Sounds like someone was using "The Clinton" playbook..........
Boeing whistleblower John Barnett found dead days after testifying against company
John Barnett, 62, worked for Boeing for three decades and retired in 2017
The whistleblower who publicly raised doubts about
Boeing's production standards was found dead.
The Charleston County Coroner's Office told Fox News Digital that John Barnett, 62, died
from what appeared to be a self-inflicted gunshot wound on Saturday. Barnett was cross-examined by Boeing's lawyers and his own attorney days before he died.
The court planned for Barnett to answer more questions on Saturday, but he did not appear as planned.
The BBC reported that he was later
found dead in his truck, which was parked in a hotel parking garage.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/boei...st-company
Scary to think what might happen to the rest of them.
If I were them, I'd hire good lawyers with experience in this field, like
Oberheiden P.C.
They’ll launch them to the ISS on a Starliner. Or is it Stayliner?
This is a major setback for Boeing. That company really needs to get its act together.
What's really heartbreaking about this is two of the four astronauts who were scheduled to fly on the SpaceX crew-9 mission will now be bumped from the mission. These folks have been training for years to get this opportunity and will have to wait, perhaps a year or more, to get another chance to launch. It. Royally. Sucks.
NASA Decides to Bring Starliner Spacecraft Back to Earth Without Crew
(08-24-2024, 04:13 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]This is a major setback for Boeing. That company really needs to get its act together.
What's really heartbreaking about this is two of the four astronauts who were scheduled to fly on the SpaceX crew-9 mission will now be bumped from the mission. These folks have been training for years to get this opportunity and will have to wait, perhaps a year or more, to get another chance to launch. It. Royally. Sucks.
NASA Decides to Bring Starliner Spacecraft Back to Earth Without Crew
I think the decision to bring the craft back without the astronauts is the right choice. I personally at this point question whether I want to fly on a Boeing aircraft or not. I realize that many of the "mishaps" being reported are not a Boeing problem, but rather an airline maintenance problem. However, it appears that much of Boeing's problems are caused by "engineers" sitting in front of a computer screen rather than the people that actually build these aircraft.
I hate engineers, even though that was my job title at a couple of points in my career.
(08-24-2024, 05:26 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ] (08-24-2024, 04:13 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]This is a major setback for Boeing. That company really needs to get its act together.
What's really heartbreaking about this is two of the four astronauts who were scheduled to fly on the SpaceX crew-9 mission will now be bumped from the mission. These folks have been training for years to get this opportunity and will have to wait, perhaps a year or more, to get another chance to launch. It. Royally. Sucks.
NASA Decides to Bring Starliner Spacecraft Back to Earth Without Crew
I think the decision to bring the craft back without the astronauts is the right choice. I personally at this point question whether I want to fly on a Boeing aircraft or not. I realize that many of the "mishaps" being reported are not a Boeing problem, but rather an airline maintenance problem. However, it appears that much of Boeing's problems are caused by "engineers" sitting in front of a computer screen rather than the people that actually build these aircraft.
I hate engineers, even though that was my job title at a couple of points in my career.
It's shocking how a company which once had an international reputation for innovation and quality has allowed itself to become a laughingstock.
Besides their aircraft and the Stayliner spacecraft problems, they have more issues with the Space Launch System.
https://spacenews.com/nasa-watchdog-find...-sls-work/
You have a bunch of potheads in Seattle putting aircraft together and you are surprised they forget things like a few bolts?
(08-24-2024, 05:26 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ] (08-24-2024, 04:13 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]This is a major setback for Boeing. That company really needs to get its act together.
What's really heartbreaking about this is two of the four astronauts who were scheduled to fly on the SpaceX crew-9 mission will now be bumped from the mission. These folks have been training for years to get this opportunity and will have to wait, perhaps a year or more, to get another chance to launch. It. Royally. Sucks.
NASA Decides to Bring Starliner Spacecraft Back to Earth Without Crew
I think the decision to bring the craft back without the astronauts is the right choice. I personally at this point question whether I want to fly on a Boeing aircraft or not. I realize that many of the "mishaps" being reported are not a Boeing problem, but rather an airline maintenance problem. However, it appears that much of Boeing's problems are caused by "engineers" sitting in front of a computer screen rather than the people that actually build these aircraft.
