Excellent Video! As a former Boeing employee, I completely agree and concur with what you are saying. sadly, the very same management policies that led to the demise of McDonnell/Douglas are now destroying the reputation and quality of Boeing. I’m glad you also mentioned the role of the FAA in this disaster too. It was a Washington DC ordered cut in FAA funding that led to shifting oversight of Boeing, and all aircraft manufacturers to the manufacturers. The fix guarding the henhouse! These problems are not going to be easily fixed, and can no longer be swept under the rug. Firing one or two managers is not going to stop the bleeding either. massive changes are needed both at Boeing and in Washington.

@blameyourself4489

4 жыл бұрын

I used to work for Airbus back then but got a contract with a Boeing contractor just as they took over McDonnell. We stood with our contracts in our hands, and the day after, got kicked out and the US government withdraw our greencards. It was devastating! But at least we later the following year received a letter from Boeing saying they were sorry for what had happened.

@Christin5554

4 жыл бұрын

same kind of mentality here in Germany, cut cost by laying off people while the managers keep getting more and more monthly pay plus the millions of bonuses at the end of the year.

@ThomasKossatz

4 жыл бұрын

@@Christin5554 Come on, Connie, you you overreaching it.

@Christin5554

4 жыл бұрын

@@ThomasKossatz I am not, but seems to me that you are one of those managers that can't get enough.

@l.ls.8890

4 жыл бұрын

Absolutely agree, look at the military KC Tanker Debacle, The 777X, et al.

"McDonnell Douglas bought Boeing with Boeing's money". That quote explains everything.

@dknowles60

4 жыл бұрын

if boeing were that dumb they need to go out of business

@vladimator1842

3 жыл бұрын

Yeah, but McDonnell Douglas isn’t a high up standard quality of a commercial airplane manufacturer neither!! Remember the DC-10? And it was a DC-10 that made one of the Air France’s Concorde plane to crash right after takeoff!! Remember that shrapnel piece of metal that fell off the plane’s fuselage lmaoo upon landing and then once the Concorde was taking off that metal piece was stepped on by the Concorde, and it caused a flat on one of its rear tires and the tire exploded sending the rubber into the planes underbelly causing a rupture onto the plane’s fuel tanks and that fuel leaked into the engine and caught fire and then after the plane took off, it caught fire and crashed into a hotel killing 2 on the ground also! So yeah, McDonnell Douglas is far worse of a company in my opinion!

@juliet4093

3 жыл бұрын

@@vladimator1842 Concorde deserved better :(

@rocketraccoon8110

3 жыл бұрын

@@vladimator1842 I present to you.. The 737MAX-10

@MilwaukeeWY

3 жыл бұрын

That’s pretty much it.

I was an engineer at Boeing in Seattle in the 80's (I left in '89) and think this was a very good analysis. Boeing was the best place I ever worked, and its employees were the smartest, most worldly people I ever worked with. The company was a national treasure and recruited from all over the country. It was definitely an engineering-driven, rather than stock market-driven company. It's so disappointing and frustrating to see what's happened to it. The one thing I would disagree with in the analysis is the idea that the CEO implements the vision of the Board of Directors. At Boeing and a lot of other big companies, the Board of Directors are simply a bunch of famous names that are there to impress outsiders. Most of the people who have been on Boeing's boards have had little or no knowledge of the aviation or aerospace industries.. It was the CEOs who screwed up Boeing, starting with Phil Condit and Harry Stonecipher. If I recall correctly, Condit was running Boeing's commercial division when I was there, and he was very unpopular in Seattle. In fact, one of the reasons people though the moved Boeing's headquarters to Chicago was so he could get away from Boeing's employees in Seattle. One of the best moves Boeing can make to show it's serious about making changes to the culture is to move the headquarters back to Seattle.

@Yolbosun

4 жыл бұрын

fixpacifica Seattle? With the drug problem they have?

@1983Bantam

4 жыл бұрын

" It was definitely an engineering-driven, rather than stock market-driven company." They built machines of murder for profit, dude.

@frankpinmtl

4 жыл бұрын

@@Yolbosun 'cause Chicago has no drug problems, right? Or gun problems.

@parthiacrassus3521

4 жыл бұрын

Condit was a slimy creature that got booted out because of his lack of ethics.

@PacificaHippie

4 жыл бұрын

@David Parry I'm already retired and I have no dependency on Boeing for that. They won't declare bankruptcy.

After my father retired as a captain from eastern airlines he worked for the faa , he was an aviation safety inspector , he was at Boeing in Seattle and he observed that he did not see one model of a Boeing aircraft in any office . That's says volumes of how Boeing thinks it not about aviation n at all.

I know a story, told by an engineer: "I design radio, and the company asked me to build one. I designed and built an excellent robust radio, you could listen all the stations in the world, clearly, loudly and in high fidelity. Then the salesmen came, and they said it was too expensive. They started removing a piece, and the radio was still working. Removed another piece and the radio was still working. An overpriced piece? Replaced with a cheap one. Continue like this until, after removing / replacing yet another piece, the radio stopped working. Then they put back the last piece removed. "Here is the radio we will produce." Cute as a little story? But a radio that stops working doesn't kills people. It does not fit exactly, but still exemplifies the conflict between those who do and those who cannot do but only know how to sell, no matter what.

One of the biggest issues with large American companies is the attitude expressed by a phrase I often heard: "Don't bring me problems, bring me solutions." In these companies, the people that will get ahead are those who are either too stupid to see a problem, or those that are willing to hide the problem. A person who is smart enough to see a problem and find a solution will still be punished because the solution generally requires spending valuable time or money.

@buzbuz33-99

4 жыл бұрын

@Bobby Brady- I was not being anti-American. I have only worked for American companies, so I did not feel that I could comment on business attitudes in other countries. And, since we were talking about a big publicly held company, I saw no need to mention that I have also worked for, and with, very successful privately held companies where this kind of attitude did not exist.

@radekc5325

4 жыл бұрын

@Bobby Brady in this context, don't you think it's really misleading to omit that the only reason we know about those bribes is because Airbus found out internally and self-reported to authorities? If you really want to invoke whataboutism as defense of the bad (why?), this is an especially bad example.

@michaelloder6159

4 жыл бұрын

the guy who fixes bars Jon Taffer "Bar Rescue" on television relys on that premise alone- He finds solutions to fixing things and thats it....

@philgooddr.7850

4 жыл бұрын

Bobby Brady just on point: it is the Airbus management who reported to the justice those "irregualrities" of some army contracts and blaming top management for that is in fact rather rewarding. To me, forcing witnesses to shut up to prevent justice to condamn or cheating to certify a flying anvil are more serious offenses If you see what i mean.

@markpriestley7812

4 жыл бұрын

It has a blame culture and have not sorted out its attitude to it engineers. It runs it like they are the CIA and rule it by do as I say not as I do !,, ?

This video is right on! I worked at Boeing from 1965 to 1999 in the engineering organization... it was engineering heaven. We got everything we wanted and did great work! We always thought that Boeing purchased McDonnell/Douglas but it felt more like McDonnell/Douglas because the engineering culture in Boeing really changed. It was very hard to understand at the time.

A single AOA sensor giving a faulty reading ended many lives , having no redundancy on such an important part of the flight system is just unbelievable from Boeing.

@donjones4719

4 жыл бұрын

A single flight-computer clock reading ruined the demo flight of their Starliner space capsule. The craft only knew "where it was" from this one input, of where it was expected to be x seconds into a flight. No double check from an altimeter, GPS, ground control inputs... And worse, apparently the pre-launch procedure has just one guy set the clock, with no one to confirm it.

@firstnamelastname2111

4 жыл бұрын

Story i hear is that an airforce mentality creeped into the engineering department. Civil has always been about redundancy.

@wilicca99tokoroa51

4 жыл бұрын

A pilot, especially in broad daylight, should see from his instruments (airspeed and horizon ) that the aircraft is not in danger of stalling. The problem was that they could not override MCAS.

@OptimusNiaa

4 жыл бұрын

@@wilicca99tokoroa51 They could override it (i.e., there is a way to cut out automatic stabilizer trim), but it currently looks as though, if they even tried to run the runaway stabilizer trim checklist, the aerodynamic forces on the aircraft might have made it physically impossible to pull on the trim wheels and yoke hard enough to right the aircraft.

@OptimusNiaa

4 жыл бұрын

@@donjones4719 Well, it didn't ruin the demo flight. They still met most of the flight test objectives. Although, it turns out there was a *second* coding error with Starliner, dealing with the separation of the spacecraft from the service module. They caught it during the flight and were able to fix it before spacecraft separation. Had they not, it likely would have resulted in the loss of the vehicle. So, yeah, coding and computer science issues in both cases (MAX and Starliner). They must do better. (At least with Starliner it was a test flight, where learning during the mission is more to be expected.)

