3 ms·

Are you asking whether Singapore addressing the airworthiness of the Boeing 737 Max 8 would automatically extend to the USA and due to other agreements to the E

by chx 8y ago

Are you asking whether Singapore addressing the airworthiness of the Boeing 737 Max 8 would automatically extend to the USA and due to other agreements to the EU , Canada and Australia? No, the Airworthiness Directives are legally enforcable and it's a matter of very fundamental principle no country can create law in another. It would not automatically follow but it's basically unthinkable they wouldn't issue similar directives in rapid succession. For example, when the 787 got an Airworthiness Directive in 2013 https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=14233 https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsI... then the EASA adopted it https://www.easa.europa.eu/newsroom-and-events/news/boeing-787-statement https://www.easa.europa.eu/newsroom-and-events/news/boeing-7... immediately but it needed to adopt it -- the FAA has no power in the EU.

tedunangst 8y ago
Does airworthiness (USA: true; Singapore: false) evaluate to true or false? What does such a bilateral agreement mean? If I make a new plane, am I required to get Singapore's approval before I can fly it in the US?
- chx 8y ago
  Singapore didn't yet trigger a false. It's close but not yet. Banning the plane is not an Airworthiness Directive. If you make a new plane and you want to fly it in FAA controlled airspace you need to get FAA approval and if you want to fly it in Singapore airspace you need SG CAAS approval, however due to the bilateral agreement, if you have a FAA approval this is a non-issue. Basically you get to skip the entire approval process except the very last step where the authority issues the approval itself. And, again, if Singapore did the unthinkable and deemed the 737 Max 8 not airworthy before the FAA did, then ... yes, everyone else would follow but that's not how this is done. Singapore practically says in the way this is done that the FAA should issue an AD and then they and everyone else would follow. To be honest, it's extremely likely at this point the FAA will cave in and issue a temporary AD within the next 24 hours until the dust clears. Right now they issued a "Continued Airworthiness Notification" https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/CAN_2019_03.pdf https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/CAN_2019_03.pdf and going straight against that is ... even in the Trump era, that's impossible. It would, without exaggeration, unravel the fabric of smooth international air travel. According to https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-witnesses/ethiopian-plane-smoked-and-shuddered-before-deadly-plunge-idUSKBN1QS1LJ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-witness... the plane "was making a strange rattling noise and trailed smoke and debris" which very well might mean it was a very different issue to the Lion Air one.

by chx 8y ago

tedunangst 8y ago

Does airworthiness (USA: true; Singapore: false) evaluate to true or false? What does such a bilateral agreement mean? If I make a new plane, am I required to get Singapore's approval before I can fly it in the US?

chx 8y ago
Singapore didn't yet trigger a false. It's close but not yet. Banning the plane is not an Airworthiness Directive. If you make a new plane and you want to fly it in FAA controlled airspace you need to get FAA approval and if you want to fly it in Singapore airspace you need SG CAAS approval, however due to the bilateral agreement, if you have a FAA approval this is a non-issue. Basically you get to skip the entire approval process except the very last step where the authority issues the approval itself. And, again, if Singapore did the unthinkable and deemed the 737 Max 8 not airworthy before the FAA did, then ... yes, everyone else would follow but that's not how this is done. Singapore practically says in the way this is done that the FAA should issue an AD and then they and everyone else would follow. To be honest, it's extremely likely at this point the FAA will cave in and issue a temporary AD within the next 24 hours until the dust clears. Right now they issued a "Continued Airworthiness Notification" https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/CAN_2019_03.pdf https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/CAN_2019_03.pdf and going straight against that is ... even in the Trump era, that's impossible. It would, without exaggeration, unravel the fabric of smooth international air travel. According to https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-witnesses/ethiopian-plane-smoked-and-shuddered-before-deadly-plunge-idUSKBN1QS1LJ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-witness... the plane "was making a strange rattling noise and trailed smoke and debris" which very well might mean it was a very different issue to the Lion Air one.