- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 8/26/24 at 5:15 pm to UnitedFruitCompany
quote:
This is what happens when you let a company founded and run by engineers get taken over by accountants and consultants.
General Motors says Hi.
Alfred Sloan, engineer and the CEO who made General Motors into the world's largest company, was quoted in his book from the 1950's as saying, paraphrased "It will be the end of the company if Accounting takes over". They did in the 1970's, and GM's market share has been on a steady downward trend ever since.
Posted on 8/26/24 at 11:02 pm to FOBW
quote:
Don’t doubt for a minute that there are some deficiencies on workforce side.
However, the competent guy I know said Boeing’s Michoud management sucked,
Few comments on both parts:
- The state of New Orleans means there is a limited pool of qualified candidates from which to draw. This means Boeing will have to expand its recruiting efforts beyond NOLA. But few people not from NOLA want to stay long term when there are opportunities elsewhere (which there are).
- Neither Apollo nor ET had this obstacle. Moreover, the design engineers are based out of MSFC. They have very little rapport with the techs 'turning wrenches' at MAF.
- Getting a stable, capable workforce at MAF is unlikely.
- Boeing's plan for Artemis was to take people from ISS who had experience interfacing with NASA and from their Delta program who had experience working on rockets. Neither of this happened to any large extent. Most of MAF's mgmt were from Boeing Commercial Airplanes who treated building rockets like it was an airplane. (your acquaintance is correct). And they do not elect to stay in the area long term either.
- MAF has a very different setting than does it peer group (KSC, JSC, SSC, MSFC, Ames, etc), Take a drive to them and see the difference if you don't believe me.
- Boeing's (and NASA's) commitment to DEI is > than their commitment to mission success.
I could go on but none of this type stuff afflicts SpaceX.
Posted on 8/27/24 at 4:19 am to CAD703X
The tech guys have probably proven numerous times that the problems are minor and the ship is functional. But no one, and I mean no one, is signing that flight plan.
Posted on 8/27/24 at 6:00 am to CAD703X
Posted on 8/27/24 at 6:43 am to CAD703X
quote:
With morale “in the toilet,” the worker claimed that many in Boeing
quote:I wish my moral could be in the toilet with a cool $4.5 billion.
initial $4.5 billion contract it secured with NASA
Posted on 8/27/24 at 6:50 am to lostinbr
quote:
and it has objectively been a failure financially
Posted on 8/27/24 at 7:08 am to CAD703X
Boeing represents all that was and is wrong with government procurement. They are built on bribes, failed timetables and cost overruns while SpaceX is lean and mean in comparison.
The failed Starliner is years behind the promised schedule and has racked up $1.5 billion in unplanned development costs, That is on top of already being 50 percent more expensive initially than the SpaceX contract.
Their Artemis project in New Orleans alone is a billion dollars over budget and may be 7 years behind schedule.
The Boeing KC-46, a military tanker designed to refuel aircraft in flight, was plagued by delays, production errors and a faulty vision system that required a complete redesign and went seven billion over budget.
The Boeing Orca drone is over three years behind schedule.
And that does not even touch on their commercial division and the colossal failure that is the MAX.
The feds would never allow it but a Musk takeover of Boeing would not only help Boeing but the US government as well.
.
The failed Starliner is years behind the promised schedule and has racked up $1.5 billion in unplanned development costs, That is on top of already being 50 percent more expensive initially than the SpaceX contract.
Their Artemis project in New Orleans alone is a billion dollars over budget and may be 7 years behind schedule.
The Boeing KC-46, a military tanker designed to refuel aircraft in flight, was plagued by delays, production errors and a faulty vision system that required a complete redesign and went seven billion over budget.
The Boeing Orca drone is over three years behind schedule.
And that does not even touch on their commercial division and the colossal failure that is the MAX.
The feds would never allow it but a Musk takeover of Boeing would not only help Boeing but the US government as well.
.
This post was edited on 8/27/24 at 7:09 am
Posted on 8/27/24 at 7:15 am to evil cockroach
I mean they’ve reported something like $1.6 billion in cost overruns on the project. If it now takes another test flight to get certified for operational use, that could cost Boeing another $400 million. Boeing’s defense and space division had a $762 million operating loss in the first half of 2024, largely due to Starliner.
On top of all that, every delay makes it less likely that Boeing can recoup their investment on the back end. Their contract includes 6 operational flights. They’re 7 years behind schedule and don’t exactly appear close to their first operational flight. Meanwhile SpaceX Crew Dragon has successfully had 8 operational flights with NASA plus another 4 fully private flights.
By the time Boeing gets Starliner certified they’ll be lucky to get their 6 contracted flights done before ISS gets decommissioned, much less any additional contract flights on the back end.
So yeah, I’d say it is pretty accurate to say it’s been a financial failure.
On top of all that, every delay makes it less likely that Boeing can recoup their investment on the back end. Their contract includes 6 operational flights. They’re 7 years behind schedule and don’t exactly appear close to their first operational flight. Meanwhile SpaceX Crew Dragon has successfully had 8 operational flights with NASA plus another 4 fully private flights.
By the time Boeing gets Starliner certified they’ll be lucky to get their 6 contracted flights done before ISS gets decommissioned, much less any additional contract flights on the back end.
So yeah, I’d say it is pretty accurate to say it’s been a financial failure.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News