|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Boeing article.|
|Archives: 1, 2|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on July 15, 2004 and July 15, 2012.|
- 1 Boeing Red Barn
- 2 History
- 3 See also
- 4 References to Airplane Models and Production Totals
- 5 Missing aircraft
- 6 SUGAR Aircraft concepts
- 7 Boeing updating elements of the Boeing entry
- 8 Boeing's intentions with commercial space
- 9 Concept aircraft
- 10 Duopol!!, Geerman American Böing?, American identity?
- 11 Boeing to close Wichita, Kansas plant
- 12 Talk:Sukhoi_Superjet_100#Vote_on_flag_removal
- 13 Self-contraditory!!
- 14 External links website for the artical Boeing
- 15 Government influence
- 16 Boeing in Japan
- 17 Boeing Boat Works
- 18 Employment numbers section needs serious improvement or removal
Boeing Red Barn
I was recently on a tour at the Museum of Flight near seattle WA. I got a picture of a red barn they said was the first boeing factory. Is there a reason this is not mentioned in the article? Does anybody who maintains this article think a picture of this barn would be useful? Thanks. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 22:30, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
I came across this reproduced 1938 article on Boeing. Thought it might be of value to improving or verifying the history section for Boeing should someone want to undertake the task. THE BOEING PLANES in Modern Mechanix, Mar., 1938 [ AlbertaSunwapta (talk) 05:16, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
- The link is in the Infobox, and in the Divisions section of the text. It's probably not necessary in the "See also" section too, per the guidelines on those sections. - BillCJ (talk) 10:29, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
References to Airplane Models and Production Totals
The 757 total is incorrect. 1050 were produced, not 1055. There is a tendency to mix Boeing engineering model numbers, with marketing model numbers, with military customer model numbers. This does track with popular nomenclature, but can be quite confusing, even to people who have worked for Boeing for a long time. Boeing model 299 was the U.S. Army B-17. Noting that the 299 came before the 307 isw significant, since the 307 was developed using the 299's wing and major systems. This relationship is correctly noted for the 345 (B-29) and the 377 Stratocruiser. It was the 707 that led to a commercial airplane marketing notion of mdoel numbers as something other than just the sequention number assigned by engineering. Engineering used many variations on the model designations, most of which were ignored by marketing. This led to considerable embarrassment with the MD-95 (really as DC-9 Model 95) was renamed the supposedly skipped 717. The 717 had actually been the engineering model designation for the KC-135 series of tankers and related "EC" planes. When this was pointed out to marketing, they quickly dubbed the MD-95 the 717-200, but I'm pretty sure that this was the first model designation totally invented by markeing. Boeing's practice since the 1930's has been to use a 3+3 model number. The first three digits are the master drawing number, including the feature variations. The first digit of the second three designates the major derivative series, and the second and third digits indicate the intial operator or customer (lots of variation here with leased planes, and planes that are subleased or resold before delivery). So from an engineering model designation point of view, the numbering system has not changed with the 747-800 and the 787-300, -800 and -900. Internal drawing references use the same 3+3 system that has been in place for over 60 years. However, marketing decided to drop the second two digits and adopt the Douglas one and two digit sub-model designation, which is they way Boeing did it during the 1920's and 1930's. In fact, the 707 was developed using the deliberately misleading 367-80 designation to suggest that it was a multi-engined turbo-prop, which is what the 300 series models were.
- The 300 series aren't turboprops; Boeing NEVER, EVER built a turboprop plane. Therefore, the 300s aren't turboprops. --Compdude123 (talk) 01:36, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
There have been some notable departures. For example, the subsidized Boeing SST was designated model 2707-100. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enkidofriend (talk • contribs) 04:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Odd that we have an article on the Boeing P-26 but no mention of it in this article. Also, and I'm not sure about this, but I seem to remember that Boeing built a trimotor passenger plane before the 247 -- Anyone know of it? Sca (talk) 12:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- True, there's nothing on the 1917 to 1927 time in the History section. If you could write something mentioning those and any notable other models, that would be good. -Fnlayson (talk) 03:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
- I Just added info about Boeing's history earlier this afternoon, using info from the history section on Boeing's website. The history on Boeing's website is very extensive and there's narratives containing a lot of info about Boeing and other companies Boeing has purchased over the years. There's also info on pretty much every Boeing aircraft. Here's the link to the website: http://www.boeing.com/history/index.html
- If I missed anything in my edits or made any mistakes, feel free to make changes. --Compdude123 (talk) 01:31, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
SUGAR Aircraft concepts
Could we possibly add in the SUGAR concepts? Maybe it could be in the Future Concepts section. Here's a link that may be helpful. http://aviationweek.typepad.com/files/boeing_sugar_phase_i_final_review_v5.pdf Thanks! 220.127.116.11 (talk) 22:01, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Boeing updating elements of the Boeing entry
Hello everybody. I'm Todd Blecher with Boeing's Corporate Communications department in Chicago. We appreciate the efforts of everybody who works on this entry. I do have a question for the community. Elements of the entry are outdated, such as the information about the US-EU trade case and Boeing's environmental record. How can I best help the community update those and other elements of this overview of our company?
