This is really tough question to answer, I mean it doesn't make sense now to think about Boeing stock in long-term. Air carries should be pretty conservative when mulling over purchases or leases new Boeing planes, so its better to keep an eye on news currently.
Boeing's 737 Max Software Outsourced to $9-an-Hour Engineers
- Thread starter Banjo
- Start date
Ugh...as an American-trained engineer (retired) from a respected and accredited American college, this is yet another outrage in the world of corporate greed, dangerous outsourcing. and H1-B visa fraud. Maybe these companies will start to learn that it is dangerous and misguided to outsource ANY critical engineering! Yeah, experience and credentials cost more, so do mega millions lawsuits. 
Ugh...as an American-trained engineer (retired) from a respected and accredited American college, this is yet another outrage in the world of corporate greed, dangerous outsourcing. and H1-B visa fraud. Maybe these companies will start to learn that it is dangerous and misguided to outsource ANY critical engineering! Yeah, experience and credentials cost more, so do mega millions lawsuits.
Ya telling me? Most people i know didn't even hear about the plane malfunctioning because BA covered up the story so well. Sure people can find out if they research it, but 100+ people died and it wasn't that well covered by the news.
Yeah the coverage was a little sparse at first. I hate to say it, but if those crashes happened to US carriers, I bet the response would have been complete shutdown of all M737s after the FIRST crash. It's almost as if the BA arrogant attitude was it was just some third world people, they didn't know how to fly it, nothing wrong here it was built by our excellent Boeing people... Very very sad.
1st off outsourcing isn't always the answer because ultimately you get what you pay for.
However, here in the USA we will sell our own enemy ammunition just to make a profit. Everything comes down to dollars and cents, because if you ain't making dollars you ain't making cents.
The 737 max software should have been inspected and tested by Boeing and then the final approval should have been granted by the FAA so yeah Boeing went cheap and got a shitty product but hey they failed to properly test it and the Federal Aviation Administration missed it too.
Air Safety always begins on the Ground!
However, here in the USA we will sell our own enemy ammunition just to make a profit. Everything comes down to dollars and cents, because if you ain't making dollars you ain't making cents.
The 737 max software should have been inspected and tested by Boeing and then the final approval should have been granted by the FAA so yeah Boeing went cheap and got a shitty product but hey they failed to properly test it and the Federal Aviation Administration missed it too.
Air Safety always begins on the Ground!
Yes... The Federal Aviation Admini$tration "missed" it...
Last edited:
Agree.
Most of them (QA) don't understand the details of the codes, so their duties ended up just checking for coding standard, documentations, ISO... When they run software IV&V, often they don't really know what to test, may not be able to test all circumstances, scenarios, which I suspect was the case with the MAX MCAS software.
I am not a software person. So, it is not a professional opinion.
Yes, it wasn't the same after they hired GE Jack Welch's wonder boy to run the company instead of promoting one of their own: Allan Mulally who went on to rescue Ford, the only US Auto company that did not go bankrupt.
Speaking of auto, Japanese and German autos are typically run by engineers, US, by MBA. Fortunately GM changed and is now run by an engineer.
I am.
Granted, what I used to work on didn't have any life on boad...so things were looser. But I would have to "prove" to QA/Safety that my weapon wasn't going to wander off the test range or detonate somewhere it wasn't supposed to. The people who signed off on the systems frankly werent trained in a HARD engineering disciplines, so they had no business saying yes or no. Basically, it was a Jordan Belfort "Sell me this pen" type of situation. At the end of the day, it fell on the engineers designing the system...if they lacked the ethical integrity or competence to do the job right...it would be a bad day (never saw any real ethical failures...saw a few minor incompetence failures...).
Agreed. It's Boeing's product not the product of those outsource Indian companies; it's Boeing's name not those Indian companies' name that's on the bill; Boeing is supposed to be the gatekeeper to check and test and make sure everything is safe and correct before the products gets shipped outside of its doors not by lowering the standard for the test to pass. It's Boeing who dropped the ball and decided to relax standards in order to sell more planes than the competition. If you want to beat the competition, you need to beat it with really superior technology not by cutting corners.
Never going to fly Boeing again. Who knows when I can be their next victim. I think insurance companies worldwide are going to increase premiums on anybody who chooses to fly with Boeing from now on. LOL