Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by gsibble | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

gsibble

My comment on Boeing not doing anything right is based upon:

- Multiple failures of Starliner

- 737 MAX

- 787

- USAF Replacement Tanker

Do you have any fact based comments that they are an engineering powerhouse? And don't quote me projects older than 10 years.

View on HN

787, F/A-18, 777, 747-8 freighter? The T-7A? Just from top of my head.

>> And don't quote me projects older than 10 years.

Pretty sure you ignored that part. Yes, Boeing used to do great engineering. gsibble didn't deny that. The issue is the last decade or so.

By limiting it to a decade, and a lot of the latest versions of the programs I mentiones are actually quite recent developments, just shows how ignorant OP is when it comes to aerospace. 30 years ago is, in aerospace, basically yesterday. That things on the civilian side sped up is largely due to the 787.

At considering 747-8 just another 747, no idea where to start... That as stupid as calling the MAX just another 737, we all agree I hope that this is not the case.

You're still not giving me any examples of anything they've done successfully in the last decade while I gave plenty of examples of things they've fucked up.

I gave you plenty of recent examples where Boeing did a decent job, excluding MAX of course. I also tried to explain that your limit of ten years doesn't make any sense in aerospace where cycles are more like 30 years. But hey, you wanna hate Boeing go and hate Boeing, plenty of reasons for it if you search for them. Being uncapable as an aerospace company is none of them so, trying to fram eit like that is just showing a certain level of ignorance about the whole industry.

Just off the top of my head:

F/A-18 was designed by McDonnel Douglas in the 1970s (Boeing has never designed their own successful fighter jet. Not once..)

The 777 is from the early 90s, close to 30 years ago.

The 747-8 Freighter is highly derivative of the 747-8, a 20 year old program, which is itself derivative of an airframe who's design began in the 1960s.

The 787 is your best counter example, that program started not quite 20 years ago and hasn't been a complete disaster.

The T-7 is a Saab jet; Boeing's contribution is being an American manufacturer so the jet could win the contract.

Exactly. Boeing used to build great stuff until the McDonnel Douglas merger. Now the money people run the show and engineering takes a back seat. Love how no one has tried to refute me. Just downvotes.

The latest iterations of the F/A-18 all happened after the merger. The 777-X is quite recent as is the 787. Aerspace standards mean 30 years is basically yesterday. Oh, you also have the F-15, in it latest iteration a Boeing jet.

Hell, Boeing has its issues and problems but not realizing what an imoressive aerospace company it is while ignoring all the issues SpaceX has, and comopletely ignoring all non-rocket programs Boeing has going, is borderline ignorant.

> F-15, in it latest iteration a Boeing jet.

Just another derivative. The F-15 was McDonnell Douglas. Boeing has never designed their own fighter jet, and not for want of trying.

I already asked someone else, but how much aerospace exerience do you have? Honest question.

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32643225

You can't get basic shit right, like pitching the F/A-18 as an example of Boeing design competence. Then you ask people for their backgrounds without sharing your own? Leaning on implicit credentialism when your arguments wilt under criticism. Is it going too far for me to guess that you or some of your colleagues work for Boeing, and thus take Boeing's reputation personally?

Boeing is a stinker, they have been for years and their contributions to SLS is just one example of this, of many. Crewed starliner should be aaaany day now, right? How many years behind crewed Dragon? Is Boeing's excuse that crewed Dragon started development 30 years before Starliner? If it were up to Boeing, America would depend on Russia to get to the ISS.

As far as my experience goes, 10+ years in aerospace, none at Boeing. Personally, I couldn't care less about Boeings reputation. I have enough experience so to realize that Boeing is a pretty strong aerospace company, both civilian and military. I also know that development cycles in aerospace are measured in decades, so an artificial limit to ten years is pointless and naive, it also shows a certain lack of insight by those putting that limit in place. I also know that a 737 MAX, a 747-8, a F/A-18 F and a F-15 X are by all means and purposes new planes conpared to their first gen ancestors. Failing to see that also shoes a lack of understanding.

I do have an issue with people dumping on Boeing, using BS reasons, without any ubderstanding of what theybare talking about. Starliner? Sure, a true delayed program. MAX, as serious a fuck as they get in aerospace. Use those examples, but writting of Boeing as company as whole is more than one bridge to far.

And for now, it is you and the commenter you linked whom resorted to personal attacks. Just saying. Usually, HN is better than that.

Their USAF inventory?

Oh, that too. What a mess.

In what way is the inventory of the most powerful airforce, including airlift, a mess? Care to elaborate?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com