- Thanks for asking Todd. I'll give you my two cents. Pointers to reliably sourced (i.e., secondary sources) articles that support areas of the article that are unsourced today, or to articles of the same caliber that cover aspects of Boeing that might be important to an encyclopedia article about Boeing but are not covered in the WP article today, are very helpful. You are, indeed, doing the right thing by not editing Boeing-related Wikipedia articles yourself! Cheers. N2e (talk) 21:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Boeing's intentions with commercial space
This topic seems to not be covered in the current Boeing article. This source—Boeing flags its intentions in commercial space, BBC News, 2010-07-23, accessed 2010-08-04.—provides a verifiably sourced set of information about Boeing's plans in the growing commercial space industry. This is the first article I've read that is as explicit and clear on this subject. Cheers. N2e (talk) 20:17, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
- 367-80 Stratoliner Prototype, N70700, MASDC, November 12, 1973
- EC-137D Airborne Warning and Control System Prototype, 71-1408, Boeing Field, Seattle, June 18, 1973
- 727-63 General Electric Unducted Fan Testbed, N32720, Mojave Airport, November 9, 1986
- 747-121 General Electric Engine Testbed, N747GE, Kramer Junction, California, August 24, 1999
- 1 737-900 Prototype, N737X, Edwards Air Force Base, November 2, 2000 NT-43A Radar Test Bed, 73-1155, Death Valley, January 24, 2003
- 1 767-200 Airborne Surveillance Testbed, N767BA, Southern California Air Logistics Center, Victorville, June 17, 2005
- 1 757-200 F-22 Avionics Testbed, N757A, Air Force Plant 42, Palmdale, California, February 13, 2006
- 747-273C Evergreen International Supertanker, N470EV, San Bernardino, May 31, 2006
- 720-051B Honeywell engine testbed N720H, Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, December 27, 2007
- 757-225 Honeywell engine testbed N757HW, Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, February 1, 2010
- 4 787-8 Prototype N7874, Mesa Gateway Airport, Arizona, May 23, 2010
- Source: http://www.air-and-space.com/Death%20Valley%20sighting.htm .... LanceBarber (talk) 04:54, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Duopol!!, Geerman American Böing?, American identity?
The duopol of Boeing and Airbus and its reasons (high market entrance costs...) should be mentioned!! It could be added, that Böing/Boeing had German heritage? (relevance: support of the USA in WWI and WWII) Maybe it should be added, that US-Americans identify themselves with Boeing and that there is much negativity towards Airbus in the US media/public? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 23:12, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
- Does not seem that relevant here as this article is about the company. Its founder is covered at William Boeing. -fnlayson (talk) 23:29, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Boeing to close Wichita, Kansas plant
Boeing started in Wichita, Kansas in 1938 and now will close by end of 2013. During World War II, the Wichita employment peaked at 29,795 in December 1943.
- Quote "Employment at the plant peaked during World War II as the company churned out four bombers a day. Its 40,000 workers included President Barack Obama's beloved grandmother Madelyn Dunham, known as "Toot," who did her part for the war effort by working the night shift as a supervisor on the B-29 bomber assembly line." NOTE: I don't know the correct maximum employees during WWII, because I've seen numbers from 30K to 40K region.
Historical photos and information about Wichita plant, since Stearman Aircraft:
The phrase "American multinational" is self-contradictory. Something is either American or not American, and it is either multinational or not multinational.
In reality, The Boeing Company is incorporated in the United States of America, it is taxed by the United States Government and its state governments. The Boeing Company is American, notwithstanding that it might have some subsidiaries of cooperating corporations in other countries.22.214.171.124 (talk) 00:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
- 1) Boeing has always been defined as a multinational corporation for a long time since they deal with contracts that are abroad and enforced under WTO rules and they are based & headquartered here in the United States. There's a lot of google search terms for this so the label is properly applied. There's even a wiki article on this List of multinational corporations. 2) I've reverted a lot of the changes you've made. For example, there is no "Warplane & helicopter" nor is there "civil aviation" market in any trade market whatsoever but rather it's under Aerospace and/or Defense ie:  3) The stuff about the Saturn V Stage S-IC? Boeing won the contract to build that SPECIFIC stage while others had responsibilities of different parts of the rocket. S-IC - Boeing, S-II - North American Aviation, S-IVB - Douglas Aircraft, F-1 engines - Rocketdyne ViriiK (talk) 02:27, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
- A well written article avoids confusing the reader by stating facts in a clear way that avoids ambiguity and confusion. It is true and correct that The Boeing Company is an American multinational, however that wording is confusing and needed revision. It is not the facts that are at issue here, it is the way the facts are presented. I revised the article to describe Boeing as a "United States-based multinational". 126.96.36.199 (talk) 22:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi editors! Can you please review my site https://sites.google.com/site/wwwboeingairplaneinfocom/ so that you guys can review it and put it under the external links section? Thanks.
