The Al Jazeera produced documentary "Broken Dreams: The Boeing 787" is a biased hatchet job which delivers little new information and rehashes years old information to make it appear that the 787 is unsafe. In short, this shoddy journalism is a
piece of dogshit. The documentary ignores basic common sense and blindly takes a one sided view, with out a shred of proof, that the 787 is unsafe. The truth and reality of the 787 program is inconvenient to the fictional story line in the documentary so Producer Marc Shaffer and Reporter Will Jordan ignores it in order to sell a bad story to an unknowing public.
So let's take apart the Al Jazeera "story" piece by piece.
Review of the 787 program - Al Jazeera goes into a quick and dirty review of the 787 program but highlights that it was built for...hold your noses and cover your eyes....PROFIT. Cue ominous music in the background hinting at some evil lurking around the corner as they roll out their "witnesses" who basically bash the aircraft and Boeing without give any details.
Old story different day - Al Jazeera starts its desperate attempt to call out the 787 as an unsafe aircraft. It goes through old news particularly the well known and often reported lithium ion battery issue that grounded the 787 for several months last year. Because Al Jazeera was unable to dig up any new damning information that proves the 787 unsafe, they decided to rehash old information to make it appear that it's unsafe. In other words, Shaffer and Jordan pulled the old bait and switch. They are also dismissive of the the new containment system that Boeing had designed despite the testing by Boeing and approval by the FAA.
They claim that "leading scientist" don't believe that the aircraft is safe with the new battery containment system. Al Jazeera doesn't present any evidence that the containment system will prevent an uncontained fire in the case of thermal runaway of the LION battery system. All they do is present Don Sadoway saying that he doesn't think it is a sufficient fix but doesn't even give a reason why he doesn't think it's not a good fix. The fix has to be judged in terms of the purpose. The purpose of the containment box and the battery redesign is to prevent the a LION battery that is experiencing thermal runaway from ever progressing to a fire and to vent noxious fumes overboard. Dr. Sadoway never said in the the Al Jazeera piece whether it was a good fix or not for containing a battery fire or not. He only said that that it doesn't address the root cause of the thermal runaway. There is a big difference. While the root cause remains unknown, Boeing and the battery manufacturer have developed a system to make sure a fire does not develop.
Airplanes fly around the world with systems that are not perfect and that can break down or cause an accident. That has been true in the field of aviation since the Wright Brothers. That is why industrial projects such as the 787 have safety systems and redundancies in order to make the aircraft safe from failing systems such as an advanced battery like the LiCoO2 batteries on the 787.
Moving on Al Jazeera again rehashes old news, this time the merger of Boeing with McDonnell Douglas in 1997. They state that McD's culture and business model (which they judge unsuccessful despite being one of the largest aerospace companies in the world at that time) is what changed Boeing and made it all about profits and "maximizing Wall Street returns." It seems that Al Jazeera is equating profit with a lack of safety in this program and nothing can be more ass backwards. If the journalists at Al Jazeera had any common sense they would realize that no aerospace company would cut corners especially in terms of safety to maximize profitability. No airline would accept or even entertain the thought of buying an aircraft that is inherently unsafe. No company in their right mind would increase a company's liability risk for short term profits.
Cue more dark and ominous music and cue the disgruntle Boeing workers who call management thugs. Clearly the agendas of these former employees and Al Jazeera's journalists are aligned. In fact Al Jazeera uses these former employees to denigrate the Boeing Company.
The documentary then proceeds to talk about the roll out of ZA001, the first 787 on July 8, 2007. They call it the fake rollout (or the "big lie" as one of Al Jazeera's stooges calls it) because the aircraft, as we all know today SEVEN YEARS later, was not anywhere near complete. Yet Al Jazeera thinks it's newsworthy to rehash SEVEN YEAR OLD news. Yes it was an empty shell, yes it lead to the first of many delays that would stretch to over 3 years but Boeing worked to ensure that the entire aircraft was complete and safe before it flew, a process that took over 2 years.