Remember Hewlett-Packard? They were a great company run by engineers, and with a motto of "We are not a me-two company." Then the bankers took over and their products went down hill.

@baymax6894

4 жыл бұрын

Hewlett Packard was the best... in my opinion it made apple look like a grape in the day.. my hp computer I bought out of high school was the absolute best. It ran so many programs so well and so easily, it still makes computers today junk.

@SheepInACart

4 жыл бұрын

There is also a chicken and egg causality factor here also... lots of these companies bean count when they don't have the margins to operate as they used to due to low product innovation and market creation/discovery... and they already have less funds to innovate or create/discover markets and break that cycle without an external capital injection or major refactoring that normally is resisted until they are in dire straights. Hence its hard to know when the bean counting caused the problem, or when the problem caused the bean counting.

@mikeet69

4 жыл бұрын

FYI HP did not start as a computer company. The original HP was a test equipment company. Computers were a side thing that grew bigger. Computers are just what the average person knows them for ( along with laser printers ). The sold off the original business along with their life science part. They became Agilent. Then they split with life sciences keeping the Agilent name. Now test equipment is called Keysight. So yes I remember what HP was like. The original HP!

@chuheihkg

4 жыл бұрын

Even no La HP, when something grows strong then let that go . Most of things are right. The question is, the new owner still remember how a being is built?

@MrWhitmen1981

4 жыл бұрын

I like their calculators though.

What's wrong with Boeing? Answer: MCAS (Money Comes Above Safety)

@MrPereivap

4 жыл бұрын

Brilliant!

@kensurrency2564

4 жыл бұрын

Yes

@snoozeCTRL

4 жыл бұрын

Fugboi I my quote you on this 👍🏾

@Rich.H68

4 жыл бұрын

Bravo

@jadchjayasinghe

4 жыл бұрын

Definitely

As a test engineer myself (software testing, certainly not for planes though), I really love seeing videos like this because they help me keep perspective on the importance of testing holistically. The business wants to always take the assumption that we're being too cautious, so I think having real anecdotes like this helps express to them that it is far from being overly careful.

@Stettafire

2 жыл бұрын

On this same note, companies need to include testing times in their deadlines. "You got 3 weeks for this." OK, well it'll take 3 weeks to dev. "No, that's the go live date" OK, well how long will testing take? Then I go to the testers and they'll say they need two weeks. A joke.

@anttikarttunen1126

2 жыл бұрын

@@Stettafire Well, in IT it's de facto practice to use your customers as testers... (apparently now practice adopted in aviation too? 🙄)

@sharoncassell9358

Жыл бұрын

Undercover boss. You get to see the inside problems. Try to get solutions...

We see so many Engineer led companies being destroyed by Accountants and management. Why do we race to the bottom being led solely on price

@MsJubjubbird

2 жыл бұрын

because things are more expensive now. but there is happy medium between both.

@sfbirdclub

2 жыл бұрын

One adjustment...just management. The fact that they want to hear what accountants to the exclusion of others is in mo way the fault of the accountant. MANAGEMENT! is the unleashed gorilla here.

@DrWhom

2 жыл бұрын

big picture: competitiveness on pricing is required for a company to survive micro picture: rewards, properties, and priorities within a company are controlled by management types

I recently retired after a 42-year career in engineering, primarily in software development. Reference 13:52, as I have asserted for the past 46 years, software is the last chance to make hardware look good. If your hardware needs a software crutch or fix, get the software right the first time. After all, at that point you are already behind in the sense that you are fixing the hardware.

@tubester4567

4 жыл бұрын

Would you still fly a boing?

@idyllsend6481

4 жыл бұрын

@@tubester4567 Personally I wouldn't but what do I know.. I like to act stupid, I would ask that same question to an engineer.

@GuinessOriginal

4 жыл бұрын

tubester4567 seeing as the same Indian company HCL, who originally wrote mcas with no experience at all of aviation software, is responsible for fixing mcas, and pays it's workers less than $9 an hour, I will never fly on a max. Or a 787 made in charleston for that matter

Being part of workforce for over 30 years, a big part as a contractor/agency employee. I’ve seen the results of ‘bean counters’ taking over decisions that should be left to engineering. Everything from fast food distribution to automotive and truck manufacturing. The company’s ultimately loose market share. The results of a airline manufacturer following this trend is people are going to die.

@jackmcandle6955

4 жыл бұрын

That same scenario played out in the us auto industry and the reason I drive a Toyota

@msnpassjan2004

4 жыл бұрын

"Bean Counters" make no decisions. Management simply convinced you to blame them.

@jacksycz

4 жыл бұрын

msnpassjan2004 right.. the bean counters find the opportunities... the management approves said plans

@grizzlygrizzle

4 жыл бұрын

MBAs are the "scientists" of management. Science is a great tool when dealing with minerals, trees, and lab rats, but it has an inherent flaw when dealing with people. Scientists objectify and mathematize what they study and what they manipulate, and with non-human objects, there aren't a lot of moral problems. But social scientists' perspectives render "the people" as lesser beings, objects not persons, numbers not names, objects of manipulation, and so on. These perspectives render social scientists morally blind, unless they bring in moral perspectives from outside their disciplines, and their moral blindness mucks up their ability to work with real people, who are NOT "lesser" objects, to be manipulated like chunks of ore going into alloys. So it's no wonder that corporations that scientize business devolve into crappy businesses over time, because businesses are made of people, not minerals or plants or livestock.

@guitaristwagner

4 жыл бұрын

Fordsidevalvesforever likewise, people wouldn’t have died if Boeing would have made the decision to allow trained pilots to take control over the aircraft if something would have went wrong with the computer system.

When companies are led by bean counters you can expect engineering standards to drop.

@shakamuni01

Жыл бұрын

And to have all the blood sucked out of the company like a swarm of mosquitoes.

"Safety is our number one priority!!", (well, after profits of course, duh !!)

My first job was as an Engineering Aide in 737 flight controls in Renton in the 70's. It has been my best job in my entire career. Your comment that it was a "family" really rings true with me. Just enjoyed the high level of safety concern and attention to detail that the engineers I worked with brought to the job everyday. I was indeed a part of the "family" and that I believe made it such an enjoyable job.

@splitscim

4 жыл бұрын

I live in Renton, and am going to be writing an article about the Boeing community for the next issue of my high school's newspaper. I can truly attest to the fact that Boeing really seems to be like a family around here, and I hope Boeing management can get their heads out of the clouds and move back to Seattle to be closer with their company and make communication easier and more direct. It's time they move home

@user-qr8ki8ue4i

4 жыл бұрын

You very well might have worked with my dad. He was in systems engineering. Worked extensively on 737 and 747's

@jjensen554

4 жыл бұрын

@@user-qr8ki8ue4i What was your dad's name, if you don't mind me asking? ~Jack

@user-qr8ki8ue4i

4 жыл бұрын

@jjensen, Doug W.

@user-qr8ki8ue4i

4 жыл бұрын

@Jjensen, did you know Dick Schoenman?

A sad development. Reminds me of the automotive industry (where I worked as an engineer for some 30 years). Outsourcing is a disastrous development. Companies lose their most valuable resources - their skilled workforce. That also shows in the enormous number of recalls and scandals. I fear it's a negative development which has spread globally.

@stupidburp

4 жыл бұрын

At the same time those outsourced jobs and investment creates expertise and wealth as a seed for future competition. Then the company goes under as foreign competition they enabled dominates the industry. But some executives got bonuses for their quarterly numbers before that happened. Short sighted goals lead to long term problems.

@tamastoth7208

4 жыл бұрын

So true, I was working in the automotive industy for some years and it is really scary how the autonomous driving development is going on... profit profit profit, costdown, lowcost, callbacks, etc. I would never buy a car like that. Engineers develop a good product then managers destroy it with their money lover attitude (while pushing the engineer’s wages down). Changing steel to plastic whenever they can, creating everything only reliable/operational up to the minimum life cycle (so the end customer will have to buy a new product), and so on. Disgusting. Basically a part of my engineer passion has been killed then I have changed career.

@user-rs5hb6gd8e

4 жыл бұрын

@@tamastoth7208 what car brand do you recommend? :)

@tamastoth7208

4 жыл бұрын

Прикладна Економіка Depends on what kind are you looking for. Generally Japanese. Toyota, Honda

@user-rs5hb6gd8e

4 жыл бұрын

@@tamastoth7208 ok I get about eco cars, What about european design/engineering school? Porsche? Mercedes? Maybe Porsche cabrios are ok but Cayenne is terrible (or all are terrible). What about Mercedes? Is it complete junk? I heard terrible stories.

"Beatings will continue until morale improves"

@dknowles60

4 жыл бұрын

that was said at CSX

@lumox7

4 жыл бұрын

''If all else fails, your co-workers are edible.''

As a former CEO, I have to say you have an amazing insight as to what really makes business work. Im impressed.

