Like the guy who worked for Boeing was found dead in his car due to “suicide” . While sueing Boeing for cutting corners . Media dosent talk about it

That’s only half the problem. The other half is their DE& I hires that past 5 years at Boeing and all of there suppliers.

​@@Phat737???

Sounds like a repeatable cliche your mom told you.

Make the elite to fly Boeing like all of usand stop them flying their private plane. Then they will care more.

A clown

@@davidstager173 it's pedophiile Biden's era that is full of corruption, genocide, and impotence.

Airbus has had plenty of issues as well. No company is really prioritizing anything other than money

@@Kayla-ey7zg When was the last airbus accident you remember caused by engineering defect or airbus corporate greed rather than human or airline error

@@Kayla-ey7zg Boeing wasn't losing money it's corporate greed

Yeah, there was too many of them on site, and in bed, with Boeing at the plants.

It’s not really the FAA at fault. The situation that brought this about isn’t an FAA problem but a congress problem. Congress gave the FAA oversight of the manufacturing Quality Control system and then didn’t give the FAA a budget or man power to do it. If I remember exact numbers, the FAA has less than 10 inspectors in the entire country doing the QC work on this type of thing. Even if those inspectors were robots that never stopped working they aren’t a large enough body to sufficiently check and track every facet of an airliner’s build, maintenance and complete QC status. This is why the worthless self check system came about. This left inspectors with needing to only look at a very minuscule number of aircraft systems.

All of government is irresponsible corrupt all the way down to small town local government this country is turning into Mexico faster than a snowball headed for hell

We will let Biden do that

​@lordhue yes the faa is ultimately at fault here

And, of course, it's the new guy whose head ends up on the chopping block

"So I get a new safety guy"

Those whistle blowers have mysteriously died. These companies are becoming worse than Russia and China. Soon you'll have employees falling out of random windows.

Same with aircraft maintenance

I have a good friend who is now an ex-engineer as well. He was let go for the exact same reason, he wouldn't sign off or give the go-ahead on parts to be shipped because the redundancies on a significant number of the batch tested were inoperable, leaving a servo that controls integral flight components with nothing past a single point of failure. He absolutely refused to stand down, and they took some pretty slimy actions and finally succeeded in getting him fired, using an incredulous outburst he had as a means of claiming he was creating an 'unsafe or hostile work environment.' Meanwhile my buddy is absolutely exasperated and distraught knowing that whoever they replaced him with most likely will just bend down and look the other way, like you said. Hearing his detailed take on it and seeing his frustration and incredulity was honestly pretty heartbreaking.

That could work well, assuming that the FAA does audits to verify that the checks are being done properly and thoroughly. Methinks they aren't there yot.

That's actually the exact opposite way to see the problem. The government is in bed with Boeing, FAA will turn the other way and is completely useless in this case where Boeing has a near monopoly, thanks to government playing favorites in the market. Boeing would get CRUSHED if we actually had a free market in air travel. We don't.

The FAA doesn't have the resources to check Boeing's work...

@@bobbygetsbanned6049 they had the resources before, but they stopped giving Boeing oversight and therefore stopped using money dedicated to giving Boeing more oversight

​@bobbygetsbanned6049 They would have the capability if the Public Administration wanted it. Public regulators always can use whatever means and time is required. And if it is not possible, the product or procedure is not approved until it is achieved. By definition , regulators have to have the upper hand, especially when human safety is in play. Ok, I know that IRL politicians are in the bed with big corporations. (Boeing, Big Pharma,...)

Or probably because this a fault with Spirit Aerosystems and is being incorrectly blamed on Boeing. Also, stop overreacting. Any system as complex as an airliner will inevitably have faults be exposed later down the line. It is inevitable. Boeing is still very safe. Also why do you not pay attention to fuel tank issues with the A321XLR, paint issues with the A350 or the Pratt & Whitney issues on the A320neo family. Flaws will be discovered and things will break. It is inevitable; and if that concerns you, don’t fly at all.

@@papatango2362well said bro. Well said 👏

​@papatango2362 But the difference is how many issues with Boeing were I'm the past 2 or 3 months compared to the airbus issues. I would say faulty door plugs are more serious than paint jobs, and the a321 xlr is not in service yet.

