Video: Complete Seattle Times interview with Jim Albaugh

Seattle Times aerospace reporter Dominic Gates sat down with Jim Albaugh, Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO, in a wide-ranging discussion about the future of the company. The write-up of the interview provides a good overview of the topics covered, ranging from the location of future aircraft programs, the relationship between Boeing and its unions, as well as outsourcing and protection of intellectual property. 
In addition to the print re-cap of the interview, the Times has published the hour-long video of the unedited interview. I highly recommend viewing it start to finish, especially if you wear (or want to wear) a Boeing badge.

8 Responses to Video: Complete Seattle Times interview with Jim Albaugh

  1. bcit March 2, 2010 at 10:30 pm #

    Jim Albaugh is 100 percent correct in everything he said…

  2. Mr. X March 2, 2010 at 11:00 pm #

    Did any catch that at 15:58 he said that there was 60,000 employess in the Puget Sound area and then he looks across the room quickly and says 75,000 employess in the Puget Sound Area. Are the layoffs going to be greater than previously disclosed 10,000 company wide?

  3. Lee March 3, 2010 at 12:55 am #

    Yes! Jim Albaugh is 100 percent correct in everything he said… bears repeating,

    and everyone around here (meaning the entire population of Washington State) except a handful of clueless executives has known it for quite some time.

  4. Vero Venia March 3, 2010 at 9:56 am #

    I tend to agree with Mr. Jim Albaugh that there are things you just don’t want to outsource.
    However, outsourcing is necessary and can be very productive. One of the most difficult part is to evaluate a contractor’s capability. You can not assume that a contractor who says, “Yes, we can.” can really do the work within the required quality, schedule and cost. Many contractors say “Yes, we can” only to obtain the market.
    You can’t just specify the work and expect it to be done perfectly by the contractor on schedule, on quality and on cost without any direct and continuous supervision.

  5. Hem March 3, 2010 at 12:52 pm #

    I find it interesting that Mr. Albaugh was vague about a new single aisle narrowbody. He mentioned that they may upgrade the 737 or start from scratch on a new narrowbody.

    Perhaps I’m missing something but I don’t see how new variants of the 737 can compete against some of the newer entrants in the long term. Bombardier’s C-Series is a phenomenal airplane with brand new technologies as is the Embraer 190 family. But a new 737, even with new wings and engines, is still a 737.

    I suppose part of the dilemma is making an airplane that is type common with the -300, -700, -800, etc. as this allows operators to seamlessly put the right sized airplane on any routing. Just looking at flight deck design is a great example. There are many features on the NextGen flight deck that are holdovers from the 300 series – features that are completely automated on the A320.

  6. Hem March 3, 2010 at 12:58 pm #

    Sorry for the duplicate posts. Its what happens with a slow computer and a itchy “submit” finger…

  7. Anonymous March 6, 2010 at 12:22 pm #

    I’m sure Jim will say that outsourcing is a bad thing, but the Board of directors and McNerney will likely have little room to compromise. The 787 took 7 years to develop, and that’s with a brand new EVERYTHING. It’s no small feat what Boeing engineers have done. But it also validates in management’s eyes that they can screw up royally, and have engineering save them. It’s BS.

    Next time, they’ll stick with the same model, threaten to outsource everything from WA, including the engineering since engineering costs are way lower in other parts of the USA (a starting engineer making $55k in Seattle is poor, but $55k in S.C. is living like a king), hold a competition just like last time, and simply have a more realistic schedule compared to last time.

    It was poor planning and scheduling. If management had simply had less Kool-aid, they would have realized their mistake and simply said it will take 7 years. If they said that, then there wouldn’t be the fiasco with continually delaying the program and the resulting damage to the reputation. It’s the look that concerns management, not the substance.

    Now I like Jim, and he cares about the substance, I just worry his bosses don’t.

  8. Houston General Contractors June 25, 2010 at 5:10 am #

    Excellent job.