@martintheiss4038

4 жыл бұрын

He is in charge of ensuring quality of other pilot for his firm. Not interested in operations management.

what probably happened is that when a company replaces its engineers with salespeople, shit goes wrong. Engineers leave or are dismissed as they are too expensive now and yeah, we have a product, so we don't need engineers anymore. New, younger, cheaper engineers are hired and have no clue what's going on. Contractors that don't have a clue are hired to develop mission critical systems _NOW_, and the code is then dumped like a big pile of poo on the shoulders of the overworked engineers that remained. This is what you obtain with a disposable engineer culture.

@timkerssen5733

4 жыл бұрын

Pretty good synopsis. Older experienced engineers have a value that is hard to quantify. I can't imagine an experienced engineer actually signing off the MCAS system. Younger engineers may not recognize the risk of having a system that can effectively override the pilot's input, when that system itself has only a single input, and that input is a mechanical device out in the airstream and subject to all the potential insults thereof. There are numerous bad ideas in that system, none of which an 'old guy' would have ever signed off on without significant enhancement or modification.

@stefanguels

4 жыл бұрын

This is exactly what's happeneing at the majority of software companies. It's the software, stupid!

@jameskerr9509

4 жыл бұрын

Have seen it played out over and over again in many instances with the same outcomes, crap.

@StefanoBorini

4 жыл бұрын

@@t2k777 it's not really Wall Street. It's a certain executive and upper management culture that is especially pervasive when software is involved but software is not the sold product. The idea is that software engineers are interchangeable and disposable, and that since software is not the product, they are not a software company.

@alfredomarquez9777

4 жыл бұрын

@Natural Man :. You are absolutely right. Since about 25 years ago, in the industrial, energy and consumer products alike, outsourced engineering has taken over previous Engineering Firms. No longer the Engineers keep working for a lifetime inside the same company (which leads to good, experienced and ethical engineers), but subcontracted companies that hire engineers just for a project, and then fire the engineers, that results in a high professionals rotation, lack of engineering culture and under paid engineers that end up losing their ethics and working just to be able to eat!

Seems I remember a story about Mr. Douglas of Douglas aircraft stating that he sat down to a meeting and he was the only engineer, the rest were accountants. He then knew it was time to get out.

@VisibilityFoggy

4 жыл бұрын

Mr. Northrop quit his entire company because he felt Convair bribed the government to cancel his bat-wing bomber aircraft proposal.

@dknowles60

4 жыл бұрын

and what is so bad. there are a lot more older douglas planes flying today then boeing planes

@VisibilityFoggy

4 жыл бұрын

@@dknowles60 - Out of curiosity, do you know the numbers on this? Would be interested to see how many Douglas planes retired from passenger service are still flying freight compared to Boeing planes of the same era.

@dknowles60

4 жыл бұрын

@@VisibilityFoggy lets see lots of DC 3 flying today no Boeing plane that old is flying lots of DC 4 flying today no Boeing plane that old is flying to day lots of DC 6 flying to day lots of DC 7 flying to day almost on Boeing plane that old is flying to day the 707 out sold the DC 8 3 to 1 but there are more DC 8 flying today then 707 almost all 747 100 and 200 retired but the DC 10 is still flying today the results speak for then self

@theonewhoknows2

4 жыл бұрын

@@VisibilityFoggy its true. These old dc10s and even some dc8s are still flying and seem to hold up quite well. Yet theres no old Boeing's really anywhere.

I was a mechanical engineer for Boeing during the "transition period" from Boeing to MD management style and all I can say is Boeing was moribund before MD and transitioned to moribund and penny wise and dollar stupid after MD. When I finally left in utter disgust, I was convinced that Boeing couldn't make instant coffee in less than five years for less than two billion dollars!!! For example, the first step in making instant coffee for Boeing would be to gather embarrassing and blackmail-able information on Juan Valdez's grandmother. This is the way those people thought!!!

@rsh6994

Жыл бұрын

Moribund.😀

@ronjon7942

Жыл бұрын

Yikes, you've painted a not-so-pretty picture of a has-been icon. I may use your first step comment for something, not yet sure on what - but I liked it

Top management need to be charged with manslaughter and tried. People died cause money was more important than safety.

@pmccann74

4 жыл бұрын

reminds me of the DC 10 debacles. They would let planes crash and settle if it was cheaper than implementing a fix. cost of doing business

@brianeleighton

4 жыл бұрын

@mPky1 CEOs of corporations are required by law to be psychopaths. They have the fiduciary responsibility to maximize profits, to do anything else is illegal. It is the job of our governments to enact and enforce laws to keep corporations in check.

@Stephanie-vt8xi

4 жыл бұрын

agreed

@jburch8583

3 жыл бұрын

Ah yes well you can keep your mommy gubmt that loves you and has your best interest at heart. Lol. The gubmt will save us all. Lol lol lol

BRILLIANT! Boeing won’t be Boeing again until HQ moves back to Seattle.

@kirilmihaylov1934

4 жыл бұрын

May be... management is very important as well

@sanniepstein4835

4 жыл бұрын

It would improve Seattle, too, from what I've heard.

@BigBrainBrian

4 жыл бұрын

When they announced their move I asked "why?" but the real question is "why they shouldn't". Just saying.

@l.ls.8890

4 жыл бұрын

They won’t move back to a California transition type state anytime soon.

@jjgreek1

4 жыл бұрын

L.L S. What do you mean

I really appreciate the comprehensive nature of your explanation. It's hard to understand the context of the 737 MAX issue without the history the led to it. There is a bunch here that I'd not heard before. Thank you!

@sundhaug92

4 жыл бұрын

As disaster-documentaries show us, it often takes a series of mistakes and cultural issues to cause a disaster

Wow, great video. I work at Boeing and agree with every single thing you said. I hired in as a mechanic on the Dreamliner program May 2012. The people who were with Boeing before the merger have have always said that the culture shift began with the merger. In fact, the joke is that if we had a dime for each time we've heard that, we wouldn't need the pension we lost in 2014.

Mr. Mentour, All my respect to your knowledge and passion. You are not only a good pilot, you have sound knowledge of aircraft engineering and now you just managed to surprise me with a business analysis of the change in corporate culture, showing your business acumen as well. Hats off! From one Engineer and corporate man who admires your passion and dedication to spread aviation knowledge.

Show of hands who agrees that Mentour one of the most eloquent speakers out there...he explains things very well....id love to have him as an instructor!

@yhnbgt365

4 жыл бұрын

Right on!

@philipkudrna5643

4 жыл бұрын

Yes, great video, „as always“...! Thank you, Mentour, for these insights. It‘s a pity that once again a greedy bunch of incompetent managers making the strategically wrong decisions (while not listening to their ingeneers) has obviously managed to destroy what was once a reputable industry giant. The next pity is that obviously they still have not understood the message. On the other hand, why should they - as long as Boeing receives gov subsidies for their space program. (And then also screws up the latest test, because somebody forgot to set a timer correctly. What a shame for a company that was once famous for their good engineering competencies!) The „America First“ protectionism will also not help in this context, but will only increase the problem, I fear...

@pokiishere-sebastian2126

4 жыл бұрын

Definitely!!

@petepeter1857

4 жыл бұрын

👏✌🖒

Boeing let their accounting department engineer the 737 max...THATS what's wrong with boeing!

@williamswenson5315

4 жыл бұрын

Directed by the ship of fools on the executive board.

@WilliamJones-Halibut-vq1fs

4 жыл бұрын

I think you are right. They’re B777 and B787 are great safe products despite the hype. Upgrading the B737NG to the B737 MAX looked good on paper but turned out to be a maze of unexpected difficulties they didn’t allow for.

@WilliamJones-Halibut-vq1fs

4 жыл бұрын

William Swenson William Boeing was a lawyer. Knew how to run a company and a board and hire the right engineers and let them do their job. Donald Douglass was an engineer also knew his shit in business, a very ethical person. The new philosophy problems came from McDonnell.

@ValiantEast

4 жыл бұрын

It has nothing to do with the accounting department. The company is driven by profit maximization and corporate culture greed. They want to satisfy their shareholders with short-term goals at the expense of the community well being within which they operate and sacrificing long term obligations. Sadly this culture and management behavior is prevalent in American and western corporate culture and dangerously they are slowly sipping into the rest of the world. The management schools and the media are also part of the problem.

@steveperreira5850

4 жыл бұрын

William Jones-Halibut it never looked good on engineering paper, it only looks good on some kind of report from a hack manager that promised a fast low cost solution to compete with airbus.

The most complete and sober analysis about this issue so far, among thousand of videos and news I´ve read so far! Congratulations!