In July 2009 Boeing had finally gotten ZA001 completely ready, had engines runs and taxi runs in preparation for the first 787 flight. Soon after the conclusion of the Paris Airshow that month Boeing announced that there was a structural flaw in the side of body where the wing connects to the center wing box. Boeing could have flown the aircraft under very limiting restrictions. Instead of risking a flight for the sake of schedule or PR they delayed the first flight another 5 months to December 2009.
Al Jazeera drags out a memo where they try to make a case that "schedule may require deviations to the quality control process." They also said the memo was supplied by an engineer who said that "They changed basic engineering principles to meet schedule" and rhetorically asks "Would you fly on a plane that you knew was built with major flaws?" Al Jazeera states that the engineer believes that deviating from the quality control process compromised safety. However, Al Jazeera stops there. They made a charge that Boeing ignored quality control to meet schedule but offered no details and no other evidence. We don't know anything about the source other than what Al Jazeera tells the audience. We don't know what parts or sections of the aircraft may be affected. We don't know how safety was compromised if at all. All we have is to go on the word of Al Jazeera and its anonymous "engineering" source and we are offered no other proof of lack of quality control.
Al Jazeera introduces Cynthia Cole who is a former president of SPEEA at Boeing. Given the bad relations between the union and management you know that Cynthia Cole's assessment is going to be biased against the company. Al Jazeera admits she never did work on the 787 so already there is doubts about her judgement of the 787 program. She adds drama when reviewing the memo and states point blank that Boeing isn't allowing quality control to do their job. How would she know based on a vague memo especially if she's never worked on the 787 program? She states flat out that she would never fly on a 787. In a press release issued by Boeing prior to the release of the report, Boeing states:
"Even on-the-record sources seem to have changed their stories for the producers. For example, former Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace (SPEEA) President Cynthia Cole said this about the 787’s first flight in 2009: “Today’s flight is a testament to the skill, hard work and diligence Boeing employees put in to get this airplane ready to fly,” SPEEA President Cynthia Cole said in a news release. “Boeing returned to engineering, and that’s what made today possible and successful.” Now, she states in the documentary trailer that Boeing “shortchanged the engineering process.” So which is it Cynthia? It seems that she's two faced when it comes to the 787.
Back to the statement that was in the Boeing memo offered up as proof: "schedule may require deviations to the quality control process." Examining the statement indicates that there would be deviations to the process and that they are not eliminating the quality control process at all which is what Al Jazeera and Cynthia Cole would have the audience believe.
Moving on, Al Jazeera connects with a Boeing worker at the North Charleston, SC plant whom I suspect is an Everett employee deployed to Boeing South Carolina to help the plant work through the issues they were experiencing. He alleges that there is poor workmanship in the plant and that the plant staff are uneducated and ill equipped to handle the job and agrees to wear a hidden camera to get "proof." The rogue employee with the camera doesn't present any solid evidence of safety issues, only sound bites about it being unsafe and that they would not fly on the aircraft.
While there is some truth to poor workmanship that had slowed the production of the aircraft and had caused some airlines angst, it's not a threat to safety of flight. According to my sources while they have seen poor workmanship such as cracked wing components (wing ribs), batteries, failed windscreens, brake issues, incomplete fuselage sections the aircraft is not allowed to be delivered to the customer in that condition. Furthermore, my sources have seen a huge improvement in the build quality. Additionally my sources have stated that "Some employees that I know have also expressed a lack of confidence in the 787, and have stated that they would not fly on it because of piss-poor quality, particularly with regard to components and/or line numbers produced at BSC but not limited to just them."
From my sources:
"With regard to the allegation that "They’re short-changing the engineering process to meet a schedule" as it were, we see a lot of managers striving to "sell" jobs in order to meet their commitments to upper management, regardless of whether or not it makes sense both from a production and a safety standpoint. We on the floor refer to it as "bean counting" or "bean selling". Having said that much, I also believe that some of our engineers are complete idiots in planning the build of this airplane. Things out of logical sequence, nonsensical processes...I've had to personally overhaul some aspects of a work package myself just to make it flow where we are now, production-wise. Now, do I believe this is a problem that cannot be fixed? Absolutely not. The problem is getting upper management to stop pretending to care about everything else above production, and to actually do so.
Having said that however, I don't think that the scope of things is terribly out of the ordinary. Boeing has had problems with the 787, and some of its management procedures are lacking, but overall I'm still proud to be a part of the 787.
