Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Baz]

Left, right and centre. 44 articles about the Texas AG questioning about DEI. You'll have to do your own research if you want more info.

Texas AG Paxton probes Boeing supplier, takes aim at DEI practices

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) is investigating a major supplier of aerospace company Boeing, whose flagship 737 MAX aircraft has been linked to a series

ground.news

I have to admit that I’m not sure we’ve always struck the best balance between hiring the best and having inclusive hiring practices so that all communities have a chance to become the best.

However, the Texas AG’s actions leads to some questions, specifically about jurisdiction. The have no aviation jurisdiction, that is federal through the FAA. They have no location jurisdiction, Spirit is in Kansas and Boeing is in Washington.

Given that, and the AG’s own political issues in the links provided (Ground News), is it possible Texas is again stirring the pot for political reasons?

 

[Pelorus]

Left, right and centre. 44 articles about the Texas AG questioning about DEI. You'll have to do your own research if you want more info.

Texas AG Paxton probes Boeing supplier, takes aim at DEI practices

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) is investigating a major supplier of aerospace company Boeing, whose flagship 737 MAX aircraft has been linked to a series

ground.news

Your love of this specific news aggregator (which to caveat I haven't looked into in depth to see what bias it may have) is either inadvertently or deliberately trying to push a red herring. 44 news reports from across the political spectrum about Ken Paxton trying to stir the base (the pessimist in me would say in an attempt to divert attention from his significant legal/ethical problems) does not mean that any of those sites agree with his dipshit claim about DEI, but rather they're reporting the facts that he did indeed make that claim (with varying levels of editorialization). "44 news agencies report that US partisan said 'X'" is a much different conclusion than "44 news agencies write article asserting 'X'".

 

[SupersonicMax]

You'll have to do your own research if you want more info.

Do you believe in flat Earth by any chance? You sound like a flat earther…

 

[dimsum]

Do you believe in flat Earth by any chance? You sound like one.

Oh you believe in the “earth” now, do ya?

 

[OldSolduer]

Oh you believe in the “earth” now, do ya?

What is this "earth" thing you speak of?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

If the US Navy owns the IP of the ASW suite, and is willing to move away from Boeing (that's the big if), the West can fairly easily move the kit to another platform, be it an A220-300 or an A320neo of Airbus. I'm sure Airbus would jump at the opportunity and make sure its engineering is done right even if just for the bragging rights. I bet Embraer would also love to sink its teeth into such a game.

Integrating mission systems to a civilian aircraft is difficult.

ask me how I know…

 

[GK .Dundas]

What is this "earth" thing you speak of?

I for one believe in the great turtle A'Tuin .

 

[daftandbarmy]

What is this "earth" thing you speak of?

It gets in the way of this guy's view ...

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I have to admit that I’m not sure we’ve always struck the best balance between hiring the best and having inclusive hiring practices so that all communities have a chance to become the best.

However, the Texas AG’s actions leads to some questions, specifically about jurisdiction. The have no aviation jurisdiction, that is federal through the FAA. They have no location jurisdiction, Spirit is in Kansas and Boeing is in Washington.

Given that, and the AG’s own political issues in the links provided (Ground News), is it possible Texas is again stirring the pot for political reasons?

Could be. Or maybe they want to make enough noise that lobbyists can't shove it under the rug, no matter the jurisdiction?

 

[Maxman1]

It seems the key issues are far more profound, and should probably steer us away from considering Boeing as a supplier:


Why Boeing’s Problems with the 737 MAX Began More Than 25 Years Ago

Aggressive cost cutting and rocky leadership changes have eroded the culture at Boeing, a company once admired for its engineering rigor, says Bill George. What will it take to repair the reputational damage wrought by years of crises involving its 737 MAX?

Once again, Boeing’s 737 MAX is back in the headlines.

After two crashes that killed 346 people in 2018 and 2019 and five years of ensuing design changes and regulatory scrutiny, the 737 MAX is grounded again after a mid-air blowout of a fuselage panel on January 5. After loose bolts were discovered on other MAX 9s, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grounded the planes and opened an investigation into whether MAX is safe to fly, accompanied by a stern warning, saying, “This incident should have never happened, and it cannot happen again.”

Boeing has also experienced repeated problems in design and production with its newest jumbo jet, the 787 Dreamliner. Such frequent, repeated crises point to a deeper issue than isolated engineering mishaps. The underlying cause of these issues is a leadership failure that has allowed cultural drift away from Boeing’s once-vaunted engineering quality.

Why Boeing’s Problems with the 737 MAX Began More Than 25 Years Ago - HBS Working Knowledge

Except the P-8 and E-7 aren't 737 MAX products, they're standard 737 Next Generation, which do not suffer from the same issues.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Your love of this specific news aggregator (which to caveat I haven't looked into in depth to see what bias it may have) is either inadvertently or deliberately trying to push a red herring. 44 news reports from across the political spectrum about Ken Paxton trying to stir the base (the pessimist in me would say in an attempt to divert attention from his significant legal/ethical problems) does not mean that any of those sites agree with his dipshit claim about DEI, but rather they're reporting the facts that he did indeed make that claim (with varying levels of editorialization). "44 news agencies report that US partisan said 'X'" is a much different conclusion than "44 news agencies write article asserting

To begin with, I never staked out a position one way or another. I simply made an assumption based on some reports, that DEI might be a problem at Boeing.

