructive to the core point I hope to make. When I was there as far as we were told it was the market leader. Someone must have liked them because they were selling hundreds of thousands of the things.

Now, (market leading) may or may not be true, but it makes my point, that companies within themselves have few objective ways of determining absolute quality, suitability for purpose or worthiness of work or products, be it compared to competitors, or in absolute terms. Only an objective outside body can have any chance of doing that, unfortunately in many cases that can only take place after the fact.

 

[DSP_Geek]

If this is what a turnaround looks like, I’d hate to see what they call a disaster:-

Business journalists are like stock analysts: they're well-spoken in the service of selling you whatever rubbish comes down the pike, and most of them aren't worth the powder to blow them to Hell.

This guy is one of the few analysts deserving a listen. Strangely enough, he has domain expertise in what he analyses. Imagine that.

[Ronald] Epstein, veteran research analyst for Bank of America, was unsparing in his criticism of Boeing and its vendor partner, Spirit AeroSystems, following the early January episode that left a hole in the fuselage of the Boeing 737 Max 9.
[...]
“Culture isn’t found in an employee handbook,” wrote Epstein in a January analyst report. In addition to being a veteran equity analyst, Epstein holds a master’s degree and Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from Duke University and an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.

He argued that Boeing needs a “drastic” cultural overhaul. “This cultural change won’t come from FAA mandates, congressional hearings, internal memos, or one-hour all hands meetings,” Epstein wrote. In his critique, he included Boeing supplier Spirit AeroSystems, which is based in Wichita, Kansas.

“For culture to move from corporate jargon to being embodied in the habits and minds of both workforces, we see it as necessary for Boeing and Spirit to drastically rethink the ways they have operated,” Epstein wrote. “For each to achieve a true cultural shift, reigniting engineering culture and rebuilding employee trust are paramount.”

Because the design, construction, and maintenance of airplanes affect human lives, he stresses the need to prioritize the safety concerns and procedures of engineers over business executives who may want to pursue less costly paths to maximize profits.

“Boeing and Spirit’s engineering prowess has waned due to an obsession with financial metrics bolstered by cost cutting and cash flow generation,” Epstein wrote. “Did anyone ever start an innovative company with the end goal of optimizing share repurchases and paying a dividend? It’s our view both companies should look to promote product development-oriented engineers to the highest levels of decision making to map the road ahead which can restore their names as engineering titans.”

The article goes into a damning assessment of McNerney's tenure at 3M before Boeing, with receipts, and previous CEO Harry Stonecipher does not get off scot-free either.

https://www.minnpost.com/twin-citie...e-and-the-tension-between-safety-and-profits/

Speaking of bogus business journalists, Larry Culp, pushed by the guy I previously referenced suggesting him for Boeing CEO, also has tenure at GE with an emphasis on cost-cutting, like Stonecipher and McNerney before him, and a Harvard MBA like McNerney. What could possibly go wrong?

 

[DSP_Geek]

As a matter of fact I have pretty intimate understanding of the GE vs RR jet engines. I've been looking at their FADECs in detail lately and at the API between the aircraft and the FADEC. And as such, the internal designs ( and failure modes ) become part of the study. Also, the complexity of the airplane's systems become obvious: Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier, Embraer.. etc...

Are you as amused as I am at the return of unducted fans? I'm thinking blade failure might be, ah, "amusing" since containment would be the wing, fuselage, passenger bodies...

 

[jackinnj]

Epstein is a solid analyst, although he was a Boeing apologist at the earliest stages of the B737Max problem. (He's now a Raytheon hater).

 

[Bonsai]

Tony, this doesn't describe reality.
Four cases of GE CF6-80 HPT disk brocken in pieces btn 2000 and 2016.
Uncontained failure and all.
All on B767
2 AA (2006, 2016)
1 Air New Zealand (2002)
1 US Airways (2000)

George

As scary as it sounds, jet engines do go wrong. Luckily with the safety back up systems in place and that modern two engined aircraft can fly on one engine when push comes to shove, most failures don’t result in catastrophe.

 

[Bonsai]

Don’t forget how reliable jet engines are. Remember the BA flight that flew through the volcanic ash in Indonesia about 25 yrs ago? The ash turned to glass inside the engines but the plane still flew. Also a very experienced crew who were able to land the 747 on instruments and reduced engine thrust because the ash had scratched the windshield so badly visibility was essentially zero.

 

[gpapag]

As scary as it sounds, jet engines do go wrong.... most failures don’t result in catastrophe.

True.
I’ve seen tens of Turbofan engine failures contained, even engines operable in idle, despite having their LPC or HPC blades gone to a high percentage and consequently their HPT /LPT blades badly damaged.

A disk failure on the other hand is hardly -if ever-contained.
Too high a moment of inertia.
It’s the nightmare of engine manufacturers.

George

 

[DSP_Geek]

Don’t forget how reliable jet engines are. Remember the BA flight that flew through the volcanic ash in Indonesia about 25 yrs ago? The ash turned to glass inside the engines but the plane still flew. Also a very experienced crew who were able to land the 747 on instruments and reduced engine thrust because the ash had scratched the windshield so badly visibility was essentially zero.

Captain Eric Moody, who passed away just a few days ago, redefined the Right Stuff by adding a considerable dose of British stiff upper lip:

Despite the lack of time, Moody made an announcement to the passengers that has been described as "a masterpiece of understatement":[5]

Ladies and gentlemen, this is your captain speaking. We have a small problem. All four engines have stopped. We are doing our damnedest to get them going again. I trust you are not in too much distress.

As Flight 009 approached Jakarta's Halim Perdanakusuma International Airport,[10] the crew found seeing anything through the windscreen difficult, and made the approach almost entirely on instruments, despite reports of good visibility. The crew decided to fly the instrument landing system, but the vertical guidance system was inoperative, so they were forced to fly with only the lateral guidance as the first officer monitored the airport's distance-measuring equipment (DME). He then called out how high they should be at each DME step along the final approach to the runway, creating a virtual glide slope for them to follow. Moody described it as "a bit like negotiating one's way up a badger's ****."[1] Although the runway lights could be made out through a small strip of the windscreen, the landing lights on the aircraft seemed to be inoperable. After landing, the flight crew found taxiing impossible, due to glare from apron floodlights, which made the already sandblasted windscreen opaque.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_009

 

[GeoffMillar]

Bonsai, agreed! Excellent read.

We see Captain de Crespigny on TV here (with Qantas being Aussie) fairly often since that happened, being interviewed about airline safety stories such as the Boeing saga.

His books about QF32 and leadership are well worth reading; a very impressive, highly intelligent and modest man.

Geoff