A lot of what is being said IS based on testimony of some disgruntled folks. I personally despise much of Boeing leadership and many of the processes we have here as they are lacking. However again, it's not permanent. In my opinion, things have improved over the years, particularly in the last three.
And FOR the record, yes I would fly on a 787, and am hoping to do so someday."
Al Jazeera then presents John Woods a former Boeing engineer that specializes in composites. Again they throw out allegations compromised and lax safety standards by Boeing managers who forced or threatened people to ignore substandard work. Again there is no proof other than the allegations that are made by John Woods along with the potentially frightening line that there may be a structural failure of a 787. Mr. Ford, like the other former or current Boeing workers that Al Jazeera talked to, doesn't go into any detail about what what parts are affected or instances of bad parts or workmanship.
Probably the only serious allegation that came up in the 48 minute report is that of drug use on the Boeing South Carolina campus. While it is unknown if it is true or not Boeing will probably make a fuller investigation of the allegation. It is also unknown if this would lead to a safety issue because no one knows the who, what and when. However drug use in a world wide societal problem and not one that is limited to one industrial company in one town. I am willing to wager that there is drug use on the final assembly lines at Toulouse, France, the newsrooms of Al Jazeera and in almost any other industrial plant all over the world.
Al Jazeera also seems to suggest a mafia like relationship between Boeing and the government with Boeing pulling the proverbial strings. They imply (they don't make an out right accusation) that the FAA basically rubber stamped the 787 certification and that the Ali Bahrami who leads the FAA Aircraft Certification Service was too close to Boeing. They go on to list politicians who have helped secure sales for Boeing including Hillary Clinton and President Obama. This should be of no surprise that government tries to help sell products and services of domestic firms to other countries and companies. It's not just Boeing or the 787 but it is a common business practice done everywhere around the world. Al Jazeera implies there is something sinister with the Boeing-government relationship but ignores the fact that even companies like Airbus have a close relationship with the governments of their home country. Airbus is even partly owned by the French government but of course it's these inconvenient facts that Al Jazeera chooses to ignore as it dilutes the story line.
Lastly, Al Jazeera employed what I call sucker punch journalism when they interviewed 787 program manager Larry Loftis under false pretenses. They pulled out the memos which were written before Mr. Loftis took over the 787 program thus ambushing him as well as to assert that he has to explain the comments of the few South Carolina workers who claim shoddy workmanship, lax oversight by unqualified workers. Boeing promptly ends the interview and later says that "the reporting team appears to have chosen to take advantage of our trust and openness and abused their position from the outset by deliberately misrepresenting the purpose, objective and scope of their planned coverage."
In the final analysis, Al Jazeera set out to use heavy handed practices to weave a false and distorted picture of the 787. They ignored facts or did not report them as it would disprove their claim that the aircraft is unsafe. They present no proof to back it up. They use witnesses of questionable character or who have contradicted themselves like Cynthia Cole. Again they were not going to let the truth get in the way of a good story and they're not above using sucker punch journalism and deception to take the narrative in the direction that they want.
Some people may dismiss me as a "Boeing Fanboy", whatever. There has been other commentaries critical of Al Jazeera from people who have been much harsher on Boeing than I. These include
AirInsight,
Leeham, and
Forbes. Additionally, the
Seattle Times reviewed the same memo that Al Jazeera had reviewed and determined that it was not proof that safety of flight was being compromised for the sake of schedule. Let's look at the performance of the 787 since entering service 3 years ago. Yes we know about the batteries ad nauseam and we all know about the reliability issues that have affect performance ad nauseam but there hasn't been a an incident that put the safety of passengers in danger. Of the over 180 787s in operation around the world we have not seen them falling out of the sky in the almost 5 years that they have been flying including the test flights. The 787-9 was just certified on time and had a trouble free flight test program. Of course Al Jazeera won't mention any of this as the truth in inconvenient to their story. Yes there are issues with production and with traveled work but none of these are safety issues but rather a production system that is in the middle of being stabilized. One has to question why Al Jazeera is putting out a hatchet piece using questionable methods in order to try to prove something that is obviously and blatantly false.
Boeing's Statement:
Posts