- Sorry but we only add external links to websites that add value to the article that would be otherwise missing, your website doesnt really add anything to the article and as a personal website is not a reliable source. Remember also that this is not a web directory. MilborneOne (talk) 18:50, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Please someone provide information about the US Governments influence on the company through shares (if any), laws, contracts or other means of inluence. I believe this is important information as Boeings main competitor, EADS is half owned by the French (22%), German (22%) and Spanish (5%) governments who strongly influence the company's decision-making, as witnessed for example in the recent EADS-BAE merger talks.ArticunoWebon (talk) 13:53, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Boeing in Japan
Here is a source:
- "Airbus struggles to loosen Boeing's grip on Fortress Japan." Reuters. September 2, 2013.
Boeing Boat Works
"25 years or so ago I went to a remote cottage in British Columbia and in one of the old boathouses on the property was one of those classic old 1920 or 1930's wooden cruisers with "Boeing Boat Works" on a metal plate on it. Does anyone know anything about this part of Boeing's history? AlbertaSunwapta (talk) 20:06, 26 October 2008 (UTC)"
I just copied (restored) the above from a deleted version of Talk as I just came across the article reference below and the comment quoted below along with it. Coincidentally, the property I visited was owned by a family that had substantial timberland in BC and the property was once apparently owned by a wealthy a American. (Someday I'll try to remember to ask what became of the cruiser.)
"Here’s some history of Boeing Boats, courtesy of the Peninsula Daily News:"..,
"In the early 20th century, Boeing acquired substantial holdings in timberland as well as lumber mills in the Pacific Northwest."... "To keep his fledgling business afloat, Boeing’s airplane company began building bedroom furniture, cabinets and boats."  By David G. Sellars PDN Maritime Columnist
"Tad Roberts says: August 23, 2011 at 3:09 pm Carl,
It seems Boeing Aircraft of Canada existed from the end of 1928 until 1937. They built quite a few boats, many of them commercial fishing seiners(approx. 75′-85′), I find a dozen Boeing built boats in the current Canadian Ships Registry. The largest was Taconite, the 125′ Tom Halliday designed Boeing family yacht launched in 1930. She was the summer home of Mrs. Bertha Boeing from the 30′s until her death in 1977, and she was always moored in Vancouver. Apparently Boeing had at some point been involved in a taconite mine….perhaps that’s were the (reported) $400,000 (1930) dollars to build her came from….Deerleap II (85′ motoryacht) is another well known product of the Boeing yard. Antiques Afloat reports that the yard built a 130′ car ferry in 1931 (depression years) for the city of North Vancouver. Also in 1928-31 they built 3 stock 48′ triple-cabin cruisers with cedar hulls, yellow cedar decking, and teak cabins with Hall-Scott engines."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlbertaSunwapta (talk • contribs) 02:41, 3 December 2013 (UTC) AlbertaSunwapta (talk) 04:58, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Employment numbers section needs serious improvement or removal
In its current form, the Employment numbers section is not encyclopedic and adds little value to the article because there is no context for the numbers. Worse, we're treating WP as a news site, including information that changes constantly and needs frequent updating. If re-creating tables that are already published on Boeing's website is the best we can do, then we need to remove the tables from the article and simply list the link to Boeing's Employment Numbers webpage in the "External links" section, assuming we agree that is worthy of inclusion at all. It is unwise to include information that is only correct at a particular point in time, changes regularly and needs constant updating. Again, WP is not a news site and it is not a collection of indiscriminate facts without context.
A prose section that discusses the ebbs and flows of Boeing's workforce size in relation to events over the course of time would be encyclopedic. A better written section would answer questions like: How quickly did the size of Boeing's workforce grow over the company's first decades? How much did employment increase due to wars? How much did it contract at wars' ends? How much and at what times did employment expand and contract due to economic downturns and upturns? Other ideas include comparing the number of employees in BCA to the number in Defense and relating that to revenue per employee in each division. Facts in context are encyclopedic; random tables are not.
- DAVID G. SELLARS ON THE WATERFRONT: An original Boeing that never leaves the ground The yacht Wyrill rests at its moorage at John Wayne Marina in Sequim. Peninsula Daily News
- A 62′ Boeing…. Boat Posted on August 23, 2011 by Carl Cramer