Netflix documentary about Boeing
Discussion
I watched this last night, anyone else seen it?
I'm not sure Boeing should still be in existence, at least at the size they are although it appears they have had some assistance in surviving courtesy of the FAA and DoJ in the US.
It very much reminded me of Ford's decision back in the 70s about not issuing a recall for the Pinto(?) because they calculated that'd be more expensive than paying out compensation to the relatives of a few deceased crash victims.
I'm not sure Boeing should still be in existence, at least at the size they are although it appears they have had some assistance in surviving courtesy of the FAA and DoJ in the US.
It very much reminded me of Ford's decision back in the 70s about not issuing a recall for the Pinto(?) because they calculated that'd be more expensive than paying out compensation to the relatives of a few deceased crash victims.
Boeing isn't the company it used to be.
It's just grown too big and swallowed up too many of the companies that used to be its competitors.
Capitalism works best when there are multiple players competing in the market place. Nowadays, the only significant competitor to Boeing is Airbus.
If you look back to (say) 1965 the number of airliner manufacturers competing with Boeing was much more varied
In the USA
Douglas
Convair
Lockheed
Martin
Fairchild
Outside the USA
Sud Aviation
BAC
Hawker Siddeley
Fokker
And that doesn't include the Soviet manufacturers who were providing airliners to their "captive audience" of vassal states -
Yakovlev
Ilyushin
Antonov
Tupolev
Look at the options that were vailable to airlines back then.
Now they only really have Boeing or Airbus with Bombardier and Embraer providing alternatives at the smaller sized of airliner market.
It's just grown too big and swallowed up too many of the companies that used to be its competitors.
Capitalism works best when there are multiple players competing in the market place. Nowadays, the only significant competitor to Boeing is Airbus.
If you look back to (say) 1965 the number of airliner manufacturers competing with Boeing was much more varied
In the USA
Douglas
Convair
Lockheed
Martin
Fairchild
Outside the USA
Sud Aviation
BAC
Hawker Siddeley
Fokker
And that doesn't include the Soviet manufacturers who were providing airliners to their "captive audience" of vassal states -
Yakovlev
Ilyushin
Antonov
Tupolev
Look at the options that were vailable to airlines back then.
Now they only really have Boeing or Airbus with Bombardier and Embraer providing alternatives at the smaller sized of airliner market.
Edited by Eric Mc on Wednesday 26th August 10:36
5 In a Row said:
I'm not sure Boeing should still be in existence, at least at the size they are although it appears they have had some assistance in surviving courtesy of the FAA and DoJ in the US.
I think the fact they employ nearly 1.5 million people in the US; directly and indirectly, has something to do with it.It all started with the merger of Boeing with McDonnell Douglas, it was the Douglas executives that took the key roles and the rot set in from there.
The 737 max debacle showed that you can lie and cheat killing hundreds of people and get away with paying a fine, so if you're a psychopath looking for a job that pays millions whilst you put the travelling public in danger in order that you collect those bonuses then a US based corporation like Boeing is the place to be.
There are two documentaries on NF about Boeing, both very much worth a watch.
The 737 max debacle showed that you can lie and cheat killing hundreds of people and get away with paying a fine, so if you're a psychopath looking for a job that pays millions whilst you put the travelling public in danger in order that you collect those bonuses then a US based corporation like Boeing is the place to be.
There are two documentaries on NF about Boeing, both very much worth a watch.
Boeing has acquired other companies too.
As well as McDonnell Douglas (which used to be two separate companies in their own right), they also acquired Rockwell (formerlly North American and then North American Rockwell).
Many years earlier they had bought Piasecki - which became Vertol and is the ancestral company behind the Chinook helicopter.
As well as McDonnell Douglas (which used to be two separate companies in their own right), they also acquired Rockwell (formerlly North American and then North American Rockwell).
Many years earlier they had bought Piasecki - which became Vertol and is the ancestral company behind the Chinook helicopter.
A cursory search suggests that 36% of Boeing's revenue comes from its Defense, Space & Security segment (which includes aircraft, missiles and munitions) - and 34% from commercial aviation. 75% of the former comes from the US Government/Military. It's a nice little earner - so could the Government allow the whole company to go under?
peter tdci said:
A cursory search suggests that 36% of Boeing's revenue comes from its Defense, Space & Security segment (which includes aircraft, missiles and munitions) - and 34% from commercial aviation. 75% of the former comes from the US Government/Military. It's a nice little earner - so could the Government allow the whole company to go under?
The documentary was about the airliner side and the QC problems they've had - specifically since they got a new CEO in 2005 (?) who put a lot of activities out to sub-contractors around the world.Of course the important part - for him and shareholders - was the increase in the share price and consequent massive financial rewards.
