Where will MAX be built?

Crosscut Seattle, an on-line only news outlet (and one we consider to be quite good) does occasional in-depth think pieces. Today it has one about the burning question to Washington State: where will the Boeing 737 MAX be built?

We’re alluded to this question and potential sites in several previous posts, including our recent one about the earthquake in San Antonio (TX), which is suggested to us to be on the short list for the MAX site.

Crosscut is known for calling shots as it sees them and it fires one at the King County Aerospace Alliance formed by the county executive with the MAX in mind.

Crosscut’s conclusion is largely correct, but it misses the point: King County government has been AWOL for years in promoting aerospace, a short-coming of previous executives who rested on complacency.

It’s about time the county got in on the action.

5 Comments on “Where will MAX be built?

  1. Can King County, and the State of Washington come up with an incentive that will off-set any action by the IAM against Boeing? Can they simply come up with an “offer they (Boeing) simply cannot refuse”? I am sure Boeing is getting offers from many right to work states, in addition to Texas.

    The B-737MAX is really up for grabs, and I would guess, when it is developed, the B-777NG will be, too.

    It is Boeing in the driver’s seat now, not the IAM, King County, or the State of Washington. This is going to be interesting.

  2. Where will MAX be built? That question will be in the air as long as McNerney is at the helm of Boeing. But will he still be there by the time the decision is finalized?

    Obviously JM is determined to move as much production as practical to a “right to work” state to get his way with the unions. That’s the mantra of a captain trying to steer his ship out of a somewhat desperate situation. To move to Texas, South Carolina or Kansas would make little difference for the future of Boeing. This last attempt is a bit like trying to shift the deck chairs on the Titanic.

    There is a trend right now among the aircraft manufacturers to go into the aircraft maintenance business. But I think Boeing itself has an urgent need for a complete overall.

  3. If you look at MAX as a stopgap until the NSA is built, Boeing already has existing, functioning, paid for 737 production lines. Why invest in new buildings and a new setup for something that may have a limited life. The MAX’s competitive longevity against the Airbus and Bombardier products won’t be determined until all three planes are flying and the numbers roll in.

  4. TC :
    The MAX’s competitive longevity against the Airbus and Bombardier products won’t be determined until all three planes are flying and the numbers roll in.

    The viability of the MAX is a much more important issue than the actual location where it will be built. If the 787 (and 747-8) is the product that could brake Boeing’s back, the 737MAX (and the 777X) is the one that could actually save it.

  5. I’m not sure what this “4.6 earthquake in San Antonio” is supposed to mean. There are very few (if not zero) areas of North American that immune to at least a moderately strong earthquake – 5.5 or so. Indiana had one about 3 years ago that was 5.0 in both the Evansville and St. Louis areas – are you ruling both of them out for future factories? Seattle and the Puget Sound area in general are open to the triple threat: earthquake, volcanic eruption, and tsunami (possibly all at one time). Heavens! Let’s move to somewhere safe and flat, far from any volcanoes. How about the old Grumman factory on Long Island? Oops – here comes at Category 3 hurricane. Well, there’s always Joplin Missouri…


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *