The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Investment Analysis Clubs / Macro Economic Trends and Risks


Subject:  Re: Boeing Engineering Date:  3/17/2019  9:15 PM
Author:  borisnand Number:  555102 of 572018

Interesting summary in the OP. Testing for single point failures is standard, so I'm not sure how they got around that requirement. In general, sensors are pretty unreliable, and need constant calibration and checks. Maybe shipments to some countries have lower standards.

The fact that there was a AoA vane option package indicates that someone at Boeing knew that this was a problem. The old Boeing would have over-engineered it and just added the redundant systems. The new Boeing, with few competitors and lax regulators, cut corners. I've seen this with other high-end brands. They start selling junk and depend on the reputation earned over decades to squeeze out a few years of high profits. Take the money and run.

I would add that there was a marketing failure: saying there was no need for additional training. This has hurt Boeing's image with pilots.

Boeing will be fine financially. They only have one major commercial competitor, and are printing money. And they have been winning military contracts recently. Their customers are more concerned with the bottom line than passengers, and so will buy the fixed Max. Pilots might rebel and write a stern letter, but that's all.

Or maybe someone will start a disrupter company. But that will take 10 years or so.
Copyright 1996-2019 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us