Tag: Airbus

Ron Howard and Klaus Schwab Attack Boeing: A new Netflix documentary exploits people to attempt to kill American capitalism

With all the talk against Boeing, the great American airline manufacturer that the liberal Ron Howard directed hit piece tried to utilize from the high moral ground, the effort has one central message. The world needs to convert its values from shareholder capitalism to stakeholder capitalism the way the Desecrators of Davos view it. The new Netflix documentary that is now streaming that tells a story of Boeing’s 737 MAX safety concerns is all about painting Boeing as a company that fell from grace due to its greed in trying to stay competitive with the Airbus A320 and that its focus on short term profits was what killed hundreds of people in two crashes that occurred in the new plane, one in Indonesia, and another in Ethiopia. The Hollywood hit piece comes at the problem from a political point of view. It attempts to exploit the deaths of innocent people in a way that sells the Klaus Schwab view of the world from the Desecrators of Davos and not the get it done mentality of American manufacturing. It’s really a disgusting movie made by people attempting to apply Covid safety rules to the stock value of Boeing and shove them into the woke world of progressive logic as only radical leftists understand them. A lot is going on in what went on with the Boeing 737 MAX and the world of safety surrounding it. But remember what I say all the time, the rules of the world are made by the losers, meaning, those who can’t compete with the good in the world make rules for themselves to penalize the best and make them more equal to the lazy, the timid, and the socially awkward. 

Boeing and Airbus have a problem when it comes to making plans for a newly created for a smaler world where air travel to even far-flung places in the world is suddenly possible, in a relatively short period. This has pushed all these plane manufacturers to massively automate these fancy new planes in ways that wouldn’t even be conceivable a few years ago. Traditionally, a company like Boeing almost exclusively had pilots flying their planes from military backgrounds. Their pilots had been flying planes for decades in the military dime, so when there were continuous improvement opportunities, pilot feedback with the engineering staff allowed for adjustments as a plane matured in a program. But these days, with all these new planes entering the market, the pilots from places like Indonesia and Ethiopia are coming from backgrounds where flying planes weren’t a reality. So the training of new pilots has to be significantly simplified, and every possible contingency needs to be worked out that takes away the possibility of pilot error. That is how the anti-stall system was put on these new MAX jets from Boeing so that new pilots without the benefit of years of training could fly these planes much easier. In the case of Boeing, their anti-stall system malfunctioned, which contributed to the crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia. When sensors on the plane detected a stall condition during flight, the system took over the pitch from the pilots and pushed the nose down. The pilots, unsure how to deal with that condition, fought the flight controls, but the planes nose-dived from the air into a crash because of all the robust automation they didn’t know how to override. It’s kind of ridiculous that their expert for this film to establish moral character as if he spoke for all pilots is a guy who crashed his plane in New York.

The real problem was automating the flight systems due to pilot training limits. In the great race between Airbus and Boeing between these new fuel-efficient planes, Airbus has had better luck at adopting their aircraft to the needs of automation. Boeing, used to a significant relationship between pilots and engineers built on American military experience, had engineered some single-point failures that have proven to be costly. It certainly wasn’t on purpose. But the point of the Ron Howard documentary wasn’t to see the situation as an accident in a rapidly changing marketplace, but an intentional killing of innocent people because Boeing was too interested in profits. And that if only we had a society that didn’t worry about shareholder value as much as they do, those people would still be alive. The movie written in the way that all communists think assumes that if there were more employees in the labor union at Boeing, that if there were more quality inspectors, and if Boeing had been willing to ground the MAX jet instead of competing with Airbus for market share, that all those lives would still be with us. The assumption was that Boeing killed those people in their airplanes because they were greedy and only cared about their company’s stock value. The other assumption which wasn’t said but was heavily implied was that in a world of stakeholder capitalism, which is essentially state-controlled communism where a strong central authority runs everything, lives would be saved, and everyone would live happily ever after. 

