Boeing indefinitely halts 737 Max production

Originally published at:


Time to dust off those Yellowstone/New Midsize Airplane plans they talked about in, say, 2011. Should be ready in 9 years then.

1 Like

Yep, nothing like indirectly causing the deaths of hundreds while harassing your employees and then receiving $80m as compensation when you lose your job. Living the high life! /s


I fear that this is the first indication of Boeing’s death spiral.

1 Like

My bet is too big too fail. It’s the U.S. national airliner company. And a bailout could be sold by fearmongering about impacts on the defense side of the business.

(This too is before-the-coffee speculation.)

(Which it always is, because I don’t drink coffee.)


Yep. Entirely possible - and the military industrial thing might be the get-out-of-jail card.

1 Like

I mean, Boeing kind of is a pretty significant player in American manufacturing. If it failed, it would be a big, big problem for the economy, and leave the planet with one major aircraft manufacturer — not a great situation.


Dang it, always wanted to fly in one…

1 Like

Boeing is, or used to be, the largest importer/exporter in the US. A hiccup in it’s plane manufacturing will ripple throughout the economy.

Boeing’s business model is interesting in that when the commercial side dips the military side usually balances the company out. The cycle of US wars has enabled Boeing to survive most disruptions so far. I’m guessing that the Boeing lobby is currently running all kinds of scary military simulations for congress critters right now trying to influence the next conflict and the sale of weapons and weapon platforms to go with it.


I agree–Boeing is literally irreplaceable in the world economy, and it would take years (or more likely a generation) for another manufacturer to replace its capacity. It would be a disaster for the economy and unacceptable for national security, so whatever bailout it will require, it will get.


I hope they go bankrupt and the shareholders lose all their money.

Who would benefit by 150k people losing good jobs and the economy taking an enormous hit?

They are/were terrible (at least in the way they were outfitted by US airlines). Seats crammed in so tightly that they had to put a convex door on the bathrooms in order to allow a human-sized person to fit into them.

It’s got to the point that I prefer to fly in the larger RJs - Embraer ERJ145 to be specific, because they are now less cramped than the “full-size” aircraft.

I wonder if the airlines skipped a redo of the evacuation safety drills in the same way that they skipped recertification after changing all of the handling and aerodynamics of the plane by hanging big engines off it.


The problem isn’t a shortage of passengers willing fly in such a jet, it’s that so many of those people continue to insist on getting to the part where the flight lands.


Landing is so over-rated, really.

1 Like

Boeing and airlines BOTH suck when it comes to seating design.

1 Like

They still do the drills. They just use adults who are in peak physical condition, who are well coached in how to evacuate, and have no baggage in their laps. So, very true to life.


What are you talking about? Boeing have a perfect safety record; they haven’t left one up there yet.


Which is why I specifically said “in the way they were outfitted by US airlines”

But thanks for the mansplaining, I guess

So, when will we see criminal charges brought against the slimeballs who made the decisions which they knew @%#$@# good and well were likely to cause the deaths of hundreds of people? And when will some people with backbones in Washington start getting rid of this corrosive and deadly plutocratic farce of allowing companies to “self-regulate”?

Hey, I can pretend I live in a rational world where there people in authority who have some ethics and spines, can’t I?