Boeing - more problems

A new problem has been found during the production of 737 Max jets that will force Boeing to rework about 50 planes that have not yet been delivered.

Boeing may delay more 737 Max deliveries after incorrectly drilled holes found

Emirates Airlines boss says manufacturer ‘in last chance saloon’ as supplier Spirit AeroSystems finds new production glitch

Someone’s told me that with this site you can pick your plane

I’d not get onto a Boeing at the moment.

How are they still in business?


Boeing is a great American corporation. Excellent track record. Human error happens.

We need to avoid Coke, PM, coal miners, XOM, and others…

1 Like

Investors are working to keep them in business. Can you imagine a world where its Airbus followed by planes from Russia and China?

More likely customers are keeping them in business. Namely, airlines, who might not want the limited choice you give above. Go back at look at Harley Davidson, whose customer base at one point literally kept the company alive during a period of truly horrible quality. Read “Well Made in America”, a truly great book of a turn-around story. Maybe Boeing executives need to read that book.

1 Like

Probably both investors and customers want to keep them in business and hope they get their act together. Boeing borrowed heavily to keep making planes when they could not be sold. Workers had to be paid, materials paid for. To shut down would lose experienced labor. Investors are on the hook for big debts.

Customers cannot easily change suppliers. Long wait list already. Large investment in training, know how, tools, parts etc. To change is a big deal. Not likely unless you have multiple suppliers.

1 Like

What’s wrong with planes from China?
They build good stuff.

Well, really, global markets do eventually resolve down to one or two players. I’m an old phart. I remember Vickers VC-10s, Convair 990s, BAC-111s, Sud-Est Caravelles, Hawker-Siddeley Tridents, Fokker Fellowships, de Havilland Comets, Martin 404s. All the EU companies consolidated into subassembly contractors for Airbus. All the US companies ended rolled up into Boeing, and a handful of defense contractors suckling on the government t3at.

Outside of the US and EU, China and Russia are the only economies big enough, with the technical capability, to build a line of state of the art airliners.

Eye candy. Russian IL-62, 1960s vintage, similar in layout to a VC-10

1 Like

Boeing does more business than Airbus.

Boeing will turn a profit this year.

When the 737 Max needed the software patch it was a huge extra expense. Engineers around the world were paid to work on that.

I would venture much of the labor cost already applies in these cases. Basically, watch what you are doing as an employee and more FAA oversight at every stage.

Boeing is a screaming buy right now.

I do not think it is a ten-bagger. But this decade going into 2034, 3 or 4 bagger in a well-allocated portfolio? Sure.

China is entering the market. The planes are not reviewed by the FAA. That may take up to a decade to begin to happen. The planes are for shorter hops in China. If the Russians want them as they might live their lives who cares? Not my idea of running an airline.

We need to talk about regulating colt arms. Something more obvious when it comes to safety.

Maybe, if you add in the gifts from DoD. Boeing lost leadership in commercial aircraft to Airbus several years ago.


Boeing also makes satellites.

European countries often own the major airliner carriers.

I would say Boeing does more work for private commercial airline companies but the numbers would have to be tabulated. So I’d risk that.

Many non-European carriers are also state-owned. The EU may be cutting deals in a packaged form with those countries. It is not Boeing’s fault and it predates the topic of discussion here.

Export Boeing sales are subsidized by the US Export/Import bank. Boeing subcontracts to vendors in other countries to curry favor with foreign governments. Boeing is being outcompeted by Airbus.

Boeing tries the “The dog must have eaten my homework” defense:

The investigation is tied to an incident on an Alaska Airlines flight in early January. Boeing also told a Senate panel that it cannot find a record of the work done on the Alaska plane.

That was on the evening news tonight. An industry “expert” was slackjawed that Boeing is crying it can’t find the documentation, because generating and preserving that documentation is an FAA requirement.

Clearly, complying with documentation requirements, just like quality and customer service, are costs to be eliminated.