The problem with Boeing is they went from a family of engineers that produced top notch aircraft that were ahead of their time and is now overrun by a hierarchy of sociopaths with Business and Law degrees that only care about cutting costs just so they can handout bonuses to each other at the detriment of the business. This problem is not unique to Boeing. It is the economy that encourages greed and basically turning everything into a cash cow instead of long term investment to improve quality. It is the economy that also encourages sociopaths with little to no creativity to infiltrate and overrun businesses with their obsession for profit, by using their worthless business degrees to cover their deficiencies to make thousands of engineers redundant in favour of handouts to wealthy shareholders. They are too stupid to realise that minimum long term investment never leads to maximum return of investment. Profit now now and now, that is their mentality.

@anupsharma3592

4 жыл бұрын

Correct

@dknowles60

4 жыл бұрын

Boeing never built any thing a head of it's time the DC 3 gave it a good spanking

@donjones4719

4 жыл бұрын

Such lack of foresight means Boeing (as part of ULA) will be out of the satellite launch business in less than 5 years, courtesy of SpaceX, run by an engineer, Elon Musk They developed technology paths that Boeing and others ignored as not viable. Well, not viable if you can get profits today by using decades old tech. Now SpaceX is undercutting ULA's launch cost by an absurd margin. Interestingly, along with his B.S. in engineering from the University of Pennsylvania, Musk has a business B.A. from the Wharton School, but uses only the parts of that knowledge that serves his aggressiveness. Boeing/ULA's "new" rocket, Vulcan, is less than half new. The only thing Boeing management knows how to do is milk the govt cash cow of the Space Launch System (rocket that will take humans to the Moon) that continues to set new records for time and cost overruns - on a cost-plus contract.

@lesulix9885

4 жыл бұрын

Yeah, its pretty much the immature behaviour of a spoiled child, that wants everything right now. This is pretty much the mentality you will find at those levels. Also, the fact that C-Level position statistically attracts an extraordinarily higher amount of people with either psychopathic or saddistic personality disorders says also a lot about the many of such "managers"

@offshoretomorrow3346

4 жыл бұрын

@@dknowles60 The 747 disproves that theory.

The US “make the quarter” culture has built tremendous value over time, but also took an enormous toll on industries and the US economy. Detroit was deserted when the Japanese changed the quality game, whereas the US car manufacturers chose to deliver the coming quarters instead of adapting. Labor arbitrage moved all manufacturing to China in search of lower costs and we all know what happened after that. Communication is the least of the problems. With a fat bonus waiting at the end of the quarter or the year, hearing “don’t tell me why it can not be done, tell me how you will do it” became the norm. Then you breach security rules once, and you get away with it. Naturally you fall in the trap to scrap all common sense and keep doing more of the same and at some point Bang! You lose it all... It happens every day, everywhere, but more frequently in the US, due to the short time horizon everyone has. Until those boards and management teams have, say, 90% of their net worth locked in their company stock for a decade, it will keep happening. Until then, the Chinese (mostly), the Japanese and the Europeans who have a longer term approach, will have the upper hand!

@jomellon

4 жыл бұрын

"make the quarter” culture has built tremendous value over time... No it hasn't, it creates an illusion of profit by converting substance - actual value - into a number justifying management bonuses and shareholder dividends. *Over time* it produces Detroit and Boeing.

@SheepInACart

4 жыл бұрын

Its more complex in that the times the actual value your talking about was built it when it was subsidized, not realistically competitive. From when US aviation manufacture boomed, Detroit automakers boomed or Japanese auto makers boomed, all the major expansion realistically didn't sell its products for the total cost of making the company that produced them, only for a small margin on top of materials costs incurred per item, on factories, research and supply lines already paid for by an external government investor who never expected direct repayment. Government support is weaned off when they are properly privatized, which leads to the company not being able to offer the same quality at the same prices once further investment is needed to do anything more than minor updates, hence why Boeing originally intended not to update the 737NG for a decade, and why if the NEO hadn't shown up that would have happened.

@buoyohbuoy790

4 жыл бұрын

Yen Tao Well, the industry is much much bigger, but Boeing has a much smaller share. That’s not the point. The real question is, have they watered down safety standards for profit? Hell yes they have. Should they be allowed to? No. Even if there was no oversight from FAA, should a company act like this on their own, in pursuit of another good quarter and year in financial terms? Absolutely not, hands down. Had they succeeded to keep the Max flying after the Ethiopian disaster, their financial performance would be great right now, but we would probably have had another 300-500 deaths in the mean time on subsequent Max disasters. The industry would still be safe by all standards... but is this something that could be allowed to happen? Really? I have children that fly every week. And guess what, they only fly Airbus and Embraer, and it is their own choice...

@christianbarnay2499

4 жыл бұрын

Sadly European managers are currently in the process of fully embracing that "successful" American philosophy.

@buoyohbuoy790

4 жыл бұрын

Christian Barnay After two or three cycles of cost “optimization”, there is nothing left to cut, but the management pressure is still there, since they booked cost savings in previous cycles and they need them again... That’s when the cancer of those big Consulting companies comes in. Looking for new ideas, and knowing that those consultants have best practices from everybody else in your industry, you fall into the trap to ask them... And believe me they reeeeealy know how to manipulate entire organizations to sell their multi-million dollar “service”. It is not the managers. Cost savings is a drug. You book them once, you take it for granted as an amount almost guaranteed each and every year in your P&L, and before you know it you have started cutting chunks off your bones. A truly deadly mistake!

From "by engineers for engineers" to "built by monkeys supervised by clowns." How the mighty have fallen ...

@martintheiss4038

4 жыл бұрын

In fact a senior German pilot was key in design of the debut 737 model.

@woodycoat

4 жыл бұрын

Yup. This is what happens when you put mere accountants in charge of tech and innovation companies

@k4yser

2 жыл бұрын

@@woodycoat add hiring an ever cheaper workforce, partly from India to the mix

@sfbirdclub

2 жыл бұрын

@@woodycoat It's not the accountants analyses that is the problem. It's the manager that take their dat as gospel and disregard everything other data source. Shame. Shame.

Thank you for the in depth analysis. From what I have read Ford Motor Co has had a similar disconnect with its engineers regarding the transmission used in the Focus and Fiesta. In order to save costs upfront, they designed a faulty transmission that has now cost them many millions of dollars in consumer reimbursement and caused immeasurable damage to their reputation.

@6aNapoleon

Жыл бұрын

I owned a 2009 Ford Fusion which had an inferior transmission. Ford replaced it at their expense when the car had about 22,000 miles on it. When the car had 95,000 miles on it, the transmission on it, the transmission failed again. This time, I was not willing to spend 4,500 dollars to replace the transmission. I suspect that I'm not alone, because very few Fords from that era are still on the road.

How is interesting is it that those managers 'concerned' with shareholder value keep destroying shareholder value.

@OptimusNiaa

4 жыл бұрын

Indeed. That's the thing. There is a difference between short-term profits and long-term profits. Some of these cost-cutting measures might have been short-term winners, but clearly look to be long-term losers. Such short-sightedness is usually bad business.

@anna_in_aotearoa3166

2 жыл бұрын

It's that relentless focus on constant economic growth (common to our whole current economic model!) which deprioritises things like safety or investment in quality R&D, and prioritises constant short-term shareholder profits... often exacerbated by short-term CEOs who make their bundle then jump ship, leaving the company's systems in disarray behind them! Competing on quality is the tougher route (profits are more longterm and based more on trust relationships than sales hype). For a company with an established A+ reputation it would've been the way to keep going... unfortunately if they want to get back to that, it seems they've got quite an uphill battle ahead of them now? Incidentally, it sounds like the regulator kinda caved to industry pressure & set foxes to guard the henhouse...? Disappointing but seems to be a really common swing of the safety legislation pendulum in any sector - usually only swings back after actual serious fatalities occur, alas 😕

This is one your best clips I ve seen you do, great job ( PS Im a 737 Max Pilot )

@patrickv418

4 жыл бұрын

I actually believe it will be the safest aircraft in the skies, simply because it is being scrutinized in such great depth now. We go every month for Simulator training now specifically in a Max Sim. So the most type specific trained Pilots on an aircraft with every nut and bolt having been cross checked so to speak. The question won't be the whether aircraft is safe or not, it will be safe when certified.. The question will be; if the flying public will ever accept it again. (Calhoun has to go too, he was on the Board throughout the mess leading up to the issues. )

@mp4373

4 жыл бұрын

@@patrickv418 I don't think they will. Plus it's not just the Max, the public now mistrusts all of their products

@patrickv418

4 жыл бұрын

@@mp4373 you could be right MP, the DC10 was grounded a month give or take and never shook its reputation, whereas the Max will have been grounded over a year. This coupled with reports from the 787 issues has decimated Boeing's reputation worldwide. Time will tell

@M11TS

4 жыл бұрын

@@patrickv418 I think it will take a lot of time until people will trust the 737 MAX, sure they´re gonna fly with it, (if ticket prices for MAX flights are discounted). I personnaly am in doubt of it - human brains work that way. Survival first.

