Why Boeing’s Quality-Control Process Still Misses Mistakes | WSJ
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 тра 2024
- Boeing was given 90 days to present regulators with an action plan to address quality-control issues at its 737 factory, following the Alaska Airlines door plug incident. There are multiple layers of inspection, handled by groups with different responsibilities and limitations, including Boeing quality inspectors, ODA members and FAA inspectors.
WSJ looks at how each layer in the process is meant to work and the issues each faces.
Chapters:
0:00 Boeing’s quality-control issues
0:45 Boeing Quality Inspectors
2:45 The ODA
3:59 The FAA
5:47 What’s changing?
News Explainers
Some days the high-speed news cycle can bring more questions than answers. WSJ’s news explainers break down the day's biggest stories into bite-size pieces to help you make sense of the news.
#Boeing #Aviation #WSJ
Four years ago, Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun stepped in to address a crisis at Boeing. Now, he is stepping aside with the manufacturer still mired in a crisis over the quality of its planes.
Read more about the executive shakeup here: on.wsj.com/49lGKng
And he ordered John Barnett killed...
He needs to step into a prison cell.
Didn’t fix anything
Just made more problems
And got mega millions for it
He failed a chimpansee pushing buttons to make decisions coukd have done a better job. And still he leaves with a multimillion golden parachute.
Is killing whistleblowers part of QC?
No it's apart of dei 😂
All part of the plan.
@@B86432👎
Like the whistleblower that was on camera for this segment?
Or are you referring to Mr. Barnett, whose testimony concluded FIVE YEARS AGO? And who hadn’t worked at the plant in 7? And whose testimony led to additional FAA regulations which were all implemented in 2019??
The “testimony” he was currently in the midst of was (if you could be bothered to read past clickbait headlines) part of his appeal for a rejected defamation lawsuit against Boeing and poised exactly ZERO threat to Boeing in literally any way. Boeing Execs would have to be even dumber than this conspiracy theory to have sought to off Mr. Barnett.
Top comment don’t let them shadow ban this ❤
“Here grade your own paper”
“Wow I’m a great teacher, everyone has an A+”
As a QA inspector for 15 years.. there should never ever be mechanics and technicians policing their own work. 😅
Amen! I also felt that inspectors should be in a different guild or union than shop.
@@MikeCTRVLRthe inspectors should be in the FAA. Lobbying and campaign donations should be made illegal. Revolving door should be made illegal. Better yet, Boeing should be nationalized and placed under democratic control with full transparency and public audits. No more drive to maximize profit YOY, planes would be cheaper and safer. Also, it would reduce costs on the tax payer as we currently subsidize Boeing, allow them to over-inflate government contracts, etc. All revenue made, if nationalized, would go back to the tax payer and workers, not private investors who have no interest outside of maximizing profit for themselves
It's like hiring a kid to be the Candy 🍭 shop manger
This is what they are switching to in software development: devs QA their own work, deploy to production, handle production issues. All to save on QA and Prod monitoring staff.
@@xx133FAA isn’t better. What’s needed is people like this whistleblower being taken seriously and having no agenda. An employee intimate with manufacturing but someone who can’t be fired by Boeing.
If anyone has concerns about the safety of our airplanes, our door is always open.
~ The Boeing Company
LOL. Dang. That’s actually pretty good.
👏👏👏
You like the open door policy?@@RingoBars
If you speak after going out, a grave is also open
Senior executives being able to just leave with a briefcase full of $$ is BS. Charges should be filed on the responsible people.
Small companies get taken down for a wrong serial number but Boeing can hire their own FAA representative. While probably handing bonuses to the ones churning the planes out.
They made deals due golf ⛳ sessions and company retreat
People blame many of Boeing’s current woes on the “McDonnell-Douglas culture,” but how many have stopped to ask how that toxic, short-sighted culture and management philosophy came to be in the first place?
A nontrivial piece of the answer is that McDonnell Douglas had lots of Jack Welch-era GE alumni throughout its managerial ranks. Welch’s tenure at GE was marked by counterproductive cost-cutting, and a laser focus on upcoming quarterly earnings above all else. He is also known as the pioneer of “rank and yank” (I.e. fire the bottom ten percent of employees). I wouldn’t be surprised if more than a few of these people made their way to MD.