​@papatango2362 However, I do genuinely understand what you are saying as almost all the issues with Boeing aircraft are problems with the assembly which is why Spirit aerosystems should be held accountable but at the same time if there are this many problems surely they would stop manufacturing with spirit aerosystems

@@papatango2362 Spirt was once a part of Boeing, then split from the company, so the same still applies. The a321XLR isn’t even certified, pick on it when it’s in service. I get your point with the a350 and you can talk bout it, but the 737 has had repeats over and over again, from MCAS to this. Also the P&W issues are completely separate unlike your claim of Boeing and spirt

The whole problem is the FAA and government. Boeing is not part of the problem, they are who government has decided to target.

I never understood the move

One question, I'm flying on one soon (737), should I change plane or will it be okay, it is around a 4,4 and a half hour flight?

@@Lrsk_ wear seatbelts as the doors might fly off :)

@@Lrsk_you will be fine. I’ve flown on them multiple times, and I’ll Fly on them again. Just flew on one in February on American Airlines 4 hour flight. They are honestly quiet and fine. The pilots aren’t going to take off if they don’t feel confident in the aircraft.

👏👏👏 agree

I agree. They have used the MCAS in the tankers and knew how to do it right (more than one input from AOA sensor) they CHOSE to do it wrong. They gotta pay for this in more ways than one.

62 years old ..extremely suspicious circumstances..not to mention 30 years with Boeing

@@tomstarzeck7137 Appears to be mafia style execution 😳

According to Boeings algorithm it had nothing to do with them

They want it obvious enough to deter any more like him

@@user-nf4sd4ss3o Thank YOU, Inspector!

FAA and US government are already heavily involved in the whole process....

The FAA and Boeing are in bed together. Nothing can be accomplished.

facts. I work for a big company and literally all they care about is profit... they'll willingly screw over employees and customers alike to make an extra dollar. it's disgusting.

How would you rate this comment KZfaq put on your comment. I put EXCELLENT! Then KZfaq asks WHY with different answer to click. I clicked other! KZfaq didn’t of course ask to clarify other BECAUSE I WOULD Have PUT……. BECAUSE ITS TRUE!!!! KZfaq is turning into LIBERAL GARBAGE!!! GARBAGE IN GARBAGE OUT IS WHAT YOUR GET KZfaq IF YOU HAVE CERTAIN VIEWERS THAT VIEW CERTAIN CHANNELS!!! SO YOUR GONNA GET ANSWERS FROM MOSTLY ONE PERSPECTIVE AND YOU HEN WHAT…….. BAN FREE SPEECH!! HERE YOU GO KZfaq “I would absolutely not fly a Max airplane,” Ed Pierson, a former senior manager on Boeing's 737 program, told the LA Times. “I've worked in the factory where they were built, and I saw the pressure employees were under to rush the planes out the door.Feb 1, 2024

Was he the same guy who got suicided?

@@KhaledTheSaudiHawkII I don't know, the interview I saw was from 7 or 8 years ago, a while back. I guess employees have been concerned about build quality for years now.

Yea and the pause was only theatrical to reinforce the idea that they had thought long and hard about it All of the people working on these planes from top to bottom have said for years that they won't fly on them. There was no thinking required to answer that question

@@SampsonGG nope, you are correct..... He knew his answer.

I mean, you won’t get another great opportunity than this 😂😂😂

Oh, it's Boeing after all, they sure will deliver more opportunities. ... nvm.

It's a problem with all MAX variants

Lol!!! Good one!

Good one!

It is wild enough that it doesn't even make sense monetarily. I don't get it.

Yawn. You're not going anywhere anyway, if you flew you'd realise you have zero choice in what equipment you fly on. Tool.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Me too! 😊

If it's airbus, you must.

Just if it’s a max 777 -300ER 747 737 757 are capable aircrafts

Wow never heard that response before.

legit same case: plane that tries to kill you every time you fly it

The MAX has had more issues than the 10. They fixed the 10. The verdict is still out on the MAX.

It’s way worse. Most of the DC-10’s problems were engine issues. But it was a solid and reliable airframe.