@61percentodicarica

4 жыл бұрын

@@mp4373 nah, flying public is not informed of what aircraft they'll be flying on when they buy the tickets - at least in the EU, we don't get that information.

As a die-hard Boeing fanboy, I have to admit you absolutely nailed it. A++

@Blox117

4 жыл бұрын

why would anybody be a fanboy of any company? and even more to admit being one...

@climatechangedoesntbargain9140

4 жыл бұрын

@@Blox117 why not?

@occhamite

4 жыл бұрын

@@Blox117 Oh gee, I don't know..... could it be not so much the company as the planes it has been producing for nearly a century....say.... the China Clipper, the B-17, the B-52, 707, 747, 777, 787 - I just can't imagine why.... Once you go find out what all those names and numbers refer to, consider this as well: As far as "admitting", it was my way of complimenting Mentour on the quality of his presentation. Any more questions?

@Species1571

4 жыл бұрын

@@occhamite What you describe yourself as is a "fan". As you said, it's not so much the company as its products. "Fanboy" implies a level of obsession where you don't accept that the company could ever do any wrong.

@occhamite

4 жыл бұрын

@@Species1571 OK we'll beat this dead horse then. Implies to YOU. "Fanboy" is a term usually used as a pejorative. My self-deprecation was intended to underscore my approval of Mentour's work. Next......

This excellent video should be mandatory viewing for management, regulatory authorities and engineers alike. Well done.

You have hit it right on the head. Coming from a major airline I have seen this also. Giving the companies control of airworthiness regulations does not work. The financial reasoning will always win the arguments.

@anna_in_aotearoa3166

2 жыл бұрын

Agreed. It's basically a built-in conflict of interest, and unfortunately the cost of that always falls on personnel & members of the public.

It's refreshing seeing someone applying critical thought to something they're involved with, ie you being a 737 pilot.

It is amazing that no one has been arrested yet.

@TheSpringMood

4 жыл бұрын

It's unlikely that any Boeing executives will be indicted over this, the rich and powerful can get away with murder in America.

@abc-wv4in

3 жыл бұрын

Not really amazing, sadly. Disgusting and par for the course in aviation "safety."

@mediocreman2

2 жыл бұрын

The chief test pilot was just indicted for lying to the FAA. At least it's something.

If the CEO just executes the wishes of the board, then why is the CEO paid so much? They take all the glory when things are going well, and escape with a 7 or 8 figure golden parachute when it turns sour.

@BigJohnson911

4 жыл бұрын

CEOs are literally paid to fail. They walk away with 60 million worth of shares on average. And when they cause an economic crash as they did in 2008, the taxpayer has to bail them out. This is what you call corporate socialism. In contrast, the average joe is left in a savage, dog-eats-dog free-market.

@reedschrichte800

4 жыл бұрын

This has all been documented thoroughly, only the ignorant debate it. Shareholders have no power. Board members have no knowledge of operations. Control, often absolute, rests with top management, until a disaster occurs, then the part-time Board often composed of top management of OTHER companies goes into panic mode. It is hard to imagine a more dysfunctional system.

@reedschrichte800

2 жыл бұрын

@BVale Excellent point, agreed! The fund is the actual shareholder/owner with the voting rights, no? What are the implications for corporate governance? Are the fund's interests aligned with their own share owners?

Great video. As someone who lost a friend in the 737-Max crash in Ethiopia, I've been very curious as to the full story regarding Boeing's decisions in the production of the aircraft. I am an aviation enthusiast and watch your channel anyway, so I was very pleased to see this video in your playlist, and really appreciate the effort you put into researching and opining on the matter.

@franziskani

Жыл бұрын

Ralph Nader lost a niece in the 737 Max crash in Ethiopia, she was an aid worker. He was on Democracy Now (I think - or maybe it was The Real News Network). Not on big media - they knew what was expected from them (or their managers knew): to bring the least worst version and an angle that would be the least damning (for Boeing). And moving on from the story as fast as possible. The advertising and sponsoring budgets for media were not wasted, not at all. If mainstream media would go after Boeing - with the right hard hitting questions, the voters would pay attention, and politicians would be forced to go after a donor (company and managers). Nader was incensed and he knew the details. (I guess many Boeing engineers knew how half-assed that quick-and-dirty fix was and were very uneasy about the 2 crashes. Likely he got very good briefing on the promise of protecting his sources.) It was criminal, they had only ONE sensor (because alterations of systems with only one sensor do not mandate pilot training and likely it is easier to get them approved). And they removed information from the handbook - when MORE information would have been needed. I do not think it was a "software mistake" - it is more likely that the software just got faulty or no data and there was not backup for the sensor (Airbus has 3 independently working sensors that provide the input). As protection against crashes due to problems with aerodynamic there was: 1) the sensor - and 2) when that failed it needed a fast and perfect reaction by the pilot to avoid disaster. Pilots had pulled it off before and between the crashes (but did not really understand what was going on), there were reports - which were of course ignored by Boeing. After the first crash they blamed the pilot (that is Boeing habit, they blame the pilots and early on. They already did that in the early 1990s - when Nicki Lauda pestered them until they could be bothered to do a modelling for higher altitude and faster speed - and then they admitted that the pilot had no chance to correct the thrust reversal mid flight. Regarding 737-Max: it was inevitable that at some point a pilot would be too close to ground or too startled or inexperienced / used to having assistance by the computer instead of having to save the machine from the computer. I assume the sensor might have worked more reliably in the first years. Your friend is dead because Boeing management is very certain that they will never be criminally prosecuted and short term their crimes are lucrative for top management and shareholders. If there would be a chance of criminal prosecution it would be much harder to pressure the head of engineering and the people that do that actual work, to go along with those criminal actions (or casual acceptance that there will be accidents). As is: they can just fire people that do not go along, those will never work in the industry again, and on top of that their sacrifice will be in vain, mainstream media will ignore their cause, and Boeing will find a person that goes along. The situation is somewhat better in many European countries, because there is criminal liability. And middle management - no matter the pressure from top down - will not play the fall guys for the psychopaths on top.

Great assessment of the Boeing situation. Appreciate your comprehensive explanation.

One of the best videos You’ve made. Love how you went back looking for root cause. Awesome. Thank you!!!

An aircraft company with employees that have the audacity to mock the customers concern for safety. (Boeing employee called Lion Air, ‘idiots’ for asking to have its pilots trained in flying the plane).. It's just so wrong.

@njaygaming857

4 жыл бұрын

lion air has an air bus too how dare you

What a great video! One of the best - if not THE best - I've seen on this topic. Thank you Peetr for your work.

Good video and I would say exactly explains why Boeing have ended up where they are now. This is it is not just aviation this has happened with, its nearly every business and industry. I worked in Power Industry for 35 years and exactly the same things have happened there. Plant modifications done on the cheap without proper research, operators not getting trained in the changes and being faced with issues that confuse them because mods have been done and not communicated to them properly. Thankfully all it did to us was continually shut the plant down, not kill 100's of people. The drive to get more and more money to shareholders at the expense of safety has to stop.

I've always wondered why the Boeing 757 was terminated while the older 737 series continues to be updated, even with the low ground clearance and other design issues. The latest 737 models have similar similar passenger capacities.

@lzh4950

4 жыл бұрын

Think the airlines preferred a lengthened 737 over a shrunken 757 because more pilots & mechanics etc. are trained on the former?

@beernpizzalover9035

3 жыл бұрын

I always liked the 757 - and even flew in a simulator for one once. :) The 757 could have easily accommodated the larger engine size of the 737 Max, as well!

@BGTech1

3 жыл бұрын

The 757 is a great plane

@srinitaaigaura

3 жыл бұрын

Southwest. Boeing customers don't want change.

@neilpickup237

3 жыл бұрын

If you think of the 757 as an upgraded and high performance high capacity 727, and the 737 as starting off as a downgraded low capacity economy version of the 727 you are halfway to answering your question. Unfortunately for the 757, it was optimised for a rather niche sector at the time, a market which has reduced with the lengthening of many of the runways for which it was designed, and it never had the same opportunity for economies of scale, or the cost-cutting potential of the 737. An engineer may see the benefits of developing the 757, but the bean-counters only see the benefits of developing the 737. In many ways, the A321LR and XLR, are engineering solutions which just happen to keep the bean-counters happy. Airbus however, were starting from a relatively modern and good original design which had already been stretched, rather than from a modified compromise of a modified compromise of a development from another aircraft developed (from something else) for a different market sector! Which if you at it like that, you really do wonder why the 737 is as good as it is - Boeing must still have some great engineers!

