To paraphrase the piece, the Editorial Board lamented GE-style management tactics that were geared almost exclusively to the shareholder and advocated for returning HQ to Seattle. The real interesting part to me was the suggestion that Boeing return to it's roots as an ENGINEERING company, and that they make these types of moves NOW in an attempt to restore Boeing's once stellar reputation.
BRAVO!! Dave Calhoun is from a company that made mainly appliances and other consumer items. Yes, they have a jet engine division too, but GE-style management is a bad fit with an aircraft manufacturer. Get rid of Calhoun and members of the board who aren't on-board with returning Boeing to it's past practices of engineering excellence instead of a corporate mindset that looks at aircraft as flying appliances. Precision machines can't be pumped out like toasters and then marketed to Third World airlines as a ready-to-roll airplane that practically flies and maintains itself. Boeing is pretending that 200 hour pilots can safely fly an airplane that mostly flies itself. That's wrong, and goes against aviation safety protocols and historical aviation practices, but does support my thesis that we're selling Lion Air and their ilk "appliances" that need not be treated as a incredibly sophisticated piece of machinery that needs QUALIFIED people flying it, MCAS was created not only to preserve
the 737 type rating, but to save (ironically) low-time, inexperienced pilots who predominate in Third World countries. A US pilot who came out of the military would know exactly what to do and not have to flip through a manual. TURN IT OFF.
Back to the Future.