The Official "Making America Great Again" Thread

[Chizzang]

Elon Musk

IT connects with a haymaker.

Ya...
woo wee that's a real heymaker

[CID1990]

IT connects with a haymaker.

Ya...
woo wee that's a real heymaker

Now look who’s uptight!






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LeadBolt]

Name one CEO that drivels on and on incoherently like Donald Trump please...

Elon Musk

I was thinking Adam Neumann, but 1). he doesn't qualify anymore; and 2). IT has a much better answer.

[SeattleGriz]

I meant our seasoned politicians use half truths, not Donald. Donald talks like a CEO. Nothing is ever wrong and it is actually fabulous.

The surveillance was enough that the current Obama NSA Director, went without permission or whatever, to see Trump and let him know he was being listened in on.

I'll go with, "My campaign was wiretapped".

Name one CEO that drivels on and on incoherently like Donald Trump please...

I see Ivy already replied as well, but I'll use our CEO. I can't tell you how many times in the last 9 months we have been told everything is awesome, only to read something different in the Seattle Times.

All CEOs talk that way, especially when they speak for a board of directors. Trump talks that way because it's his money and his brand.

[Chizzang]

Ya...
woo wee that's a real heymaker

Now look who’s uptight!

Ya... you got me
Elon Musk - good one

[CID1990]

Now look who’s uptight!

Ya... you got me
Elon Musk - good one

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

And just like that, Dennis Muilenburg is fired.

[Chizzang]

And just like that, Dennis Muilenburg is fired.

But will he go to jail
for putting stock value above human life..?



I know... what a stupid thing to say
This is Corporate America - maximum profit - zero accountability
Accountability is just a word we use when we talk at poor people and losers

[SeattleGriz]

And just like that, Dennis Muilenburg is fired.

But will he go to jail
for putting stock value above human life..?



I know... what a stupid thing to say
This is Corporate America - maximum profit - zero accountability
Accountability is just a word we use when we talk at poor people and losers

The whole situation rubs a lot of employees the wrong way. It's always the same. Some group of engineers makes a decision and then the whole company has to pay for the mistake, along with cheesy corporate slogans about how we all are responsible.

Yes, corporate America.

Still a good place to work though.

[Chizzang]

But will he go to jail
for putting stock value above human life..?



I know... what a stupid thing to say
This is Corporate America - maximum profit - zero accountability
Accountability is just a word we use when we talk at poor people and losers

The whole situation rubs a lot of employees the wrong way. It's always the same. Some group of engineers makes a decision and then the whole company has to pay for the mistake, along with cheesy corporate slogans about how we all are responsible.

Yes, corporate America.

Still a good place to work though.

Um...
Engineers do what they're told
The Director of Engineering does not tell the CEO CFO or CTO what to do

The idea to shortcut the design and just slap the new engines on a 50 year old fuselage
came straight from the top... not the middle

[UNI88]

The whole situation rubs a lot of employees the wrong way. It's always the same. Some group of engineers makes a decision and then the whole company has to pay for the mistake, along with cheesy corporate slogans about how we all are responsible.

Yes, corporate America.

Still a good place to work though.

Um...
Engineers do what they're told
The Director of Engineering does not tell the CEO CFO or CTO what to do

The idea to shortcut the design and just slap the new engines on a 50 year old fuselage
came straight from the top... not the middle

From my experience working with engineering types, they would have said this might be a bad idea but the suckups and bean counters overruled them.

[Chizzang]

Um...
Engineers do what they're told
The Director of Engineering does not tell the CEO CFO or CTO what to do

The idea to shortcut the design and just slap the new engines on a 50 year old fuselage
came straight from the top... not the middle

From my experience working with engineering types, they would have said this might be a bad idea but the suckups and bean counters overruled them.

Boeing engineering reported that the retro design failed the flight physics...
and were told there was a software fix

This sits right in the lap of the CTO / CFO / CEO

[89Hen]

Engineers do what they're told

or people die.

[SeattleGriz]

Um...
Engineers do what they're told
The Director of Engineering does not tell the CEO CFO or CTO what to do

The idea to shortcut the design and just slap the new engines on a 50 year old fuselage
came straight from the top... not the middle

From my experience working with engineering types, they would have said this might be a bad idea but the suckups and bean counters overruled them.

This is big reason they are opening a "channel of communications" from the Puget Sound engineers to leadership in St Louis.

[BDKJMU]

Its been grounded since March 2019. Boeing last week said halting production of the 737-Max in Jan. Airlines aren't going to resume with it until at least the middle of 2020. Why not just scrap the whole MCAS alltogether like the guy for Air Transport Canada said a couple weeks ago?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/22/busi ... 7-max.html

[SeattleGriz]

Its been grounded since March 2019. Boeing last week said halting production of the 737-Max in Jan. Airlines aren't going to resume with it until at least the middle of 2020. Why not just scrap the whole MCAS alltogether like the guy for Air Transport Canada said a couple weeks ago?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/22/busi ... 7-max.html

Don't know if you can. The plane was designed the way it is, to maximize fuel efficiency.

That's what Cleets was referring to above.