I have seen similar a similar "march to destruction" at General Electric. The GE is no longer a technical company, they buy other companies and suck the money out until the products fail and then buy another company...... almost the same here at Boeing. GE also was dropped out of the Dow Industrial Average. Boeing not there quite yet. But if you don't learn from history you're doomed to repeat it, so beware. OTOH if you make a great product, they will come. Look at Elon Musk endeavors. I'd love to invest in SpaceX. and look at TESLA a small company now worth more than General Motors. Every company seems to have a live cycle. GE is dying after 100 years and Boeing looks to be on it's way out to unless it gets back to having an engineer run the company and make products. Business people just focus on on short term profits this quarter. I'll bet Boeing doesn't even have a 5 year plan. GE doesn't.

@benganchan1420

4 жыл бұрын

Don Adams in comes COMAC with its C919 which will sell for 50% less. You’ll still get proven components and all the Chinese do is assembly with casings ( read aircraft fuselage , car bodies, smart phone casings )It’s the same business model applied to China made German designed cars , American designed Apple smartphones etc

@mikeske9777

4 жыл бұрын

Humm 2 of the last three CEO's at Boeing came from GE

@ryanfraley7113

3 жыл бұрын

You are speaking of Neutron Jack.

@ryansplace2009

3 жыл бұрын

Isn't that the general trend? Most likely every company will go this way when founders are no longer present and lessons that lead to their success are forgotten.

@MrJimheeren

3 жыл бұрын

Tesla never made a profit though, in my mind it’s a big bubble but I could be wrong

Capt. Petter reminds me of my favorite flight instructor, Dan Sieber, back in the early 80's who happened to be Swiss (not Swedish). He was humble, soft spoken, patient, very intelligent, and an all around great pilot and teacher. Interestingly, I got my driver's license about 2 weeks after I got my pilot's license in the first car that I ever had (a baby blue Ford Mustang II, which I bought from him just before he returned to Biel, Switzerland to pursue his career as an airline pilot. I've always wondered what ever happened to him. I'm sure he went a long way in aviation and hopefully even today continues to live a good and prosperous life. God bless pilots and aviators everywhere...

@angelinasouren

Жыл бұрын

Oh, then you'll laugh when I tell you that I once took a flying lesson and the instructor said "you start it just the way you start a car" and I said "I don't know how to start a car". (I only got the driving license, though, a few years later.)

Great video!! I have worked at Boeing sense 2011, i love my job and the company. But you hit the nail on the head on the communication mechanics on the floor raise problems all the time and nothing ever comes of it gets frustrating

Very interesting, cheap at the end becomes expensive... That's how life works...

Mentour, as always thank you for being very fair and thoughtful in these presentations which involve controversy and emotion. The quality issues at Boeing may be cross-cutting, unsurprisingly, with the major software glitch during a recent Starliner spacecraft test and subsequent calls by NASA to investigate Boeing. Bringing in a new CEO from the board of directors? Maybe like rearranging the Titanic's deck chairs. Let's hope for fresh and critical thinking at the top. "If all of us are thinking alike then one of us isn't thinking", the timeless words of General George Patton.

@sharoncassell9358

Жыл бұрын

I hope they wake up and smell the coffee before they completely fall on their face. Because hard heads make sore behinds.

I was wondering watching many of your videos if pilots are even allowed to talk about companies that are airlines' bussiness partners - but clearly you are freee to speak up - that's awesome!

Mentour - I love your videos, and this one raises several good issues. But I have to correct a couple of items. I wrote my MBA thesis about deregulation; it was enacted in 1978 under the Carter Administration. Reagan had absolutely nothing to do with it. And prior to regulation, the CAB set routes and fares, as you pointed out. But there was never any direct subsidy paid to the trunk airlines, as they were then called. True, they could petition the CAB to increase fares, but airlines became much more conscious of expenses long before 1978. In fact, it was the 1973 OPEC oil embargo and price increase (or price-gouging by the Arab oil states, to be more accurate) that caused a cost panic in the U.S.

@jameswhyard2858

4 жыл бұрын

MBA? Mostly bullshit artist?

@markpoidvin5382

4 жыл бұрын

@@jameswhyard2858 "There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." Isaac Asimov He is right and accurate on every point. Why some people are not unaware of their ignorance, but actually proud of it never ceases to amaze me. How else you get Trump as POTUS. I will go to my grave muttering about how badly I underestimated the galactic stupidity of your average person.

@alanbarrow7447

4 жыл бұрын

Mark Poidvin “Your average person” - a meaningless category really, and one from which you, perhaps mistakenly, thought yourself exempt.

@jameswhyard2858

4 жыл бұрын

Had the the qualification been in Engineering or Science I might not have been so direct, but I perceive business administration as on the same plane as theology and deserving of similar respect... Sadly Australia has declined to a similar state as the USA...

@poruatokin

4 жыл бұрын

@@alanbarrow7447 Think how stupid the average person is, then realize that half of them are twice as stupid.

I still remember the day when Boeing started worrying totally about "shareholder value" over the quality of the airplane. Good ol' Harry Stonecipher started it and infused us with his minions. Airplanes need to be built by airplane people, not business majors.

@deadfreightwest5956

4 жыл бұрын

This! A thousand times this. Old Hairy Petroglyph even said he wanted all of us hourly workers and our families dead.

@thegr8rambino

4 жыл бұрын

This country has gone to shit and is basically a walking zombie of a country

Excellent video! Funny thing is that I'm following your channel as a hobbyist aviation enthusiast, but this video is very relevant to my non-aviation related work. I'll share this in my company (a rapidly growing tech startup) next week as a good example of how company culture and management can affect a business.

Congrats Peter! This was the most informative and most in-depth video I have seen from you till this day. Thanks for sharing your research and expertise. Additionally, my fear of flying is now long gone after following your channel :)

Boeing moved its headquarters to Chicago to gain power in the US congress. Washington is a relatively small population state with few representatives in congress, while Illinois is a large population state with many more members of congress. The more power Boeing had in the congress allowed them to get more high dollar government contracts.

@fixpacifica

4 жыл бұрын

I worked for Boeing and would strongly disagree with that interpretation. Boeing was also considering moving its headquarters to Los Angeles, and if its objective was to gain power in Congress, it would have moved to California. Boeing's official reason for moving to Chicago was that it was easier to reach customers from Chicago's O'Hare than from Seattle's Sea-Tac, and it was more central to Boeing's many locations throughout the US. But in Seattle, it was felt that CEO Phil Condit moved the headquarters to Chicago in order to get away from Seattle, where he was despised.

@frankpinmtl

4 жыл бұрын

Good point, ziggy

Great video (and a sad story). Your evaluation of Boeing cultural changes as well as diminished FAA participation seems spot on. For the sake of crews, passengers, airlines, Boeing employees, and the Boeing Company itself, I hope that they can bring themselves back to their past greatness. Thank You

Excellent, thoughtful and well researched video delivered with your trademark energy and enthusiasm. A case history in the really bad stuff that happens when communication, honesty and trust break down.

My husband is currently a mechanic at Boeing in WA state, and has been for 12 years. I've learned more about Boeing's history and the Max (which we got to tour once) watching your video than was ever communicated. Thank you!

Excellent point about Regulation: In this case, the regulators might have saved Boeing a lot of grief with the 737MAX.

What is wrong with Boeing is that they've become lazy and complacent. When I visited their facility in Washington, you can tell the lack of morale on the floor. From up high you could see the building full of planes but the people moved like they were ill and sickly. You can tell a lot by how people move in a company.

@bocahdongo7769

4 жыл бұрын

Laziness isn't the cause, but the effect. The point of Boeing's problem is that management was started to oriented around money and lack of communication. 2 main problem combine to 1, it is the ultimate disaster for ANY company. There's so many example of companies that had 2 main problem like this, all of them never end well

@tabaks

4 жыл бұрын

No.

@onastick2411

2 жыл бұрын

Could it be you'd wandered into a hospital by mistake?

WHAT IS WRONG WITH BOEING? Greed over Quality Control. In my opinion, they never should have merged with McDonnell Douglas Corp. That is when Boeing "Quality" went downhill. A Fascinating and Excellent video Sir!