Even more than that, this movie, Downfall: The Case Against Boeing, is an attack on great American industry and a swipe at the traditionally get it done mentality of enterprise. As liberals who do everything in life behind the safety blanket of armchair quarterbacking, they never plan to take responsibility for anything, as all liberals are prone to do. They are the first to preach about the morality of something, but when their side is guilty of sex trafficking, or drug abuse, they point to institutional failure and not themselves. In the case of Boeing, they want to bring down the concept of the CEO with large salaries and to replace them with state central control, to federalize big companies like Boeing so that safety can be imposed, and the temptations to play with people’s lives will be averted. They don’t tell you that their solution to the problem is not to build the planes. They plan to let the market rot and to use safety to hide the incompetence of all involved. To use rules and regulations to protect the inefficient from any expectation that might come from competition. To bend the world to the limits of the slow, the not very smart, and the timid. Boeing was a company built on risk, on American innovation, and when you didn’t get it right the first time, horse sense allowed you to survive to the next day, and everyone worked together to make things better. But when dealing with a global enterprise, which is what aviation is these days, we deal with people from all kinds of backgrounds. And the challenge is to simplify everything for them by making everything more complicated at the end of the system. And when you don’t figure everything out the first time, bad things can happen. Yet instead of understanding that, Ron Howard and the gang are more interested in introducing the Klaus Schwab view of the world, removing shareholder capitalism from consideration and replacing it with stakeholder capitalism. Because when the state controls Boeing, as liberals plan to impose on them, there won’t be any expectation of profits from a Boeing stock. Instead, the value will be that people are working, subsidized by the state, of course, and that safety will be first, even if that means not building and delivering the planes to the market. To the socialists and communists of the world, the market can wait. After all, safety is the most important thing, even if that means that the rest of the world has to slow down to those limits and that they will learn to like it. Whenever a lefty suggests that Americans do things too fast and too recklessly, that is what they are really after. In the case of American business, it should make us all sick to our core because it’s not just an assault on a great American company, but an assault on us all and the greatest country on earth and their core beliefs. 

Rich Hoffman

Click to buy The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business

President Trump, get the Boeing 737 Max back in the Air: Stupid pilots are the cause of the crashes, not the planes themselves

Since the investigation into the black boxes of the most recent crash of a Boeing 737 Max series jet has not occurred as of yet, I’ll go ahead and climb out on a limb as to identifying the cause of not only the Ethiopian disaster, but the Lion Air accident that killed 189 people just a few months ago—it was because the pilots sucked. It wasn’t the plane’s fault. President Trump, stand behind Boeing and get those 737 planes back into the air. Software can’t fix stupid and the training schedules for the average airline outside of the United States is lacking. In America the recruiting of pilots who have flown fighter jets for 10 or more years is common. In places like Indonesia and Ethiopia a pilot’s previous job might have been being a taxi driver or a bicycle delivery person. What the black boxes won’t tell anybody is that the pilots simply lacked the skill needed to fly the airplane. Two switches in the cabin could have been turned off by a pilot of even moderate experience to shut down the autopilot system and the planes never would have crashed. It’s training and circumstances that caused the crash, not the planes themselves.

For those who don’t know, there is a great race in the world as modern aircraft is rapidly replacing older less fuel-efficient units. While airlines are eager to comply with the politics of climate concerns, the real need they have is to save money in fuel, so less fuel consumed gives the airlines tremendous ability to stay relevant in the market. So Airbus makes a series of planes that are very good and the world is buying them up by the thousands and those planes are creating a fleet for the foreseeable future. Boeing by nature is competing directly with Airbus for a seat at the table and this Boeing 737 is the key to their market driven approach. With over 5000 back logged orders, time is everything and it won’t take much for those orders to convert from a Boeing purchase to Airbus. Airlines need a modern airplane that burns a lot less fuel and both of these new offerings from Boeing, the 737 Max series and the Airbus A320 are the hottest offerings to come along in many years. Boeing stands to lose over $25 billion in market value which could cost it for the foreseeable future and really isn’t fair to them.

