Who benefits when a major developer and manufacturer of high-end military hardware and software becomes the target of sabotage?
The question is being whispered in few dark corners now as the number of incidents involving Boeing comes to light.
Some of the damage is self-induced.
A small factor might be increased "newsworthiness" increased the amount of coverage by the mainstream media.
But given the number of incidents seems to be increasing and the causes are beyond the control of "the factory", one must consider the possibility of malicious actors.
Means, motive, opportunity
In no particular order:
Trade-unions benefit because they can point to Boeing and insinuate "Nice brand you got there. It would be a shame if something happened to it."
During times of inflation, trade-unions seek every bit of leverage they can manage as they seek to negotiate wage increases that keep up with inflation.
Never underestimate the value of a "brand". Name-brand shoes can command 5X the price of the equivalent un-branded shoe. Huge profit potential and a lot of advertising equity is a risk.
Foreign powers can benefit if they maneuver and become a White Knight and rescue a company in free-fall. Boeing is a treasure-trove of advanced technology that could leap-frog a second-rate defense industry into the big-leagues.
Competitors would benefit from increased sales and more pricing power. I discount this because sabotage is Pandora's box and there are no fire-walls that prevent the practice from being inflicted on the competitor.
Environmental zealots can achieve some of their goals by squashing civilian air-travel which would reduce petroleum consumption, make the skies "prettier" (i.e. no contrails), reduce transport of strawberries and farmed salmon from the southern hemisphere and reduce tourist numbers of pristine beaches so turtles' copulating is not disturbed by college students' copulating.
New World Order can achieve some of their goals of squashing dirt-people's ability to travel, assemble and communicate.
Russia believes that the west has been waging a stealth war against Russia by blowing up assets like pipelines and bridges. Reciprocity?
Anti-Zionists same as Russia. Bonus link.
Domestic traitors trapped in delusional thinking.
A breech in the levee
My guess is that Boeing's institutional failures created an opportunity. It is possible that multiple actors saw the potential and ran with it.
Like a high-speed turbine losing a blade, the forces of the imbalance is tearing the machine apart.
Do what you can to not be standing down-range of fragmenting blades or the rubble of the building that houses the turbine.
Just spit balling, here Joe…
ReplyDeleteThe list of suspects is great, motivational drivers are excellent… but…
But… teamwork? Among that lot…?
For most of those suspects actions like this are declarations of war. This type of thing would call for reprisal too. Worse, they live in glass houses. Let us insert ourselves into it: would you throw stones like that at me, knowing full well that I can and will throw them at you in return? It’s possible I suppose…but unlikely, maybe. Permit me to game it out?
If I may I will temporarily remove the competitors, foreign powers, and Russia. Internecine wars like this are very, very bad for business.
I’d like to rule out the idiots and incompetent as well. The New World Order and the greenies are capable of low level vandalism but they are mostly cranks seeking 15 seconds of fame. A targetted assassination is not their standard mode of operation.
That leaves the crazies. My fellow antisemites, the domestic traitors, and they are capable of anything… but they are driven by emotion. They want to strike directly at their enemies; not the wheels and cogs in The Machine.
I’m looking at the trade unions. I think the combatants in this Boeing thing know each other, and messages are being sent and received behind the scenes. They are the only ones with the stones to throw shots, and strong enough to take them…
Very good analysis.
DeleteThe only weak spot I can poke at is that coordination is not necessary. Collusion can occur without coordination as long as actors have knowledge of other events. And you can thank the media for handling that detail.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Boeing went woke, gonna go broke.
DeleteHello Mr TarHeel: In the interest of recreational debate, why are Airbus planes not seeing the same underwhelming level of maintenance competence as seen on the Boeing planes? Do the airlines that fly mostly Boeing somehow accidentally hire ADHD mechanics?
DeleteMaybe we need to look at numbers here. How many Boeing planes are in service versus others? How many “factory defects” occur? How many go unremarked by the MSM? IDK.
DeleteHow do we know that Airbus aircraft aren't having similar problems that aren't being discussed by the news?
DeleteHow many of the problems of Boeing are really problems of local maintenance elsewhere? At least some - for example, the airlines with problems in Ethiopia and Malaysia were both national carriers who the local air safety bodies were known to go light on for political reasons; their misdeeds are being blamed on Boeing. Where else is that happening?
Also, where were these planes built? My understanding is that only their South Carolina factory is non union.
Inquiring minds expect the real story to be more in depth than the headlines.
Jonathan
Hanlon's Razor sounds good but is usually wrong in the real world.
DeleteLook closely, and you will see that most of the current incidents are on planes that are several, or more years old, some as old as 30.
ReplyDeleteAlso, notice that that majority of the maintenance failures are United. Thing is, incident like the current reports DO happen often, they are just on the news media's radar right now.
The issues are of maintenance, not Boeing. a 10 or 30 years old airplane has had it's tires replaced many times, you cannot blame Boeing for them falling of that you can Ford for your current truck's tires going flat. Engines on a 10 year old plane have been replaced at least once, so that is on United as well. Same with all the other incidents. Those planes have gone through an inspection every 100 hours and yearly. At some point stripped to the walls for inspection. You gotta blame United for those failures.
Having worked for both Boeing in Seattle and the UAW in Detroit, I found Boeing to be far more heavily "union" (with all the bad that goes with it) than Chevrolet. But I wouldn't let the airlines themselves off the hook - easy to "defer" maintenance when looking at cash flow.
ReplyDeleteHours on airframes makes a huge difference.
ReplyDeleteSecondly all aircraft manufacturers have a very rigid QA/QC that does not embrace change without lots of meetings, testing and documentation. If a part has been accepted, it will take sometime before a change can be made in an air fleet. That includes new installation and maintenance documentation.
Lastly this means more documentation and meetings with the FAA who's motto is "We're not happy till you're unhappy!"
BTW if you add the DOD into the mix with military aircraft double or triple the time and $$$. I have the t-shirt.
It's actually "We aren't Happy until YOU aren't Happy"
DeleteLet access to financing hinge on hiring from a population with average IQ of 85, then wait for the disasters.
ReplyDeleteWe can speculate about the motives, but there's no doubt die-versity is the method.
Is what's happening at Boeing deliberate in any way? Perhaps. But I suspect the bulk of the problem comes from the precipitous drop in IQ's that has happened over the past half century. We are starting to see the "competency crisis" expand and accelerate. This is but a more publicized result of that crisis. But it's occurring in other industries as well.
ReplyDeleteRoger that! Competency crisis, slowly at first...
Delete