What's wrong with Boeing? Simply: a loss of _integrity,_ i.e. a commitment to doing what's right over what is profitable; from the way they ditched many of their highly-qualified, longtime Washington-state workers by moving thousands of production jobs - and their headquarters - out-of-state ( to undermine Labor's bargaining power, despite also having received exorbitant tax credits from Washington state for years ), to massively outsourcing offshore, including to low-wage countries ( ex: their planes' software! ), to the way they fostered a culture of denying reality ( esp. safety + design considerations ) and offloading responsibility, to the misleading of the FAA and their customers. It's a classic story, philosophically: loss of integrity ( i.e. the exclusive pursuit of near-term profit over all other considerations, specifically: fairness, quality and safety ), leads to a responsibility-averse culture, causing *reality* [ such as _gravity,_ and the Market! ] to eventually reassert itself-after stubbornly denying parts of it are true, or exist. Another way to put this, in a broader sociopolitical context, is that, in my opinion, 'integrity' and 'responsibility' ( i.e. ethical norms ) are fundamentally _communally-defined_ and _held_ - and therefore _mostly local_ - values ( and so is _democracy!_ ), having much to do with maximizing what is deemed 'right' by a specific sociocultural group, at a particular place and point in time ( to maximize _its_ long-term welfare and autonomy, through sacrifice; like: by sacrificing near-term profits ), whereas the supply-chain has become globalized, to maximize profits. Unfortunately, delocalizing production has also resulted in a commensurate loss of accountability and visibility, as the various parts of the 'system' can no longer see and communicate among themselves very well, nor easily agree on a common set of - I would argue, intrinsically _locally-defined_ - values and interests, nor necessarily rapidly suffer the consequences when skirting the law or ethics. Basically, a major downside of globalizing production is that it externalizes and diffuses responsibility, while delaying negative consequences, and also decreasing the potential _penalty-cost_ of bad or counter-productive behaviors. It seems as though this broad externalization of accountability has finally caught up to Boeing. In short, globalization + neoliberal deregulation backfired!

@namolokaman2393

4 жыл бұрын

@ ...Yes, but it’s not that clear-cut. On the one hand, it is _true_ that Republicans are notorious proponents of small government, deregulation, and pro-business - implicitly, _anti-labor_ - polices, in general. On the other hand, it is _corporate Democrats_ - liberals - that are the biggest supporters of free-trade deals ( ex: it was Bill Clinton who signed NAFTA into law, and Obama who pushed for the TPP - which Trump promptly cancelled - ), and of opening the nation's borders to the global supply-chain - thus hurting workers, here at home, in the US [ note: there is a reason _Hillary_ sat on the board of Walmart, a purveyor of mostly Chinese-made goods - 70-80% of their merchandise! ]. And it is _Democrat-backing_ industries - notably: Hollywood and Big Tech - that are the greatest advocates of multiculturalism, and of this cosmopolitan as well as "politically-correct" world view currently permeating mainstream media and popular culture ( an implicit "pro-globalization" ideology ). In short, both parties contributed to so-called "free”-market neoliberal policies that have savaged the working-class, as well as resulted in soaring economic inequalities in the US - to the point that US life-expectancy has decreased for 3 years in row! Boeing planes falling out of the sky are just _one_ consequence of a broader, systemic problem - and both US political parties are to blame, imo.

@parthiacrassus3521

4 жыл бұрын

@Bobby Brady Airbus will take a no-cost loan from the EU to pay the EU that fine :)

@OptimusNiaa

4 жыл бұрын

"doing what's right over what is profitable" And the thing is, these two things do not need to be at odds. Indeed, doing what is right is often in the long run what is profitable (and vice versa, as the MAX situation illustrates). Treating employees well tends to lead to a higher retention rate, which for companies that rely on skilled labor, is often vital. Making safe, reliable, useful products that people want or need is also vital, and cost-cutting measures can impede that. And so on. I'd argue the issue here is largely short-sightedness. Cost cutting measures which increase profits in the short-term but which ultimately are unprofitable. So why would managers make unwise short-sighted business decisions? I can think of at least three reasons: 1. They are only in it for the short term, and don't care about long-term consequences. 2. They aren't sophisticated enough in their thinking to even consider what the long-term consequences might be. 3. They look at possible long-term consequences, but aren't smart about it and come to incorrect conclusions. The first is a character problem, and the second and third are intelligence and/or education problems.

@sorbabaric1

4 жыл бұрын

BenjaminFranklin99 And here I thought Bill Clinton was a democrat.

Great video Mentour I enjoyed watching it, have a fantastic weekend my friend.

Luckily we have Airbus, competition is good and needed, but giving up on quality will hopefully never create success in the long run.

@ExaltedDuck

4 жыл бұрын

Two ways to build value: cut cost or increase quality. They are mutually exclusive, antithetical to each other. Cost cutting always damages business in the long run and, ironically, truly improving quality will reduce costs more on the long run.

@1983Bantam

4 жыл бұрын

@@ExaltedDuck "cut cost or increase quality. They are mutually exclusive, antithetical to each other." smart phones have better cameras and are cheaper than professional camera two decades ago. You're talking out your ass.

@user-ky6vw5up9m

4 жыл бұрын

Competition is not good. Airbus have been fined in Jan 2020 on several counts of bribery.

@marquamfurniture

4 жыл бұрын

@@1983Bantam False equivalence!!! (BTW, thanks for your last sentence, telling us what kind of person you are. Do you really think it helps make your case? ... spurious as it is.)

Absolute perfect research work presented in a way that even people unfamiliar with the airline industry understand easily. Thank you very much for your excellent videos.

This just goes to show how important it is that everyone feels perfectly free to share whatever concerns they have.

Mentour would have been a very effective investigative reporter as an alternate career.

@InnocentChristopher

4 жыл бұрын

I truly agree with you

An excellent 'think piece'. Your analysis is the first I've heard that explains why the software villain of the piece was introduced. Thank you and cheers from DownUnder.

7:24 Oh! Hello, there! :) Couldn't resist Liking this video when the dog appeared and cuddled at mid-video.

Congress ordered the FAA to "Save money", for an American company. I would like to know the cost of the saving. Sir, thank you for the explanation, we agree with the previous comment. The two disasters would have been more devastating if they took place over America. We hope the people who allowed these failures have been named and removed from air safety. We like your cushions.

Your dog jumped right up when you said "watching your favorite Netflix show". :-)

Really great video... Among your best (which is really saying something, because your quality & sincerity comes across)!! Deep dive into Boeing... The joke used to be... The perfect airliner would be... Designed by Lockheed, built by Boeing and marketed by McDonnell-Douglas.

Perhaps in this case, for this particular industry, moving your HQ half-a continent away was a big mistake. Just saying...

@martintheiss4038

4 жыл бұрын

To better manage and supervise purchasing and shipment of parts.

@richardlockhart4557

4 жыл бұрын

@@martintheiss4038 It was Chicago, that toddlin' town. Center of America's corruption. Home of the Chicago School of Economics. Home to the idea that only the stockholder matters in all of life and this genius idea must be exported to all the world, any failures can be excused as the error of governments trying desperately to save their populations.

Mentour, this is an amazing video. Thanks for making it. This is EXACTLY how companies steer themselves into a corner by letting greed and cost cutting spiral out of control. Bean Counters are the worst kind of managers and decision makers, because they value P&L over all else, and don't consider the long term impact of any of the other factors involved.

When I heard that Boeing was moving their headquarters from Seattle to Chicago, I thought "I have a BAD feeling about this!".

@billy98102

4 жыл бұрын

yes!

An excellent historical explanation of failures at Boeing and the FAA regulators. Thanks.

@MentourPilot

4 жыл бұрын

Glad you liked it. It’s short but I think it covers the main points

"What's wrong with Boeing?" I can think of 737 things...

@bobbycv64

4 жыл бұрын

EXCELLENT

@sheritonn5019

4 жыл бұрын

Not familiar with the 787? As a brief summary, Boeing can build the 787 for a hundred years and not recover their cost of development. Looking at recent programs, the 787, 747-8 and 767 tanker all had serious issues.

@planeflight1202

4 жыл бұрын

@@sheritonn5019 What is wrong with the 747-8?

@mickeypopa

4 жыл бұрын

@@planeflight1202 That one has 747 issues in 8 different sections of the plane. :P

@BGTech1

3 жыл бұрын

@@sheritonn5019 have you seen the “787 broken dreams” documentary?

We need more people in the sciences for these companies. Shame no ones hiring them.

15:00 Lets have the fox as a guard dog for the hen house!

Thank you for finally come clean with Boing mismanagements.

Good video. I'll take issue with one thing: Having been there at the time of the merger, we at Boeing did NOT expect the former culture to continue, but feared for the future. In fact, the culture had already been changing. Also, I'll point out the SPEEA (Boeing Engineers Union) of 20 years ago. That was when Boeing made it clear the engineering culture was despised by management. The CFO told the financial media "Boeing doesn't need engineers to build airplanes." After it was over, most of the best younger engineers left.

@user-qr8ki8ue4i

4 жыл бұрын

This sounds so very Boeing philosophy. Spot. On. I'll say that mindset goes back much further than 20 years go.

@deadfreightwest5956

4 жыл бұрын

Harry Stonecipher hated both unions. He destroyed Aerospace in favor of McD's defense division. Condit was only strong enough to bang his mistress, not protect the company. It seems amazing, looking back, that Frank Shrontz was the last great CEO of Boeing.

They grotesquely over pay management and then go with minimum wage programmers.........next?

@GuinessOriginal

4 жыл бұрын

Greg Moore after sacking their entire aviation software design and development division with over 30 years of experience. Now it's all outsourced to HCL in India, who have no experience, pay $9 an hour and are currently working on the fix to mcas which they developed in the place.

