61 ms·

Fix: Make Engineers actually liable for the correct classification of systems and require signed justification for NOT defaulting to the highest possible standa

• ggm 8y ago
  ...which demands a fully independent FAA. Not the one we seem to have which appears on the face of it, compromised by the consequences of embedded self assessment and 'same type' rules. Why was it in the national interest to have Boeing get 'same type' ? Because of the cost of competing with airbus. The regulator was hamstrung in the interests of 'efficiency' (I'm not an American and this is an argument i read which resonates. I'd welcome good rebuttal)
• rusticpenn 8y ago
  This also causes a lot of over engineering. ( Which maybe good for Boeing right about now)
  • ggm 8y ago
    I'd dispute it causes the over-engineering. Engineering principles cause safety margins, and regulators enforce safety margins. As the industry decides it can live with reduced safety margins they get reduced. When they get too close to a risk window, they get raised. I know the over-engineering term exists, but I think it's based on flawed logic. Not having margins results in under-engineering, which is significantly worse in almost all cases. Its not a symmetric world out there. Some things are worse than others.