New document reveals significant fall from grace for Boeing’s space program

[Peartree]

Oh how the mighty have fallen...

Since December, the company's space issues have also become more widely known following the failure of the company's Starliner capsule to successfully carry out a test flight to the International Space Station. NASA labelled this aborted mission, during which the spacecraft was nearly lost two times, a "high visibility close call." The company has agreed to perform a second test flight without crew to assure NASA of Starliner's safety.

Further Reading
NASA declares Starliner mishap a “high visibility close call”
But a new document released by NASA reveals the broader scope of Boeing's apparent decline in spaceflight dominance. The "source selection statement" from NASA explains the space agency's rationale for selecting SpaceX over three other companies—Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and Sierra Nevada Corporation—to deliver large supplies of cargo to lunar orbit. NASA announced its selection of SpaceX for this "Gateway Logistics" contract in late March. The selection document says that SpaceX provided the best technical approach and the lowest price by a "significant" margin.

The 2014 crew contract analysis, authored by NASA's then-chief of human spaceflight, William Gerstenmaier, frequently lauds Boeing for its technical and management expertise. "This is a very comprehensive, credible plan," Gerstenmaier wrote. He described their earlier work in the commercial crew program as "excellent and effective," while providing "high quality products with sufficient detail."

Due to its high price and ill-suited proposal for the lunar cargo contract, NASA didn't even consider the proposal among the final bidders. In his assessment late last year, NASA's acting chief of human spaceflight, Ken Bowersox, wrote, "Since Boeing’s proposal was the highest priced and the lowest rated under the Mission Suitability factor, while additionally providing a conditional fixed price, I have decided to eliminate Boeing from further award consideration."

Full article here: https://arstechnica.com/science/202...nar-cargo-delivery-plan-is-very-unflattering/

 

[tsmmiller]

Just my personal opinion: Boeing’s fall from grace began when they were purchased by McDonnell Douglass and adopted the same business model.
Building the worlds best aircraft became second to increasing share holder value and profits.
Gone are the days when the company was run by people who had advanced from the floor with intrinsic understanding of the companies mind set. Replaced by bankers and money people with little to no understanding of the business other than the money.

 

[Funkworks]

... run by people who had advanced from the floor with intrinsic understanding of the companies mind set. Replaced by bankers and money people with little to no understanding of the business other than the money.

People going for the short cut and getting what they deserve. That's such a familiar pattern you'd think it would be standard knowledge by now.

 

[Peartree]

Just my personal opinion: Boeing’s fall from grace began when they were purchased by McDonnell Douglass and adopted the same business model.
Building the worlds best aircraft became second to increasing share holder value and profits.
Gone are the days when the company was run by people who had advanced from the floor with intrinsic understanding of the companies mind set. Replaced by bankers and money people with little to no understanding of the business other than the money.

"Purchased by McDonnel Douglass" isn't exactly right. It was technically a merger and a "stock swap" but it was MDD that was in financial trouble, it was MDD that pretty much disappeared, and it was their employees (for the most part) that saw the axe. Boeing was the superior partner and it was Boeing that was the survivor in the merger. The only part of MDD that remains is their logo.

 

[tsmmiller]

"Purchased by McDonnel Douglass" isn't exactly right. It was technically a merger and a "stock swap" but it was MDD that was in financial trouble, it was MDD that pretty much disappeared, and it was their employees (for the most part) that saw the axe. Boeing was the superior partner and it was Boeing that was the survivor in the merger. The only part of MDD that remains is their logo.

On paper that is true.
Harry Stonecipher was given the head CEO position when that merger happened. Those of us that lived that have a saying. MD purchased Boeing using Boeing’s money.
Boeing’s business model was dumped in favor of MDs plan. We are still using MD’s business model. It’s not working.
The 777 was built on time and had little no issues. We loved building that aircraft.
The 787 was to be built “by the world” so Boeing would not take the hit on big problems. We all know the results and delays that saw.
The 777-9 (777x) is being manufactured as a larger version of the 787. It is also late and has many set backs.
Boeing has been on a downhill slide since that merger.
The mergers main intent was to acquire the military division, however it has been the commercial division that has suffered.
I don’t normally admit to my place of employment but I have been a Boeing employee for 33 years. I’ve seen it in times of prosperity and times like now where we are facing greater than 10% layoffs once again. This is just a start.

 

[BEC]

I, as a 3 1/2-years retired Boeing engineer after nearly 38 years there, sadly have to agree with TSMILLER. The management (both personnel and culture) shifted significantly after the "merger", and not for the good of anyone but shareholders.

On the outside it may have been that MDD pretty much disappeared but on the inside it was a VERY different story.

His description of those three Everett programs is also pretty much spot on from what I know from my knothole mostly in narrow-body land, though I did spend some time on 777, first while it was in Renton and then another 11 months after the program moved north.

I'd best just stop here, sadly agreeing with the ars technica article in the first post, before I get too wound up.

 

[Exactimator]

Just my personal opinion: Boeing’s fall from grace began when they were purchased by McDonnell Douglass and adopted the same business model.
Building the worlds best aircraft became second to increasing share holder value and profits.
Gone are the days when the company was run by people who had advanced from the floor with intrinsic understanding of the companies mind set. Replaced by bankers and money people with little to no understanding of the business other than the money.

The same issues are what's killing Sears, a company that's been an American institution forever. It's a shame.

 

[Peartree]

On paper that is true.
Harry Stonecipher was given the head CEO position when that merger happened. Those of us that lived that have a saying. MD purchased Boeing using Boeing’s money.
Boeing’s business model was dumped in favor of MDs plan. We are still using MD’s business model. It’s not working.
The 777 was built on time and had little no issues. We loved building that aircraft.
The 787 was to be built “by the world” so Boeing would not take the hit on big problems. We all know the results and delays that saw.
The 777-9 (777x) is being manufactured as a larger version of the 787. It is also late and has many set backs.
Boeing has been on a downhill slide since that merger.
The mergers main intent was to acquire the military division, however it has been the commercial division that has suffered.
I don’t normally admit to my place of employment but I have been a Boeing employee for 33 years. I’ve seen it in times of prosperity and times like now where we are facing greater than 10% layoffs once again. This is just a start.

I'm really sorry to hear that. My brother was in St. Louis on the MDD side so I thought they were the only ones who got screwed.

 

[BEC]

I'm really sorry to hear that. My brother was in St. Louis on the MDD side so I thought they were the only ones who got screwed.

....nope. "Heritage Boeing" got it royally and we have seen the rewards.