Boeing’s Fatal Mistake
10-28-2020, 03:24 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: Sofa Stress Tester
Posts: 614
Originally Posted by WhiskeyKilo
Pardon my feeble RJ pilot brain, but given no engine/wing performance changes, what does adding a "2nd set" of wheels do for the 321 that move it closer to 57 territory?
10-28-2020, 03:29 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: Sofa Stress Tester
Posts: 614
Originally Posted by DarkSideMoon
It’s so bizarre to me that we have so many major players in our economy who rabidly avoid actually doing the real work and would rather just broker for others. (Uber/Lyft, some majors with their JV’s, all majors with their regionals...)
10-28-2020, 08:16 AM
#24
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,393
Originally Posted by Ziggy
Sadly, I see this trending as well. I’m a firm believer that when you outsource you loose control of your product/service. But, one thing that has been brought to my attention was that of liability. When you outsource you may loose control, but you may also mitigate your liability. So in today’s society, I wonder how big a factor that plays into.
10-28-2020, 08:22 AM
#25
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,393
Originally Posted by YAKflyer
Boeing's Fatal Mistake??? Simple merging with McDonnell Douglas.
It destroyed their culture and bankrupted their moral compass. They were an amazing organization before that fateful day.
It destroyed their culture and bankrupted their moral compass. They were an amazing organization before that fateful day.
Reality is that the 757 is an old design, and making new ones was not going to help much even if re-engined. Too costly to mfg with old materials and processes and the efficiency would never be there.
They either needed a clean-sheet like the NMA, or to try to fill the gap from either end with stretch NB's and small WB's.
Even gap filling is far from ideal, and could not compete with a clean-sheet design. The reason the XLR is getting away with it is because it's based on a very efficient NB design (NEO) so it's numbers look decent compared to older models. But the XLR could not hold up well against a clean-sheet NMA, if such a thing were to come about in an alternate universe.
Last edited by rickair7777; 10-28-2020 at 06:36 PM. Reason: Typo
10-28-2020, 09:46 AM
#27
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,571
Originally Posted by Nucflash
What I don’t get is the KC-767 has been operating for Italy and Japan since the late 2000s. What is so different about the KC-46 that they can’t seem to get straight?
Oh, and most recently, electrical wiring problems in at least one aircraft.
10-28-2020, 12:30 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Position: UNA
Posts: 4,429
Originally Posted by Excargodog
Well, twice the USAF stopped taking aircraft because the workers were leaving FOD in the closed in spaces of the aircraft. The tie downs meant for the aircraft to handle pallets were poorly designed and woukd never take the load in the event of a mishap or possibly even severe turbulence, the new fuel tanks leak, the new boom station gives distorted images in certain lighting conditions, the British built probe and drogue wing Refueling stations, although long in use for other aircraft, have yet to be certified for the KC-46, and they keep finding Big Mac wrappers in the fuel tanks...
Oh, and most recently, electrical wiring problems in at least one aircraft.
Oh, and most recently, electrical wiring problems in at least one aircraft.
10-28-2020, 02:38 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2020
Posts: 407
Originally Posted by Gone Flying
I think his point was they have been building 767s for decades and tanker variants for over 10 years. How could they possibly be f-ing it up, it’s not like they are new to this
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