[BDKJMU]

Its been grounded since March 2019. Boeing last week said halting production of the 737-Max in Jan. Airlines aren't going to resume with it until at least the middle of 2020. Why not just scrap the whole MCAS alltogether like the guy for Air Transport Canada said a couple weeks ago?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/22/busi ... 7-max.html

Don't know if you can. The plane was designed the way it is, to maximize fuel efficiency.

That's what Cleets was referring to above.

So let me get this straight
-Take 50 year old aircraft design.
-Add larger, further forward mounted engines that the plane wasn't designed to carry.
-Compensate for by flawed MCAS system.
That seems incredibly dumb to me. If it can't be flown without the MCAS, should it be flown at all?

Why not just either:
-get rid of the engines that the plane wasn't designed to carry, and go back to what worked for 50 years?
-Or better yet, why try to put biggger, new engines on a 50 year old aircraft design that wasn't designed to carry them, and instead design a new aircraft from the ground up designed to carry these types of engines, and retire a 50+ year old aircraft design.

It seems to me Boeing is trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole.

[Chizzang]

Don't know if you can. The plane was designed the way it is, to maximize fuel efficiency.

That's what Cleets was referring to above.

So let me get this straight
-Take 50 year old aircraft design.
-Add larger, further forward mounted engines that the plane wasn't designed to carry.
-Compensate for by flawed MCAS system.
That seems incredibly dumb to me. If it can't be flown without the MCAS, should it be flown at all?

Why not just either:
-get rid of the engines that the plane wasn't designed to carry, and go back to what worked for 50 years?
-Or better yet, why try to put biggger, new engines on a 50 year old aircraft design that wasn't designed to carry them, and instead design a new aircraft from the ground up designed to carry these types of engines, and retire a 50+ year old aircraft design.

It seems to me Boeing is trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole.

The answer to your points above are "stock Value"
If Boeing scraps the MAX they lose billions and 5 years

but YES they need to scrap the MAX
you can't fix massive physics incompatibilities with "software patches"

They need a "from the ground-up" design of a new aircraft
which they have known for years was the case

[SeattleGriz]

So let me get this straight
-Take 50 year old aircraft design.
-Add larger, further forward mounted engines that the plane wasn't designed to carry.
-Compensate for by flawed MCAS system.
That seems incredibly dumb to me. If it can't be flown without the MCAS, should it be flown at all?

Why not just either:
-get rid of the engines that the plane wasn't designed to carry, and go back to what worked for 50 years?
-Or better yet, why try to put biggger, new engines on a 50 year old aircraft design that wasn't designed to carry them, and instead design a new aircraft from the ground up designed to carry these types of engines, and retire a 50+ year old aircraft design.

It seems to me Boeing is trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole.

The answer to your points above are "stock Value"
If Boeing scraps the MAX they lose billions and 5 years

but YES they need to scrap the MAX
you can't fix massive physics incompatibilities with "software patches"

They need a "from the ground-up" design of a new aircraft
which they have known for years was the case

One thing to keep in mind, is that the airlines put pressure on Airbus and Boeing to limit required training.

One of the big reasons to just do updates instead of building a new plane.

With that said, Boeing has told us it costs about $10 billion to develop a new aircraft.

[BDKJMU]

The answer to your points above are "stock Value"
If Boeing scraps the MAX they lose billions and 5 years

but YES they need to scrap the MAX
you can't fix massive physics incompatibilities with "software patches"

They need a "from the ground-up" design of a new aircraft
which they have known for years was the case

One thing to keep in mind, is that the airlines put pressure on Airbus and Boeing to limit required training.

One of the big reasons to just do updates instead of building a new plane.

With that said, Boeing has told us it costs about $10 billion to develop a new aircraft.

But I bet the cost of the 2 crashes, Boeing eventually being sued by the victims, airlines and whoever else, grounding for at least a year, halt in production, cancelled orders after a large chunk of the flying public refuses to fly on it, stock drop, etc, etc, is probably going to end up being a lot more than 10 billion, no?

[kalm]

And suddenly...everyone became an aeronautics engineer.

[89Hen]

And suddenly...everyone became an aeronautics engineer.

That's how this board runs. Apparently everyone here is an expert in engineering, finance, history, climatology...

[UNI88]

And suddenly...everyone became an aeronautics engineer.

That's how this board runs. Apparently everyone here is an expert in engineering, finance, history, climatology...

So all of us together are almost as smart as Bernie, Warren or Trump.

[SeattleGriz]

And suddenly...everyone became an aeronautics engineer.

That's how this board runs. Apparently everyone here is an expert in engineering, finance, history, climatology...

Don't forget religion!

[CAA Flagship]

We interrupt this PNW circle jerk for an announcement of another Trump accomplishment:

Trump having his revenge on California as he remakes once-liberal 9th Circuit court

As recently as April 2017, judges appointed by Democratic presidents outnumbered Republican appointees on the court by about 2 to 1 (that number probably also includes semi-retired senior-status judges). The court is now edging toward a more even split, with a ratio of 16 Democrat-appointed active judges to 13 Republican-appointed ones.

https://www.latimes.com/california/stor ... ptionalism