In 1996, GE was the most valuable company in the world. The MD merger took place in 1997, so that culture was very much en vogue at the time. Not a stretch to guess that this played a role in how MD management came to “take over” at Boeing.
Also consider: Current CEO Dave Calhoun and the first new post-merger CEO, Harry Stonecipher, were also Welch-era GE alums and disciples.
Is there more to it than that? Yes; however, Boeing’s current state of affairs begins to make a lot more sense with that extra layer of context.
Absolutely. Management has background and expertise in private equity, not engineering.
boeing supposed to merge with macdonald hamberger not duglas
Jack Welch was a Muppet but that doesn't excuse active decisions to put money over safety
If it's Boeing, I ain't going
Sounds like they need Palantir to organize them
@@cakeismtrader4227 Nope, they need to purge DEI culture from their organization. Diversity hires are a root cause.
737 catching strays
Flying on a 737 MAX is safer than Blowing a Whistle.
To be fair the 737 Classic and 737 NG and 757❤ and 767 are good safe aircraft at least as safe as A320. Flew once in an MD11 and swore never again.
‘Fox put in charge of the henhouse’.
Exactly…independent quality audit on the line … during WIP.
Wait, boeing has quality control!!
It's a joke, didn't you get it?
If they had QA door plugs wouldn't fall off and software fly planes into the ground against their pilots wishes.😂
That's what they call it, anyway.
Love how CEOs get off with no criminal charges
Seeing Boeing management talk in a 3rd person voice about the problems is rich.
The FAA inspector employed by Boeing to certify Boeing. Did you spot the problem here?
(Insert two Spider-Man pointing out each here)
Boeing needs to return to its roots and totally scrap the McDonnell Douglas approach to business.
The vast majority of Boeing Employees have the right attitude and care about flight safety. However, as in any business, some employees and managers need careful surveillance. Some are just careless. Others don’t bat an eye if they try to sell a job to an inspector with a missing part or a defect , they expect the inspector to find that the part is missing or that a defect exists.
Decades ago the Man Power Development and training Act (MDTA) put many new (well-trained) inspectors on the shop floor. New hires were trained by senior Boeing Inpectors over several months. A new program is needed to train inspectors. The MDTA was one of the few government programs that worked flawlessly.
I worked as a writer and none of my work went without multiple proof readings by others before being submitted for publishing. How much more important our safety issues are!
What quality control?
Only QC they have is murdering whistleblowers
This quality control.
replaced with financial statement control
Hereafter Boeing will be the most cited company across multiple management courses around the world.
Dealing with Quality Control with ISO audits, SOPs etc. One thing is clear. Boeing has sacrificed quality over profit. FAA needs to place its own QAs in every plant and oversee if the SOPs are followed to the letter!
Customer Inspections are also needed before closure of any area.
FAA doesn’t have the people or money to do it.
@captiannemo1587 There are many qualified auditors that can do the job the money Boeing will pay for it since it is incompetent to do what they are supposed to do on their own.
Like the USDA
And we still get tainted meat
its the wrong aproach - if the FAA put its own QA in every plant you give boeing essential a free quality control payed by tax payers -
the goal should be to punish boeing incl individuals who doesnt do is job of quality control and im not talking about the workers who put the planes together
The idea about the FAA more practical aproach isnt bad but it need to stop where the FAA becomes boeing´s quality control payed by tax payers
When u appoint an accountant as a CEO of an engineering brand...they only know how to dilute safety for more profit.
As a 737 Captain for a major airline I will say the biggest mistake with the 737 is Boeing has tried to make it the same type rating as the version that rolled off the assembly line in 1968 while also sort of upgrading the technology. That was a huge mistake but I understand why they did it. The airplane needs a stronger APU and an EICAS just for starters.
Taking the 'Jack Welch' approach to safety is terrifying.
Better than Mott’s approach
As an employee of Boeing in Everett. Not in my area. But I'll shut up now. 🤬
We all should be careful as we now know that Boeing will put out hits on it's critics
C Suite bonus should be partly based on results of an internal survey of engineers that ask them how they’d rate Boeing safety culture.