Perhaps I misunderstood, what you were asking. I did my best. Guess what? You can Google shit yourself. That way you don't have to accuse people of giving you non-existent red herrings and going on biased rants.

I like GN because silly sensitive souls have a habit of attacking a source simply because of the perceived right/ left slant. GN gives them an opportunity to read about a subject from all political perspectives.

Again, don't wait for me to answer. Do some work yourself. A whole page of Boeing and DEI with a very simple search of three words.

https://gprivate.com/6ak7m

Have an illustrious day

 

[Pelorus]

To begin with, I never staked out a position one way or another. I simply made an assumption based on some reports, that DEI might be a problem at Boeing.

Perhaps I misunderstood, what you were asking. I did my best. Guess what? You can Google shit yourself. That way you don't have to accuse people of giving you non-existent red herrings and going on biased rants.

I like GN because silly sensitive souls have a habit of attacking a source simply because of the perceived right/ left slant. GN gives them an opportunity to read about a subject from all political perspectives.

Again, don't wait for me to answer. Do some work yourself. A whole page of Boeing and DEI with a very simple search of three words.

https://gprivate.com/6ak7m

Have an illustrious day

This is a lot of words to say, "I pulled a bullshit right-wing conspiracy theorist claim about boogeyman-de-jour DEI out of my ass, got called out on it because despite most of army.ca's users being generally right leaning they still embrace legitimate debate, and when put to task I skulked back into saying, well "I never staked out a position one way or another."

You can make a bunch of passive aggressive claims and link to Google search macros to suggest that the rest of us could understand your point if we just did some research. Guess what - most of us are at least somewhat read into the Boeing saga as defence enthusiasts so we immediately knew that your Trump-esque "many people are saying" was bullshit from the start.

I'd say do better, but you've made an entire career on this website of being full of shit, playing it off when you get called out by members all across the political spectrum, and then bringing the same bullshit out the next day as if nothing had happened. I don't know why I continue to engage, but I guess it's for the tidbits of actual subject-matter expertise that gets sprinkled into this forum a few times a week.

 

[Baz]

Integrating mission systems to a civilian aircraft is difficult.

ask me how I know…

It doesn’t have to be (ask me how I know)…

The problem comes when there are requirements that don’t naturally allow it, the contractor doesn’t really understand those requirements, and the people representing the users and customer (they are different) don’t know how to explain them.

 

[Halifax Tar]

There's a lot of speculation that the lack of maintenance and inspection is being affected because of DEI hiring.

slaps legs Well, look at the time.

 

[dimsum]

This is a lot of words to say, "I pulled a bullshit right-wing conspiracy theorist claim about boogeyman-de-jour DEI out of my ass, got called out on it because despite most of army.ca's users being generally right leaning they still embrace legitimate debate, and when put to task I skulked back into saying, well "I never staked out a position one way or another."

You can make a bunch of passive aggressive claims and link to Google search macros to suggest that the rest of us could understand your point if we just did some research. Guess what - most of us are at least somewhat read into the Boeing saga as defence enthusiasts so we immediately knew that your Trump-esque "many people are saying" was bullshit from the start.

I'd say do better, but you've made an entire career on this website of being full of shit, playing it off when you get called out by members all across the political spectrum, and then bringing the same bullshit out the next day as if nothing had happened. I don't know why I continue to engage, but I guess it's for the tidbits of actual subject-matter expertise that gets sprinkled into this forum a few times a week.

 

[YZT580]

Pardon me adding my 2 cents but what gives? Over the last several weeks the level of tolerance and rational discussion has dropped to a level not seen since the last House of Commons debate. Simply put telling someone to F off is not a good repartee. If you have to resort to that you have already lost the argument. We give the Mods enough headaches without this.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

It doesn’t have to be (ask me how I know)…

The problem comes when there are requirements that don’t naturally allow it, the contractor doesn’t really understand those requirements, and the people representing the users and customer (they are different) don’t know how to explain them.

All true, but I am still saying that making a civilian airliner into an ASW aircraft is not “hand wave, we will bolt a bunch of mission stations in and have it done next week” exercise.

Modifying a commercial fuselage for a bomb bay is not trivial exercise. Weapon separation trials are not a trivial exercise. EMI/EMC trials are not trivial.

Everything is doable- please send money. And with a coherent project management structure. And with a few years.

 

[dimsum]

Pardon me adding my 2 cents but what gives? Over the last several weeks the level of tolerance and rational discussion has dropped to a level not seen since the last House of Commons debate. Simply put telling someone to F off is not a good repartee. If you have to resort to that you have already lost the argument. We give the Mods enough headaches without this.

I agree.

That being said, I’ve seen this pop up a few times from various people in the past few weeks - e.g. the reply to @SupersonicMax yesterday.

Maybe there’s something to the whole “don’t discuss politics” thing in the mess…

 

[Baz]

All true, but I am still saying that making a civilian airliner into an ASW aircraft is not “hand wave, we will bolt a bunch of mission stations in and have it done next week” exercise.

Modifying a commercial fuselage for a bomb bay is not trivial exercise. Weapon separation trials are not a trivial exercise. EMI/EMC trials are not trivial.

Everything is doable- please send money. And with a coherent project management structure. And with a few years.

Agreed.

 

[WinnipegFella]

Agreed.

Just strap some bombs to the wings Flintstone style. That easy. I'll take my 130 million Arrive an cut now.