I hate engineers, even though that was my job title at a couple of points in my career.
The Starliner hypergolic valve problem is probably the fault of an engineering team or two. They needed to be in the lab testing those valves to failure and they clearly were not. Boeing is blaming Aerojet Rocketdyne because they made the valves, but with a new critical design, the vendor needed to test to failure and the customer needed to either observe the test or demand a high level of documentation for them. All of that falls on engineers at both companies.
The 737 max issue was entirely caused by the sales, marketing, and management teams. There may have been some engineers who knew enough about piloting aircraft to realize they were doing something wrong, but most would not know enough about how pilots are trained to realize what they were participating in. And it seems the pilots who work for Boeing, testing the aircraft and helping prepare training materials, also weren't given enough information to realize something was wrong. Sales and marketing never should have dreamt up the "let's build a new aircraft but only train pilots as if it's an old aircraft" and management clearly acted to prevent the kind of collaboration that would have exposed the issue.
(08-25-2024, 09:19 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (08-24-2024, 05:26 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]I think the decision to bring the craft back without the astronauts is the right choice. I personally at this point question whether I want to fly on a Boeing aircraft or not. I realize that many of the "mishaps" being reported are not a Boeing problem, but rather an airline maintenance problem. However, it appears that much of Boeing's problems are caused by "engineers" sitting in front of a computer screen rather than the people that actually build these aircraft.
I hate engineers, even though that was my job title at a couple of points in my career.
The Starliner hypergolic valve problem is probably the fault of an engineering team or two. They needed to be in the lab testing those valves to failure and they clearly were not. Boeing is blaming Aerojet Rocketdyne because they made the valves, but with a new critical design, the vendor needed to test to failure and the customer needed to either observe the test or demand a high level of documentation for them. All of that falls on engineers at both companies.
The 737 max issue was entirely caused by the sales, marketing, and management teams. There may have been some engineers who knew enough about piloting aircraft to realize they were doing something wrong, but most would not know enough about how pilots are trained to realize what they were participating in. And it seems the pilots who work for Boeing, testing the aircraft and helping prepare training materials, also weren't given enough information to realize something was wrong. Sales and marketing never should have dreamt up the "let's build a new aircraft but only train pilots as if it's an old aircraft" and management clearly acted to prevent the kind of collaboration that would have exposed the issue.
Good article here about Boeing’s downward spiral.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/boeing-br...00958.html
(08-25-2024, 09:34 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (08-25-2024, 09:19 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]The Starliner hypergolic valve problem is probably the fault of an engineering team or two. They needed to be in the lab testing those valves to failure and they clearly were not. Boeing is blaming Aerojet Rocketdyne because they made the valves, but with a new critical design, the vendor needed to test to failure and the customer needed to either observe the test or demand a high level of documentation for them. All of that falls on engineers at both companies.
The 737 max issue was entirely caused by the sales, marketing, and management teams. There may have been some engineers who knew enough about piloting aircraft to realize they were doing something wrong, but most would not know enough about how pilots are trained to realize what they were participating in. And it seems the pilots who work for Boeing, testing the aircraft and helping prepare training materials, also weren't given enough information to realize something was wrong. Sales and marketing never should have dreamt up the "let's build a new aircraft but only train pilots as if it's an old aircraft" and management clearly acted to prevent the kind of collaboration that would have exposed the issue.
Good article here about Boeing’s downward spiral.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/boeing-br...00958.html
I also think some of the fault for the 737 max disaster lies with airlines. The airlines are clearly boxing pilots out of purchasing decisions. I have to think if pilots were at the table, the critical questions would have been asked by at least one of the airlines and the whole thing might have been exposed before paying passengers ever boarded.
(08-25-2024, 09:44 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (08-25-2024, 09:34 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Good article here about Boeing’s downward spiral.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/boeing-br...00958.html
I also think some of the fault for the 737 max disaster lies with airlines. The airlines are clearly boxing pilots out of purchasing decisions. I have to think if pilots were at the table, the critical questions would have been asked by at least one of the airlines and the whole thing might have been exposed before paying passengers ever boarded.
This upcoming book on the Stayliner debacle seems to bear that out given Boeing’s lack of interest with astronaut input during the design phase while SpaceX embraced their advice.
https://twitter.com/FutureJurvetson/stat...5377169618