@jcf20010

4 жыл бұрын

@@GuinessOriginal Oh no not HCL. Unfortunately I have experience working with HCL. What a friggin nightmare that was.

@GuinessOriginal

4 жыл бұрын

Jack CF yeah tell me about it. Their motto is "we compete on price not quality". Says it all really.

@jcf20010

4 жыл бұрын

@@GuinessOriginal Just curious how do you know HCL is involved?

@DoubleMonoLR

4 жыл бұрын

@@GuinessOriginal Except there's no evidence that HCL worked on MCAS.

Awesome content, actually quite ballsey to say some of this! Quick question, does the MAX worry you, eg if you were asked to fly it, would you want to?

very interesting topic good work on this video 👏👏

@MentourPilot

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you! I was hoping people would like a history-lesson

@Speedbird9A

4 жыл бұрын

you know what they say ( A good pilot is always learning)

I'm still not flying on the Max. So basically pilots won't need additional training or certification because they are essentially just repairing MCAS I think that's irresponsible to be honest,

@redtailarts101

2 жыл бұрын

Incorrect. Pilots do need training as for what to do in the event MCAS fails to activate, or activates erroneously. This would include how to turn it off, and how to fly the plane without the MCAS system whereas the plane won't stall. Pilots now require simulator training to fly the 737 MAX, even if they are previous 737 Pilots. I know a lot about the MAX because I have a strange fixation on the case, and I would fly the MAX. I won't push you to make the same decision, as your refusal is an important consequence for Boeing, but I don't want you to make any decisions while misinformed. If you want to know more about why I would fly, I'd be more than happy to infodump

@nickolliver3021

2 жыл бұрын

the max is fine now

When your self regulate... That's a huge conflict of interest.

@ReflectedMiles

4 жыл бұрын

Don't ever fly Airbus either, then. EASA does the same kind of delegation through the Design Organisation Approval program. Neither the FAA nor the EASA allow self-regulation per se, but they have no option but to depend upon the internal expertise and analyses provided by these manufacturers. The cost of maintaining their own, exclusive experts would be very prohibitive, not to mention the question of what to do with them at those kinds of salaries when no major certification was in progress.

@ronholzhauer8115

4 жыл бұрын

@@ReflectedMiles agreed. There must be fail/safe ck and balance. All aviators must abide the very same rules/standards.

@38911bytefree

4 жыл бұрын

COSTS CANT be a justification for that, this is nothing but CORRUPTION.

@ReflectedMiles

4 жыл бұрын

@@38911bytefree It is as long as that is all you can consider or see. For many products and services to be affordable, compromises are essential. The challenge is to make the right compromises for the maximum good, and correct the ones that go wrong. The strongest airplane in the world is an airplane that can't fly, so there's no point in building it. Even if safety is the top priority, other factors have to be accounted for. That's just the nature of the real world. Unfortunately, McDonnell-Douglas wasn't very good at achieving the right balance.

@masterwong1133

4 жыл бұрын

Airbus is still less reliable than Boeing

TRUE. Unfortunately, hundreds of souls, including pilots and flights attendants had to be first sacrificed before these two entities make changes within the company/institution, also known as "GREED", with very minimal consequence, IF ANY. That would have been a Walmart shoplifter, he would gone to jail and would have a record tied up the rest of his life for stealing a bag of food and a screwdriver. Unless, you lock them up and show ACCOUNTABILITY, these things will continue to happen again, might not be in Boeing but by other companies or CEOs.

Your dog is always like "ugh not another youtube video!" lol

You need to remember that Boeing was really successful at exploiting "grandfather rights" on the 737 (and other lines) throughout the 80s and 90s to avoid stricter regulations that Airbus and others had to follow (doors and exits etc.) . That gave their products a commercial and operational advantage and they profited from that. With the Max they just pushed that philosophy too far despite the engineering realities that they chose to ignore or downplay... in the end it bit them on the behind.

I grew up on the 1960s and '70s when airlines were highly regulated. We were lower-middle class and the price of air travel was completely out of reach for us for routine travel. We weren't poor; my dad was a TV repairman and my mom was a hairdresser, both with lots of work. We owned our own home. But I remember that in 1973 our family had to save up for months so that my mom and one of the kids could fly from Oregon to Oklahoma to visit family. After deregulation nearly everyone in the US can afford to fly routinely.

@onastick2411

2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely, it's getting the balance right. With regulation it's consistency that's important, so the companies know the hill they have climb, and aren't constantly faced with shifting sands.

A big part of Boeings descision to move out of Washington was that Washington State was/is not friendly to business. High taxes and lots of red tape and regulations. I live here in Washington and it was kind of a big topic at the time.

@sheldoninst

4 жыл бұрын

1) WA state govt was just as greedy and socialistic. So true, in fact the greed for power lies on the awful WA state government just as much as it does on BA’s management. 2) BA management wanted to live in a more cosmopolitan city. Don’t underestimate the self perceived image of sophistication held by BA’s management, who with a similar yet selfish selection criteria used by the Amazon management to choose the ever impractical NYC as their new secondary headquarters, wanted to live in a more fun and happening city. If BA management needed a new headquarters, it should’ve moved to TX instead. 3) Airbus is even more INefficient with an equally or even worse sclerotic corporate structure. Remember, Airbus does NOT have to pay back loans for bad projects like the A340 and A380, they only return loans on a percentage of that aircraft’s sales. I can remember all the talk of “impending Airbus doom” when BA smartly developed the 787 vs Airbus’ boondoggle A380. 4) Competition is great and led to MDA’s demise and Lockheed’s ceding the passenger plane business. Inevitably, there will be a third player in our lifetime, and don’t think for a minute China can’t eventually learn to build competitive planes. 5) Contrary to what the friendly video author says, there was no grand plot by Condit to buy MDA... it was nearly bankrupt, and BA bought it with desperate govt requests to take it for roughly 10 cents on the dollar.

@davemiller6055

4 жыл бұрын

I like to refer to my state as the Peoples Republic of Washington. Actually, the Seattle/coast are is the liberal hotbed. The rest of the state is more conservative. The problem is that 60% of the population lives there so they dictate politics here (using Amazons and Starbucks money).

@MaximilianBocek

4 жыл бұрын

Of course you know that Bezos set up Amazon in Seattle because of the tax structure: no income tax. Also, Dave, the state gave in to Boeing's ... well, let's call it persuasion ... and gave them a ton of money not to leave, to the tune of $100M/year, according to the Seattle Times. I would also note that it was the lack of red tape and regulations that has led to Boeing's problems with the Max, as reported in the video. There are a more things to consider with running a business in Washington State than taxes and regulations. It's easy to attract the best engineers to Seattle because of the quality of life, which is at least a little due to the way the city and state are run. There's a reason Amazon and Microsoft are here. BTW, full disclosure, I grew up in Yakima, live in Seattle, and used to work for Boeing.

@davemiller6055

4 жыл бұрын

@@MaximilianBocek I'm from Spokane and my older brother used to work for Boeing.

@sheldoninst

4 жыл бұрын

All true, especially for most blue collar workers and some white collar. But the “bean counter” class, namely the board members along with upper management of any large company generally see themselves as sophisticates, and prefer a world class city with lots of world renown restaurants and fabulous real estate. Most of Chicago for the most part beats out most of Seattle for the “sophisticated cultural” types for sure. No knock on the great Seattle by any stretch, but knowing some of these people from Boeing/Amazon confirms this interesting point.

As always, love the dog!

Sad, this whole mess. All because Boeing management decided money was more important than safety. They forgot what made them great.😩.

@Mrbfgray

4 жыл бұрын

The problem with that thought is the blatant fact that it cost them tens of billions, crashing has NEVER been profitable for anyone but maybe attorneys.

@andersonrodriguez8258

4 жыл бұрын

Are the recent CEOs from Boeing are from MD?

Keeping the 737 in the sky has been the problem. A completely innovative, new design would have prevented the company from mayhem.

@alanhowitzer

4 жыл бұрын

Yes, but no one wanted to do all the work to make a new plane happen, including pilots and the airlines. At least that's what it seems. Everyone wanted to take the easy route.

@evolution7180

4 жыл бұрын

You don’t seem to know the cost of designing a new aircraft

@jeffluo8960

4 жыл бұрын

@@evolution7180 You don't know the cost of having 737s overrun the runway every month and having to constantly boot people to keep the Vr under 200 knots.

@Trollzzofficial

4 жыл бұрын

@@alanhowitzer Yes, but now they are thinking of making 797 the new 737 replacement... If that will happen, they need to understand that somebody made really bad decisions in the last years. Sadly, this will drag for the next few decades with them. Instead of making new parts and doing RND, they are just going to fill gaps. They need multiple aircraft to be done and that will take years.

@evolution7180

4 жыл бұрын

Jeff Luo Yeah it’s SURELY cheaper to spend years developing new planes, testing them and fixing the problems