The Boeing 737 Max 8 and 9 are fantastic airplanes that are light years away from their predecessors by way of safety and efficiency. But part of what is driving this new global market is that airlines in remote parts of the earth are now emerging in places like Indonesia and Ethiopia. You won’t many old planes in the fleets of those upstart airlines because a few years ago none of them existed. But the world has become smaller and global economic needs have created a reason for these airlines to exist so they are popping up like flowers on a spring weekend all around the world, even in places that are considered third world markets. But the problem with that growth is where do the pilots who fly those planes come from. That is the multi-billion-dollar problem that nobody wants to talk about, which is why nobody has opened up the black boxes yet, because the real source of the trouble linking the two Boeing 737 Max jet crashes is pilot error in overcoming environmental elements that threw off the autopilot.

The Boeing 737 Max 8 and 9 knew from the beginning that to enter these new airline markets that their customers did not have years of experienced fighter pilots to draw from to fly their planes in a commercial endeavor. The United States enjoys lots of aviation experience from their pilot pools which is why you don’t see them crashing their Boeing 737s into the ground every few months. Foreign airlines want push button flying and Boeing has tried to give that to them. But sometimes a pilot needs to be a pilot and overcome situational elements for the safety of the passengers on board. I mean do you really want a person flying you around out of Ethiopia whose previous jobs was feeding monkeys or polishing shoes at the airport? You’d want a pilot with thousands of hours of flight experience and the military of a country is a good place to recruit such talent, and obviously the United States has the most opportunities to produce those kinds of pilots. So when the planes start behaving unreliably under the control of an autopilot system, they simply shut them down and fly in the traditional way. But for airlines operating in third world countries, they just don’t have the ability to draw from a deep pilot pool of experience.

Both Boeing and Airbus are trying to build airplanes that inexperienced pilots can fly in these emerging markets. Maybe one is further along than the other, but both are trying to use software to overcome stupid, and that doesn’t lend itself to a good safety record. There is going to be a learning curve in software design and these crashes are part of that learning curve. The problem is not in the planes themselves. It is in using computers to overcome the lack of experience that airlines are all scrambling to utilize. And it’s not fair to an American airline manufacturer to burden them with this problem and hurt them economically when the real problem is in the lack of experience of the global marketplace of the pilots.

To listen to the politicians of the world, especially in the United States, berate Boeing and call for the grounding of the 737 Max planes has been an experience in complete lunacy. Who are these idiots who think it’s economically viable to hurt such a valuable American company in a time when they need to be ramping up production, not scaling down over a safety issue that is not even their problem? Overcoming stupid is not a burden they should be coupled with, yet that is the expectation. That is why President Trump should put his support behind Boeing and get the planes back up in the air quickly so that in the global marketplace, Boeing doesn’t lose its share of the plane deliveries that are demanded for this current aerospace expansion. If consumers aren’t buying the 737 Max jets, they’ll just buy the Airbus A320 series. The marketplace will go on, but Boeing might be damaged for well over a decade when it is needed most.

Any politician that condemns any company or corporation is a destructive element in the scheme of things. In most cases politicians would have a hard time managing a fast food restaurant let alone a multibillion-dollar company that has the responsibility for building airplanes that safely transfer people all over the world. In a fast food example if some worker forgets to put a straw in the bag at the drive thru window, people don’t die. But in passenger airline travel, they do if the pilots forget to override an autopilot system when sensors or environment elements throw off the computations of the onboard computer. Yet in some cases the skill levels are the same, and a politician who doesn’t know better is more dangerous because they fail to properly identify the problem. Which in the case of Boeing costing the company hundreds of millions of dollars of business per day that their airplanes are grounded while the rest of the world marches on. President Trump should get those planes back in the air quickly so that more market share isn’t lost. American pilots won’t have the same problem as the Ethiopian pilots and those in Indonesia at Lion Air. The problem is in pilot training, not the planes themselves, and that is the element in all this that nobody is talking about. And it’s the only thing that matters.

Rich Hoffman

Sign up for Second Call Defense here: http://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707 Use my name to get added benefits.