Of course, if the case before the SCOTUS goes their way, that government agencies do not have authority to create and enforce regulations, then all this criminality on the part of Boeing “JCs” vanishes, right?



Then their product liability insurance goes to infinity… Boeing won’t be able to document–to the product liability insurance company–the planes sold meet any FAA regulations. So all Boeing aircraft are grounded. That may NOT be what they want. But it is what could happen if the FAA is not satisfied.


As I understand it, if the SCOTUS makes the “pro-growth, free-enterpise” decision, there would be no FAA regs to comply with, until Congress passes them. Same with DOT, EPA, DOE.



What is important though is keep talking the talk of good intentions even if your actions and realities differ:


Boeing and its chief executive officer, Dave Calhoun, have repeatedly vowed full cooperation with investigators at the NTSB and Federal Aviation Administration.

Early March:

During the Senate hearing, Homendy said investigators are focused on 25 Boeing workers assigned to 737 doors. The company hadn’t provided their names and the safety board hasn’t been able to interview them, she said.

“We’ve asked repeatedly for that information,” Homendy said. “It’s not for lack of trying.”


“With respect to documentation, if the door plug removal was undocumented there would be no documentation to share,” Boeing said in a statement.

Rhyming with findings from a report commissioned after the Max crashes:

The Federal Aviation Administration spent nearly a year investigating Boeing’s safety culture, uncovering a troubling workplace culture that made safety issues difficult to report. The FAA published the results of its investigation on Monday in a scathing 50-page report detailing 27 areas where Boeing’s safety procedures and culture were insufficient.

Presumably a relief from pesky safety regulations, and agencies sticking their nose into corporate culture (‚we prioritize making money - what else do they expect to find?‘) would come at the right time for JCs under undue pressure.


CEOs will never get paid. Congress will pass laws requiring companies to be in 100% compliance with ALL DOCUMENTATION for each and every individual component used/included in a public use vehicle–or ALL the executives of the business shall not be paid. If they can’t track the small stuff, then they can not track–or pay–the big stuff either. It is too expensive to track that stuff, so it got eliminated. The executives don’t need the money anyway.

1 Like

As I understand the case, and if I’m wrong, someone jump in here, if plaintiffs have their way and the court decides broadly, no departmental regulation will have any authority, unless Congress enacts it. Congress doesn’t do much but name post offices anymore, because it is so hamstrung by partisan posturing. Congress enacting every regulation on the books by the several regulatory agencies would take years, without lobbyist or partisan obstruction. With the level of obstruction in Congress now, it would never happen.



Guess what? The Supreme Court has the identical problem. They delegate to lower courts to figure stuff out. That is prohibited because Congress did NOT authorize that delegation–nor can they (per the USSC). So ALL the lower court decisions are null and void.

The alternative for Congress would be to pass a general law authorizing the existing bureaucracy. Otherwise, the country stops operating immediately because nobody can do business any more.

1 Like

The Constitution says Congress has authority to establish inferior courts. Were the inferior courts established by Congress? The POTUS nominates justices for the inferior courts, and the Senate approves them, or not.

Congress already did that. Congress established the administrative departments, and delegated rule making authority to them. iirc, the suit contends that Congress does not have authority to delegate rule making authority.

The American Enterprise Institute has a screed out that looks at the broader question, whether Congress has any authority to delegate anything.

Available April 15, 2022

In The Administrative State Before the Supreme Court: Perspectives on the Nondelegation Doctrine, leading scholars consider a revival of the Constitution’s nondelegation doctrine—the separation-of-powers principle that bars Congress from transferring its legislative powers to the administrative agencies. Although the nondelegation doctrine has lain dormant since 1935, some Supreme Court justices have recently called for its return. As the Supreme Court takes up the doctrine in current cases, this volume makes a timely contribution to our understanding of the separation of powers and the Constitution.

1 Like