Apparently engineers have been complaining about this for years. If executives’ paychecks were based on those concerns being addressed, maybe none of this would have happened.
What’s missing is not quality control. It’s quality assurance
Both are missing. QA is catching defects before they ship to customers. QC is setting up the manufacturing process in such a way as to make defects impossible.
Even Jack Welch ultimately said what he did to GE was a mistake, and regretted doing it. Why is Boeing still doing it?
Because it makes money regardless of quality. It's about selfishness of those who invest.
The McDonald Douglas takeover...
@@SolaceEasyYeah McDonalds employees took over quality control
poor guy they killled him for saying the truth
Spirit has shut down all overtime factory wide this week
Thank you Kayak for option to choose aircrafts
Not these Wall Street corporate stooges covering and defending for Boeing. Embarrassing journalism and lack of integrity as always from the WSJ.
Just imagine what kind of additional problems are going to show up from the aircraft with bad parts that slipped through the cracks which are miles wide. This isn’t over.
Boeing management should've just said from the get-go "I'm sorry, we were wrong" to everyone instead of trying to cover up their mistakes
That’s some juicy PR.
“Help me Wall Street journal. Please help meee.”
Access during multiple phases of assembly and process is an imperative if FAA airworthiness inspection efficacy is the goal?
Please hire an aerospace engineer or some technocrat as the CEO
This. Alan Mullaly was the last good CEO they had and he was an engineer on the 777 program.
Most annoying to hear the leadership talk about how we should stop cutting corners and prioritize quality, after you’ve been frustrated for years with their very strange decisions to cut costs and throw quality out of the window in the first place. Happens in all kinds of organizations. Thankfully, many aren’t as life and death as Boeing.
When production and shipping is placed over quality aftermaths like this happen, a strong quality assurance focus on prevention and validation of PFMEA AND CP will aid this
We deserve better ✈️s
If we did, we’d put in the politicians to set the policies and enforcement to ensure that we get better planes.
But sadly, we don’t, so we don’t.
Who at Boeing thought this was a good PR move? 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Boeing's last lot of managers learned their trade at GE from Jack Welch.
There is no such company as GE anymore as it has been managed MBA'd and acountanted to death.
Boeing needs an Engineer as CEO, not a private equity expert - like the current CEO is.
Since the current CEO is stepping down together with some of the senior management, it is paramount that he is replaced with an engineer - who give priority to the quality of the aircraft, and not to increase profits for investors irrespective of all other things...
Previous CEO was a career engineer before going into management. And he was the one begging the FAA and Trump not to ground the MAXes even after the 2nd crash. The corruption from Wall Street and management culture can happen regardless of who is in charge.
Having worked in the Airforce, I can't see how this can even happen. This is a serious management issue.
I have worked for over 20 years at another very large aerospace company (begins with the letter “L”) and we are right behind Boeing in the sense that management is actively attempting to eliminate quality processes so we can become more “efficient”. Any concern expressed by the production floor people is politely ignored. We have incorporated similar practices with Boeing in which production mechanics buy off their own work. In the last 24 months we have made the worst production errors I have seen during my tenure with the company. Even when faced with the growing evidence that these new quality processes are failing, there is reluctance to admit the new processes are flawed. Rather, management is doubling down. There exists this attitude that older practices are automatically flawed and outdated. Got to keep breaking down those silos.
Building planes (etc.) to make it through inspection is different from building them to carry people through the skies.
what about the FAA? why they are not held accountable?
You think a government agency is will resolve this - “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem”
@@MickeyMouse-zu2yk but we have a Democracy, I will write my Senator!
I totally agree, not only the government don't solve the problem they profit from it.@@MickeyMouse-zu2yk
its evident in my opinion that greedy politicans has handcuffed the FAA (budget and so on) punish the politicans for it
There are way more inspection layers...subtier suppliers and multiple internal layers.
Yes - source inspection and customer inspections in addition. Boeing must do better, but this hysteria is just that: hysteria and media taking the opportunity for them extra clicks. Even going nuts over 30 year old Boeing planes when they experience a maintenance (Airline responsibility) problem.
But the masses don’t know any better…
That's true! All components must meet stringent criteria to be approved. Even tiny components such as rivets and screws have to be periodically verified to be “The right stuff”.
