I think for the cost, about 100k plus, they could 100% x-ray everything.
The whole business runs on useless people counting down the days to their pension.
Peter wrote:
The whole business runs on useless people counting down the days to their pension.
Do you really think that a group of smart managers and workers could make a much better business out of producing some 1000 engines of 200 different types and variants per year at say USD60k each on average?
I fear such a group would start by eliminating production of all variants that do not have a production count of 10 or more units per year and of all spare parts for all other engines being sold in quantities lower than 10 units per year.
A couple of comments from insiders, predating this QA escape:
There are many business models which can be made to work profitably.
I would say that a business producing such a wide range of stuff is much more fun to work for than one churning out the same stuff all the time.
IMHO the main reason for these issues is that the certification system protects poor QA.
Take ISO9000. The firms which used to make total crap before ISO9000 are making the same total crap with ISO9000. Nothing needs to change. If your products self destruct at 6 months (like that secret message player in the Mission Impossible series which caught fire after you listened to it) and you put that in your Quality Manual, you could not be denied ISO9000! Of course those customers who have requested a copy of your Quality Manual would not buy from you, but probably < 1% of customers do that. The rest will buy from you because you have ISO9000, and will then complain that they blow up at 6 months.
Throughout certified GA, certified vendors have a guaranteed business.
Like Honeywell and their smoking KFC225 autopilot servos. They have known about this for > 20 years. They even know the cause (because I told them the “prob99” cause). No fix. Why? Because they whole firm is rotten from top to bottom, counting the days to their pension.
Peter, I think that you miss the biggest point here – private companies exist to make money for the shareholders and not to produce quality goods.
For these manufacturers to “succeed”, all they need to do is to sell something, and that something should be (somewhat) legal, and then make a profit.
The bigger margin – the better for (at least some) shareholders.
private companies exist to make money for the shareholders and not to produce quality goods.
As someone who has been making quality products since 1978, I thoroughly disagree 
We will just have to disagree.
I am always ready to be cynical about human nature and there are plenty of reasons all around us for that, but there is absolutely no reason why there should be a disconnect between product quality, ethics, and making lots of money.
The most successful industrial manufacturing enterprises, of all sizes, make products which work well.
These are the companies which smart people invest in – the likes of Rolls Royce (aero engines) … you get the idea. These are companies I believe in, who believe in excellence and who deliver excellence, over decades. They are companies I invest in for the long term. Probably the same companies Warren Buffett invests in.
Continental are owned by the chinese so they probably screwed up their business by decades of mismanagement and eventually some chinese “businessman”, looking out of anything that may be of strategic use over there, bought it. Also of course the previous owners were sick of dealing with problems so they happily sold it.
Continental and Cirrus were bought by the same Chinese organization within a month of each other in May/June 2011, and one is the primary engine supplier for the other. That’s why AVIC bought Continental.
The intertwined 2013 Chinese purchase of Thielert under Continental and their attempted 2020 purchase of EPS is also related to Cirrus, but they didn’t get EPS due to other interests interceding.
We will just have to disagree. I am always ready to be cynical about human nature and there are plenty of reasons all around us for that, but there is absolutely no reason why there should be a disconnect between product quality, ethics, and making lots of money. The most successful industrial manufacturing enterprises, of all sizes, make products which work well.
Fully agree. To start with, good quality means loyal customers who are prepared to pay well. That usually brings in more money than selling extra spare parts based on planned obsolescence. And it is a joy to work with loyal and happy customers who appreciate quality and ethics, and you really want to have your people to have fun and feel valued by these customers. I’m sure that in the end in many sectors of the industry, companies that preach stakeholders value rather than shareholders value will be the winners.