​@@patton303the cargo doors would have disagreed

Both designed by brought to you by Mcdonald Douglas Edit McDonnell for some reason auto corrected to McDonald's I think it fits better

And it will eventually go back to Airbus. That’s how it works. I don’t have any issue flying Boeing. The chance of anything happening, slim. Even if the spoiler deployed. It’s not going to lead to a crash unless the pilots are asleep.

@@alanhinkel420 Or you’re 60 feet off of the ground… 🫤 #SorryPete #AirCanada621 #DC8

​@@alanhinkel420 What about a open Door ? I dont think someone can save you from that

​@@alanhinkel420 Found the Boeing exec

@@robloxiasquad672 What about an open door? You have to include context.

4 missing bolts on an old plane design is different from 4 missing bolts on a new clean sheet plane design? The door plugs have been around since the 707, the technology is proven to be safe. It only became a safety hazard due to Boeing's subterranean safety standards. The 33 product audits failed from 89 speaks volumes about Boeing's unfixable unsafety culture. The 787 was just the beginning from what we see now as a result.

@@jantjarks7946And what about Airbus’s issues such as those with its landing gears or fuel tanks? How come the spotlight is on Boeing so much?

aycc-nbh - Should I start with the criminal conspiracy with the MAX crashes until today of what is happening with Boeing's? It's already difficult to get a comprehensive list together already how Boeing cannot get its act together. 2024 was supposed to be a good year for Boeing, that worked out... And the list is about certified planes. Unlike the Airbus, where the EASA is doing its job without cosy relationships in politics or Boeing's FAA. As such, why are you even raising the fuel tank redesign? That's exactly what a certification is about, to find safety concerns. Do you really want me to point at the 777X certification process so badly? Let me guess, Boeing's FAA couldn't find any safety concerns before certification of any Boeing plane? The latest issue with a certified Boeing plane seems to be the inability of Boeing to exchange a simple switch since 2017, when the issue with the 787 pilot seats popped up first. Instead LATAM had to deal with it and more than 50 people injured. Does Boeing always have to wait until finally an incident happens before getting its act together?

⁠@@jantjarks7946What do you mean by EASA having no relation with Airbus? It would only be in their rational self-interest to have one with them, since harming one of the two major passenger airplane manufacturers in the world would mean they would be collecting less money from overflight fees and other fees related to airports and air travel. I’m raising the fuel tank design because it would only mean Airbus is not designing the safest aircraft they can and they are facing just as significant of problems as Boeing or at least somewhere in the ballpark. And wasn’t the area that B787 flew over known for being turbulent to begin with? An A330 also experienced something similar recently, so it may not have been something related to the aircraft.

@@aycc-nbh7289 There are enough aeroplane businesses building jets which will pay overflight fees, no need to cozy up like Boeing's FAA. And you are raising the fuel tank design as it's the only way to deflect from Boeing's unsafety culture and the criminal conspiracy they committed. Fun fact, Airbus is addressing it within the framework of the certification process, like any other aeroplane producer has to do it. Boeing is addressing its issues with criminal conspiracies and serious air travel incidents instead. You deflecting with Airbus shows how weak your argument really is. Just for your information, the DoJ has launched another criminal investigation into Boeing. As such, no one comes even close to the criminal behavior of Boeing. And a faulty switch on pilot seats, that should have been reworked since 2017, has nothing to do with turbulence. You asked why the spot light is on Boeing and you got your answer. Now it's up to you to accept reality or not.

Just good luck and a matter of time. He'd be better off sticking with Airbus. Still though, I hope he never has any problems with any plane he flies.

And sudden diving towards the Tasman Sea throwing 50 passengers to the roof...

You forgot the unpredictable autopilot, because the engines were too large.

...and today a panel "just fell off" a 737 departing San Francisco. 🤦

You know, I was always told that flying is dangerous. Boeing are just out to prove it.

@@jasono2139 Was that a MAX?

How could an engineer possibly operate as a CEO? Did that actually make sense in your head before you typed it out for the entire internet to see? What do you think CEOs do, sit on the computer running CAD/CAM software all day?

@@billstrasburg384 your stupidity is absolutely astonishing, look no further then Nvidia's CEO, my father is also another example. there is no "bachelor of CEO". the arrogance you exude whilst being simultaneously wrong is actually mind numbing. please take your own advice "Did that actually make sense in your head before you typed it out for the entire internet to see?"

@@billstrasburg384 No, but at least the decisions an honest engineering ceo makes, will come from a place of expertise. Besides, haven't you ever seen an engineering graduate with a degree in business administration???

​@@billstrasburg384Do you honestly think a engineer can't be a CEO?? Former CEO of BP Oil is an engineer. My friend who is the CEO of his own company with 100 employees is an engineer.

🎉

Stay home

Didn't they say, they removed the word "max", for some reasons? ;-) So, when it's a 737-8 or 737-9, we know what it is... ;-)

Government is the problem.

Lol 🤣

Nah more like: It is a Boeing plane: 😨 It is a 737: 😰 Max: 💀

Yeah, the guy said if he died it wouldn't be suicide. He died the next day.

Former quality manager or something. Has been speaking against Boeing for 7 years and trying to get them accountable. He finally succeeded in getting a court case and is found dead the day before his testimony in court

@@gdok6088 Move along, nothing to see here. …..

Yea it is fashionable to knock Boeing and the 737, I guess it generates clicks. I see lots of issues on the news that are "Boeing" problems that are actually poor maintenance or other manufacturers issues. Example if there is an engine problem on a Boeing aircraft it is not Boeing's fault, Boeing does NOT build engines. Wheels falling off, maybe the airline mechanics that serviced the aircraft should be scrutinized .

@@chuckwain5591 they are the ones assembling and selling the plane. Final QC round falls on them

​@@konkeroufit's just like buying a new truck, alot of the truck manufacturers don't build their own powertrains(engines, transmissions, rear-ends). You have a problem, you take it to the dealership and blame the truck manufacturer, but it's actually who built the components that broke.

​@@konkeroufwrong! Aircraft manufacturing is totally different than automotive. They build the plane and you purchase your choice of engines like RollsRoyce, GE, Pratt&whitney etc if the engine blows up in flight Boeing has absolutely nothng to do.

Thats because you have the Showroom Edition those never have issues.

You should bring a parachute instead.

@@charliec5653 well, I want to save lives and the world!

That's a good one😂😂😂😂

😂😂😂

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

😂🤣😂🤣 Bravo!!

Yes ...money. money money

Government needs to get out of it, and then Boeing can fix it as they should, If there even is a problem, government causes the problem with the regulations. Government just needs to get out of it, let the people who know how to build planes ,BUILD PLANES. Boeing is a fantastic American company.

@@juliemanarin4127 it’s not about money, it’s about power prestige in control the government employees want so badly, every FAA worker, as well as Joe Biden. They should all be held personally liable for the issues that they have caused.

​@@BlindBiker3government is not stopping Boeing from making a good plane. You're nuts.

@@ED-es2qv that’s not nuts, ITS TRUTH! All it takes is to put the nightly news on to see the government and government employees are working against the people again, they always do. In this case, Boeing is a great American company who makes planes right, and they are trying to do their job, but FAA and FAA employees have decided that they don’t want Boeing anymore, they want boeing out of existence, and the employees done away with, FAA employees. Don’t want a prosperous America, they don’t want America to exist. In my own life, government has been very abusive, I live it every day, they are Heynis abusive evil sinister people. and all FAA employees failed America. FAA doesn’t know how to build airplanes, Boeing does, and they do it well. It’s government regulation the blocks them from making fantastic product, if any problem, and since the product is regulated, if something goes wrong, the FAA in regulators and employees should be at fault personally as well as Joe Biden personally. Boeing is a great company, let freedom fly.

The only problem with that is, the FAA let's boeing certify their own planes. In a lot of ways, the FAA is just as guilty.

​@@emaro6095yeah that got changed faa took that away from them.

They will just keep giving the FAA money under the table to cover it up

It takes 5-6 weeks to do a big check for a plane by a team of people. Almost Everything is taken out, whole inside, walls too, parts of the outside panels. Everything where cables, motors and electrical is going. Engines too. It happens after a big number of hour and landings. It’s really something impressive to see. So imagine they have to do 1500 planes, you need 1/2 year and over 1000 certified people I guess?

Ignorant

just five more. and I got bingo.

What about the engine anti-ice that can't be turned on for more than 5 minutes or the engines take damage? (Okay that's probably the engine manufacturers fault but still ...)

And 2 dead whistleblowers

My brother works on those engines. It's the mount that's the problem, made by Boeing.

omg the MCAS...that was crazy.

Val 👋😂

Original

Boeing will always be propped up but US government. There is no chance they will go bankrupt

LOL Boeing brings in billions of dollars a year. Not going to work!

Will you pay for the workers salary? Because a lot of people are going to loose their jobs if Boeing fails. Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of Boeing but surely there is a middle ground between this and " sueing to bankruptcy"... I mean, Airbus is doing fine, having profit and doing safe planes.

They won't understand because it's just the company that gets the lawsuit. It simply doesn't affect the suits, and if it does, then just in the shape of a golden parachute. How about making the executives personally accountable (as in, they have to pay for the damages, not the company they ruined, plus jail time), then they would learn

Well someone's gotta make military aircraft

Arm is for the ground spoiler feature for landing, they auto deploy, but irregardless of the handle position, it is true they are supposed to deploy little bits, especially at slower speeds, to help maintain roll control, where normal aileron use could bring the wing undesirably close to a stall or are generally just less effective due to not enough airflow

Let China make it right 😂

The "Dreamliner" is turning into a "Nightmare"!

​@@TheOzthewizdifferent aircraft

Yeah, and now they found the whistleblower dead shot in the head in a hotel parking lot before he was getting ready to testify. Yeah cause that’s not suspicious at all.

@@postersm7141I mean it could still easily be explainable as suicide. Almost every family ever when interviewed following a loved one’s suicide says “oh they were doing so well. They never would have killed themselves.” So that’s not very unique. Also it’s not like this guy was the lynchpin to finding Boeing responsible. Their stock price has tanked due to all the incidents and recalls and whatnot. It wouldn’t make much sense to murder the guy at this point.

did you pass the course?

@@nickshawn11 It's not? The 737-400 already exists. It was part of the second generation of 737s.

@@nickshawn11 “The 737-400 design was launched in 1985 to fill the gap between the 737-300 and the 757-200, and competed with the Airbus A320 and McDonnell Douglas MD-80. It stretched the 737-300 another 10 ft (3.05 m) to carry up to 188 passengers.[13] It included a tail bumper to prevent tailscrapes during take-off (an early issue with the 757), and a strengthened wing spar. The prototype rolled out on January 26, 1988, and flew for the first time on February 19, 1988. The aircraft entered service on September 15, 1988, with launch customer Piedmont Airlines (25 aircraft ordered). The last two Boeing 737-400s, the last Boeing 737 Classics, were delivered to CSA Czech Airlines on February 28, 2000. The 737-400 was replaced by the 737-800 in the Boeing 737 Next Generation family.” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_Classic

@@noahd.4551 it appears I was misinformed, thanks for the correction

Give me a 737-800 over a 737 MAX 8 anyday

Any x00 over the max. I'll even fly an old 707 or 727 when it's maintained well over any max series.

Black humor is oddly appropriate.

lol

😂

"Fewer," and these are new planes

​@@windsofmarchjourneyperrytr2823 Less than is fine. There was nothing to correct here. Grow up.

😂

CEO isn't a technical position, it's a business position. You obviously don't understand how companies work.

Bean counters and investor reps should not be on corporate boards. Boards should only be interested in long term corporate health - not investor relations.

@@bobbygetsbanned6049 Doesn’t seem to be working very well for Boeing, does it!

​@@bobbygetsbanned6049 This guy is another angry hippie socialist who thinks that businessmen just sit around in gentlemens' lounges smoking cigars all day. He sounds like Alexandria Occasional-Cortex.

@@iancormie9916 This 100%. Then you might argue why we've allowed institutional finance to chop up and extract so much wealth from these companies that provide so much for our everyday lives.

I think id be possible, if they get their shit done correctly and then just fade in the backround for some time. I think Boeing in general public would start to sound great again by itself because of litteral decades of building great planes, that shoud at least in my opinnion still be in the minds of quite a few people long terme. But i do not want to say it doesent hurt Boeing and it will take jears witout any mayor problems.

The airlines know more about the realities than an average person reading gossip news.. luckily..

You’re aware that Airbus has its own issues as well, no?

Yes Airbus has big problems no doubt but let's be serious, Boeing is just in a FAR worse state currently. Even the usual quite pro Boeing FAA does acknowledge that Boeing is in an horrible situation

@@lachmowe1642Maybe because they are being subjected to a lower standard.

​@@aycc-nbh7289they are corrupt now,they care about money more than safety of people riding it

Yes, I am..

Can also be wake turbulence from another plane. Airbus’s made me spill my coffee a few times, suddenly our 737 just rolled, Airbus A319 in front. Tried this a few times..

Yes, just came here to say more likely wake turbulence, that is relatively common and the most likely scenario

Air bus monopoly

greetings from germany

Correct. Airbus are going to become the world's leader

With all of the safety issues surrounding Boeing in the past decade, they lost their grip a long time ago. And certainly don’t deserve getting it back any time soon.

I saw this coming back in 1991 then it becomes a reality when McD/Douglas took over.

Source: trust me bro

Yes, right after profits, the number one priority.

At least the Kia can't fall out of the road.

​@@paulperry7091facepalm

movement that expires.

You’re living in a strange world and you’re talking utter bollocks.

Shut up kid

Boeing fan boy 🤓🤓🤓

​@@paulhough5941Sorry if this subtlety seems excessive, but this was my attempt at being factitious.

You could have a great career in advertising! That one is really good!

The shareholders are getting bent over a barrel, lol. You think people are buying up Boeing stock? These decisions are BAD for making money.

You shouldn’t fly at all. You should also be concerned about your A321XLR having fuel tank issues.

​@@papatango2362the A321XLR isn't even in service yet 😂

@papatango2362 wait till it’s certified to worry about safety

i thought you said airbussy for a second 💀

@@papatango2362i mean as an american, we should probably worry about our problems with the 737 MAX before judging others i’m a huge boeing fan, but it’s clear that between the A320 family and the 737 family, the A320 might be a little superior when it comes to safety and public records

Hahahahaha thank you!

I don’t see why, since the information there still holds true.

Don't be one of those people who is only influenced by the last person they heard from

nothing he said in that short was untruthful

This is why we need to think with more sophistication. It's not just a matter of "Boeing Bad" or "Boeing Good." They are at fault for a bunch of things, but not everything. You don't have to lie to make Beoing look bad.

What, you don't like excitement and surprises?

The proper term is aileron roll.

@@derheeheehee6941 True.but still nothing remotely worth experiencing on that family trip to Disneyland with kids in tow.... CRINGE

They are gonna live this

and risk being su*cided in their hotel rooms?

It's not a new problem, and airlines already had to look for problems in all their MAX airplanes last summer. This is just the approved airworthiness directive to permanently fix the problem.

@@johnhaller5851 All the drama in narration added by Airbus

​@billolsen4360 believe it or not Airbus and Boeing collaborate on safety. I doubt either company would run campaigns to badmouth the other.

What if your flight gets cancelled and you’re forced to book with another airline?

Best comment ever😂

It's not the engineers so much as it's the suits rushing out new planes before their known problems can be fixed.

I had no idea about that but i struggled in math all my life. I would get the right answer but my formulas were all goofy or something. So I kept failing cause my work was wrong but my answers were right, how tf does that make sense? Not til college that I was diagnosed with a learning disability in math only. Maybe I’m a “new genius” in reality! 😂😂😂 anyway, thanks for this, gonna look into it. ✌🏽🙃👍🏽

Someone doesn’t understand how math works…

It can be argued that understanding the concept is more important than simply answering some questions right.

Yeah that right is for us Europeans only now you’re right

Nooo please be fair. As a fan of Airbus I would trust Boing a 1000 times over cheap chinese build crap

@@steuererhoehung what Chinese built planes are failing like Boeing? I’ll wait and you can barely name any American made thing because America doesn’t make anything and the few things it does make is crap!

Yep I agree

they can't cancel the program since it's already flying💀

@@PreCeptorBRthey mean cancel production and the 737 MAX 7 and -10 aren’t in public service yet, so they can cancel that

@@Your_Local_NerdGiven the amount of orders they have especially for the MAX 8, it won’t be cancelled.

Forget about the program. Cancel Boeing as a whole