5 In a Row said:
The documentary was about the airliner side and the QC problems they've had - specifically since they got a new CEO in 2005 (?) who put a lot of activities out to sub-contractors around the world.
Of course the important part - for him and shareholders - was the increase in the share price and consequent massive financial rewards.
Boeing has used outside contractors for decades. That is not a new thing and in itself was not a significant factor in what has been going wrong.Of course the important part - for him and shareholders - was the increase in the share price and consequent massive financial rewards.
One new thing they did was to set up new independent companies - some in the US, to employ low qualification and - most importantly - non Unionised labour.
One major event in the story is the fact that Boeing actually sold off their factory in Wichita Kansas to a new company called Spirit Aero Systems. Since World War 2, the Boeing Wichita plant had mainly been concerned with the manufacture and assembly of bomber aircraft - such as the B-29, B-50, B-47 and B-52.
A lot of the technical issues with the 737 Max and 787 stem from issues in the quality of work from the Wichita sub-contractor.
Boeing has since (December 2025) bought back the Wichita factory.
I have flown Boeings since the 2000's. I have managed Entry Into Service programmes for fleets of Boeing aircraft and the one thig I can say, is that I agreed with virtually everything in the documentary.
In the mid 2010's we had a large order of 737 Max's, we had to have engineers in every area of the build process to keep an eye on what was happening and some of the reports that were coming back to us were more than alarming. In fact, they were shocking and horrifying in equal measure.
In the early part of my flying career, when I was first flying about in 73's, I had a sticker on my flight case that read "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going." After over 25 years in the industry, I'd recommend Airbus every day of the week now. They are a completely different beast.
Boeing needs tearing apart and rebuilding, it isn't fit for purpose any more.
In the mid 2010's we had a large order of 737 Max's, we had to have engineers in every area of the build process to keep an eye on what was happening and some of the reports that were coming back to us were more than alarming. In fact, they were shocking and horrifying in equal measure.
In the early part of my flying career, when I was first flying about in 73's, I had a sticker on my flight case that read "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going." After over 25 years in the industry, I'd recommend Airbus every day of the week now. They are a completely different beast.
Boeing needs tearing apart and rebuilding, it isn't fit for purpose any more.
Eric Mc said:
Now they only really have Boeing or Airbus with Bombardier and Embraer providing alternatives at the smaller sized of airliner market.
That’s not really the case anymore either unfortunately. Bombardier basically just produces corporate jets, with the CS100/300 sold to Airbus and the Dash8 joining the Otter at what was Viking, now renamed de Havilland Canada again.
Embraer appear to be independent again, but at one point looked destined to be a Boeing subsidiary, ironically it seems to be the fallout from the issues in this thread that saved them. No doubt Boeing will have another go at some point.
Other than that, Comac don’t seem to be selling many planes, at least outside China and the Sukhoi Superjet seems to have disappeared outside of Russia. One suspects the duopoly has a long time to run, even if Boeing manage to bankrupt themselves.
5 In a Row said:
The documentary was about the airliner side and the QC problems they've had - specifically since they got a new CEO in 2005 (?) who put a lot of activities out to sub-contractors around the world.
Of course the important part - for him and shareholders - was the increase in the share price and consequent massive financial rewards.
In addition to sub-contracting out according to the documentary (presumably this is fact checked or Boeing would've done something about it) some problems stem from opening a 2nd factory in South Carolina.Of course the important part - for him and shareholders - was the increase in the share price and consequent massive financial rewards.
They made a point about it being non-unionised but the QC guys were sent down from Seattle.
However the SC workforce were/are not going to be from any sort of aviation background whereas the Seattle area (and others, obviously) has plenty of potential staff who are.
Eric Mc said:
Boeing isn't the company it used to be.
It's just grown too big and swallowed up too many of the companies that used to be its competitors.
Capitalism works best when there are multiple players competing in the market place. Nowadays, the only significant competitor to Boeing is Airbus.
If you look back to (say) 1965 the number of airliner manufacturers competing with Boeing was much more varied
In the USA
Douglas
Convair
Lockheed
Martin
Fairchild
Outside the USA
Sud Aviation
BAC
Hawker Siddeley
Fokker
And that doesn't include the Soviet manufacturers who were providing airliners to their "captive audience" of vassal states -
Yakovlev
Ilyushin
Antonov
Tupolev
Look at the options that were vailable to airlines back then.
Now they only really have Boeing or Airbus with Bombardier and Embraer providing alternatives at the smaller sized of airliner market.
Maybe so, but would you have willingly gotten on a pre-Boeing DC-10/MD-11?It's just grown too big and swallowed up too many of the companies that used to be its competitors.