@@RingoBarsAlthough media does exaggerate there are quite a few serious issues that happened in the last few years. Much more than what should ever happen.
I thought Mikey Day put on some glasses and decided to spoof the interview.
It's all in the paperwork and procedures. No number of additional inspectors would have known that the retention bolts were not installed in that door plug without taking it apart again. There should be a document, signed be either an inspector or a mechanic, stating that they were installed. The question is: where is that document?
☝️ one of only a few actually reasonable comments on this thread. Yes, unofficially, it appears someone intentionally circumvented a process to AVOID having to sign it up to QA again - a scandal that should have been preventable and there was a failure there.
But it was NOT systemic - it was a limited number of bad actors (who yes, may have behaved the way they did due to pressure).
Boeing said they don't have it. Read: we deleted the damning evidence.
@@RingoBars it appears different - the posibilty that its possible to circumvent a part of the QA is the defention of systemic in my opinion
in my opinion multiple layers of QA have faild
and intentionaly putting in someone in harms way is Intentional Endangerment or something along this lines - courts and lawyers will have a field day
and the possibility that boeing not prevented this action could be also punished criminaly
"Quality Control"
Operator verification was introduced by Boeing decades ago. We had reservations about it then
Hey you guys, I know a guy with some tie rod end castle nuts for a ‘57 Studebaker…maybe you can use them on those 737 Max door plug shear bolts?
The easy way to separate quality assurance from retaliation by company execs is to have them employed by the FAA but paid for by the manufacturer. Make it a cost of doing business thing that no cost cutting exec can actually do anything about. This would also cut the funding needed from the FAA to maintain the QA program enormously. No exec or manager can pressure QA to push out uninspected planes since that person is not in the QA chain of command.
Planes would perhaps be a hundred thousand dollars more expensive, but for a multi-million dollar aircraft, that is a comparatively miniscule cost increase.
"Quality" control is a rather lax definition for Boeing it seems.
How about 737 Max that has been delivered to airlines? That has commenced operation? Is it safe?
Insane that, even with these problems, flying on a Boeing or any commercial plane is still safer than driving.
It's time executives are personally liable for gross negligence.
Its going to be a huge challenge to break the culture
I am not interested in riding any newly made Boeing plane for a while...
Hooooo.! .. Boeing actually Does have a QC process in place ...( no kidding) really impressive ......
LET THE LONG TERM RESULTS VINDICATE BOEING
Why did it get this bad? Boeing use to set the standard. Management let this happen. Management sets the priority. Inspection has to be done during manufacturing. I equate it to maintenance. Management will say we don't need to spend money on maintenance because nothing has been failing. Then after a few years everything starts falling apart. Then management will then say the workers are not doing maintenance. This is a management problem and a leadership problem.
Well, for me, it is clear: If it's a Boeing, i ain't Going!! Never!!
1:11 it may be a small percentage but of what? If self inspection is allowed on a critical component or system, it will have an outsized negative effect on the product quality.
If it’s boing. I ain’t going
Quality control and Boeing should never go in the same sentence
" Hey we have a problem here. "
Next day -
" Here's your move memo."
the thing is, years ago when these issues started occurring, even though hundreds had died, it didn't hurt boeing that much. it took them (or someone within boeing) killing a whistleblower to actually cement their reputation for good.
when pilots are being given paid leave and passengers changing flights all because of your companies reputation, you know you're screwed. you'd have better luck offering cruises on a ship called the titanic.
Being appears to be in the logical fallout of production over quality…. Happens everywhere… leaking buildings etc etc problem is buildings don’t have to fly
Boeing, and this report, make the mistake of conflating quality control and quality assurance, but they are very different things. The goal of quality assurance is to make sure defects do not get shipped to customers. That is what Boeing and the FAA are trying to do. The goal of quality control is to set up the manufacturing process in such a way that defects become impossible. For example, if it is important that a certain part be installed in a certain orientation, design the part so that it only fits when it is in the correct orientation. Create door plugs that cannot be installed without being properly secured. How? I don't know. That is the downside of quality control: it is very difficult to set up; it has to be built in to the design of the product. Once a proper QC process gets rolling though the cost savings and customer satisfaction just keep going up.
No mention of the Delta Airbus A330 neo flying from Salt Lake City to Amsterdam having to make an emergency landing due to a panel falling off during takeoff.
cause its an Airbus ???
the articel is about boeing and not airbus
i dont see any reports of systemic problems in airbus plants ?
i dont see any reports that pust airbus in the same basket as boeing in terms of quality control ?
i dont see any reports about airbus putting finacial success over quality
the titles says BOEINGS quality control
maybe thats why its not menitoned in an articel about boeing ????????????????
Just like in corporate auditing, the method changed from physically checking over the shoulders of workers, to using probablility theory to highlight likely causes of problems. This reduces the numbers of checkers. So now they just do spot checking only. They actually don't have a qualified engineer watch whats going on.
And this week we are hearing that Ryan Air does its own checking and they have found things from wrenches to ladders being left behind in spaces in new $100m Boeing aircraft.
Personally I've worked at Boeing in the welding department C-17 The Welding Engineer had zero welding experience only textbook knowledge! I've worked at Aero Arc an offload site for the C-17 also in the welding department. I witnessed their titanium welding not being purged, Their welds are wire brushed and sandblasted! Any welding Engineer or welding inspector should see the obvious red flag!
Quoting the CFO says enough....
Higher ups never get to take responsibility, stepping down after getting huge paycheck is not responsibility.
100% inspection is 80% effective. 200% inspection or 300% inspection will result in minimal increase in effectiveness.
Process Control and Failure Mode and Effect Analysis with TGR/TGW feed back is hat is needed.
Wait they have one?
they have quality control?
this entire video feels like damage control on boeings side
youre just trailer drama and any practical reporting is fake to you
How Airbus does it?
0:15 Embraer 175
I thought they were using bamboo sticks to test the strength 😂
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE SHAREHOLDERS?!?!?!!
I feel like there should be a 3rd party inspector. Clearly the FAA isn't cutting it.
the FAA shouldnt cutt it - its not there job to act as boeings QA - there job should be to regulate the QA otherewis the tax payers would pay boeing own QA
boeing spend millions for politican and im betting that politican have intervend on behalf of boeing -
the FAA is a gouverment agency and politican play a big part of deciding there budget - the rest is self-explanatory
What is the final carbon footprint of all this?
Bro I watched from an Alaskan airlines flight 💀
Do you think it's very strange that it's the CFO that keeps saying Boeing will focus more on safety and quality? Did he feel guilty that he prioritized financial performance over safety and quality?
Impressive comeback, Boeing! Keep soaring ✈️
I think this is a corporate America problem . We see this in every industry is do it quicker, cheaper, yet some how keep quality . Any changes need to be made at the top
Boeing took out the whistle blower
Yep. They got him 5 years after his testimony had concluded and its impact had been implemented at the South Carolina plant. Makes perfect sense - if you only read clickbait headlines.
Why did they not off the whistleblower on camera for this segment? Seems weird they would off some guy who had ZERO new info to provide, having not worked at Boeing for 7 years and 5 years after he already testified. Weird.
They offed a guy whose testimony CONCLUDED FIVE YEARS AGO?? But they didn’t off the whistleblower literally featured in this video?
Wow. That’s wild. And makes absolutely no sense.
Wrong
He was going to testify
This is what happens when you put a bunch of clueless MBAs in charge of an engineering firm.
An Engineering firm needs to be ran by engineers.
Boeing: The sound of a part flying off an airplane.
Boeing planes are perfectly safe so long as your name isn't John Barnett.
It’s “aircraft” not “aircrafts”!
You can have one aircraft or 500 aircraft, but you can never have aircrafts!
So glad Boeing now has quality control.
The title is a contradiction of terms. The words Boeing and Quality Control can not be used in the same sentence!
Introduce competition if you want Boeing to succeed.
Airplane assembly and supply chains are so complex you can’t just “introduce” competition. For now, actually regulating is the best option. And the government pushing for changes as a large customer.
Airbus exists
More competition will promote even further productivity over quality.
@@BobbieGWhizThat's just not how that works
@@f_pie thanks for your insight.
The video is blank
I thought this video would've been a 3 second video with three words: There is none.
Boeing : Quality? what quality?