More important than maintaining its reputation for safe designs, apparently.
This is covered ground. They whys and wherefores of how Boeing ended up ruining its track record are well understood. My point -- my only point -- is that I hope the halt of 737 MAX they are now being made to contemplate ultimately carries over to the rest of the 737 family, and I've seen nothing that dissuades me from that hope.
I'll add that if the Boeing business model (and the airlines etc.) is not viable without forever reworking an obsolescent 50+ year old product then perhaps the thing that really needs rework is the business itself. Keeping dysfunctional bubbles inflated is the source of some of the greatest evils.
Airlines - and the airplane industry as a whole - are quite efficient and actually proof positive that we can do stuff at that level. Where this whole saga really went off the rails is in the regulatory domain, an FAA with teeth that would not be in bed with Boeing would have required major modifications or certification as a new aircraft, and the knowledge that they would not get a sweetheart deal would have kept Boeing honest.
The 'obsolescent 50+ year old product' ended up serving the market better than some much more recent designs. The whole reason the industry moves slowly is because they want to play it safe, if they end up not doing that than they might as well 'go ahead and break stuff' but I really hope that they will be able to regroup and do it right the next time around because Airbus needs the competition as much as Boeing does.
I'm pretty curious what would satisfy you in terms of a modern day business model for aircraft manufacturers and airlines, so if you would care to write out your thoughts I would definitely be grateful.
> I'm pretty curious what would satisfy you in terms of a modern day business model for aircraft manufacturers and airlines, so if you would care to write out your thoughts I would definitely be grateful.
A little competition would go a long way. This market is wholley owned by two company oligopoly that employs the sons and daughters and sons-in-laws and daughters-in-laws of the senators and chairmen and vice-chairmen and acting-deputy-vice-chairpersons directly or indirectly through their boards and law firms and non-profit chairmanships and god knows what else, so the regulatory capture you mention is a metaphysical certitude. I know of two remaining solutions; a GULAG system or competition. The former is worse than the problem so I dream of the latter. War use to serve as a means to break these ice jams, but that's pretty much obviated today given nukes.
BTW, this view applies to far more than aircraft manufacturers and operators. Pretty much every damn 'problem' you can name in the modern world is a consequence of the same structural dysfunction.
More important than maintaining its reputation for safe designs, apparently.
This is covered ground. They whys and wherefores of how Boeing ended up ruining its track record are well understood. My point -- my only point -- is that I hope the halt of 737 MAX they are now being made to contemplate ultimately carries over to the rest of the 737 family, and I've seen nothing that dissuades me from that hope.
I'll add that if the Boeing business model (and the airlines etc.) is not viable without forever reworking an obsolescent 50+ year old product then perhaps the thing that really needs rework is the business itself. Keeping dysfunctional bubbles inflated is the source of some of the greatest evils.