Capitalism works best when there are multiple players competing in the market place. Nowadays, the only significant competitor to Boeing is Airbus.
If you look back to (say) 1965 the number of airliner manufacturers competing with Boeing was much more varied
In the USA
Douglas
Convair
Lockheed
Martin
Fairchild
Outside the USA
Sud Aviation
BAC
Hawker Siddeley
Fokker
And that doesn't include the Soviet manufacturers who were providing airliners to their "captive audience" of vassal states -
Yakovlev
Ilyushin
Antonov
Tupolev
Look at the options that were vailable to airlines back then.
Now they only really have Boeing or Airbus with Bombardier and Embraer providing alternatives at the smaller sized of airliner market.
Edited by Eric Mc on Wednesday 26th August 10:36
It’s easy to be hyperbolic about this sort of thing. But western aircraft safety is so incredibly high these days that the tiniest lapse that yesteryear would have not made it past industry FYI’s are now headline news.
The sense of proportion seems to have been lost.
Cristio Nasser said:
Eric Mc said:
Boeing isn't the company it used to be.
It's just grown too big and swallowed up too many of the companies that used to be its competitors.
Capitalism works best when there are multiple players competing in the market place. Nowadays, the only significant competitor to Boeing is Airbus.
If you look back to (say) 1965 the number of airliner manufacturers competing with Boeing was much more varied
In the USA
Douglas
Convair
Lockheed
Martin
Fairchild
Outside the USA
Sud Aviation
BAC
Hawker Siddeley
Fokker
And that doesn't include the Soviet manufacturers who were providing airliners to their "captive audience" of vassal states -
Yakovlev
Ilyushin
Antonov
Tupolev
Look at the options that were vailable to airlines back then.
Now they only really have Boeing or Airbus with Bombardier and Embraer providing alternatives at the smaller sized of airliner market.
Maybe so, but would you have willingly gotten on a pre-Boeing DC-10/MD-11?It's just grown too big and swallowed up too many of the companies that used to be its competitors.
Capitalism works best when there are multiple players competing in the market place. Nowadays, the only significant competitor to Boeing is Airbus.
If you look back to (say) 1965 the number of airliner manufacturers competing with Boeing was much more varied
In the USA
Douglas
Convair
Lockheed
Martin
Fairchild
Outside the USA
Sud Aviation
BAC
Hawker Siddeley
Fokker
And that doesn't include the Soviet manufacturers who were providing airliners to their "captive audience" of vassal states -
Yakovlev
Ilyushin
Antonov
Tupolev
Look at the options that were vailable to airlines back then.
Now they only really have Boeing or Airbus with Bombardier and Embraer providing alternatives at the smaller sized of airliner market.
Edited by Eric Mc on Wednesday 26th August 10:36
It s easy to be hyperbolic about this sort of thing. But western aircraft safety is so incredibly high these days that the tiniest lapse that yesteryear would have not made it past industry FYI s are now headline news.
The sense of proportion seems to have been lost.
Cristio Nasser said:
Maybe so, but would you have willingly gotten on a pre-Boeing DC-10/MD-11?
It s easy to be hyperbolic about this sort of thing. But western aircraft safety is so incredibly high these days that the tiniest lapse that yesteryear would have not made it past industry FYI s are now headline news.
The sense of proportion seems to have been lost.
I flew on DC-10s a couple of times. Had no problems with that.It s easy to be hyperbolic about this sort of thing. But western aircraft safety is so incredibly high these days that the tiniest lapse that yesteryear would have not made it past industry FYI s are now headline news.
The sense of proportion seems to have been lost.
Although the DC-10 had a series of very well known accidents, with the exception of the two cargo door incidents (Windsoe Ontario and Paris), the other accidents were all due to very different circumstances and were not really a reflection on the aircraft's design.
I never flew on an MD-11 though and would not have been too keen if I had too as I think the MD-11 was a development too far of the DC-10 design.
Cristio Nasser said:
Maybe so, but would you have willingly gotten on a pre-Boeing DC-10/MD-11?
It s easy to be hyperbolic about this sort of thing. But western aircraft safety is so incredibly high these days that the tiniest lapse that yesteryear would have not made it past industry FYI s are now headline news.
The sense of proportion seems to have been lost.
It isn't that accidents happen, it's why they happen and what happens in the aftermath, the 737-max scandal is the perfect example of that. It s easy to be hyperbolic about this sort of thing. But western aircraft safety is so incredibly high these days that the tiniest lapse that yesteryear would have not made it past industry FYI s are now headline news.
The sense of proportion seems to have been lost.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff