3 ms·

In one it helps them, pushing the narrative that more training would have avoided the disaster, on the other hand this questions if MAX should have been approve

In one it helps them, pushing the narrative that more training would have avoided the disaster, on the other hand this questions if MAX should have been approved by FAA as a 737 variant that does not require re-training.

tomglynch 7y ago
If I'm not mistaken, Boeing themselves were the auditor for this on behalf of the FAA.
- tremon 7y ago
  It is both. FAA establishes guidelines for planes and designs to meet, and the airlines (not just Boeing) are responsible for certifying and rating their planes according to those guidelines. This is not simply a case of regulatory capture, the FAA simply doesn't have the expertise and in-depth knowledge to perform completely independent verification. Requiring the FAA to do so might be prohibitively expensive, so this arrangement is the result of pragmatic realism more than regulatory capture. It does require a great amount of trust between all partners though, and it seems to me Boeing has been more than happy to skirt their responsibility in this case.
  - dillonmckay 7y ago
    You say airlines, but I think you mean airplane manufacturers? Perhaps the airplane manufacturer and certifier should be separate manufacturers? How is the NHTSA able to certify crash tests for every make and model vehicle sold each year?
    - tomglynch 7y ago
      The FAA delegate much of the certification to Boeing [1], and to me it seems either the FAA is underfunded, or Boeing was in bed with the FAA to push things through quicker. [1] https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/failed-certification-faa-missed-safety-issues-in-the-737-max-system-implicated-in-the-lion-air-crash/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faile...
      - salawat 7y ago
        The only reason the FAA delegates is because they could no longer pay a competitive salary to retain aeronautical engineering talent given the better pay in the private sector. So they delegated. This completely missing the point of independent certification, validation, and acting as a proxy for the "customer of first resort" is the entire point of a regulator. If you can't sell an independently staffed regulator on your design, flying their own test regime, you shouldn't be making planes period. The new regime basically relegated the FAA to the role of paperwork auditor; a reactive instead of proactive regulatory process.
    - tremon 7y ago
      sorry, yes, I meant manufacturers. Thanks!
CydeWeys 7y ago
They claimed that no training was required to fly this plane (a requirement of it being able to retain the 737 type rating). If it does in fact require additional training then that's very bad for their narrative.

tomglynch 7y ago

If I'm not mistaken, Boeing themselves were the auditor for this on behalf of the FAA.

tremon 7y ago
It is both. FAA establishes guidelines for planes and designs to meet, and the airlines (not just Boeing) are responsible for certifying and rating their planes according to those guidelines. This is not simply a case of regulatory capture, the FAA simply doesn't have the expertise and in-depth knowledge to perform completely independent verification. Requiring the FAA to do so might be prohibitively expensive, so this arrangement is the result of pragmatic realism more than regulatory capture. It does require a great amount of trust between all partners though, and it seems to me Boeing has been more than happy to skirt their responsibility in this case.
- dillonmckay 7y ago
  You say airlines, but I think you mean airplane manufacturers? Perhaps the airplane manufacturer and certifier should be separate manufacturers? How is the NHTSA able to certify crash tests for every make and model vehicle sold each year?
  - tomglynch 7y ago
    The FAA delegate much of the certification to Boeing [1], and to me it seems either the FAA is underfunded, or Boeing was in bed with the FAA to push things through quicker. [1] https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/failed-certification-faa-missed-safety-issues-in-the-737-max-system-implicated-in-the-lion-air-crash/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faile...
    - salawat 7y ago
      The only reason the FAA delegates is because they could no longer pay a competitive salary to retain aeronautical engineering talent given the better pay in the private sector. So they delegated. This completely missing the point of independent certification, validation, and acting as a proxy for the "customer of first resort" is the entire point of a regulator. If you can't sell an independently staffed regulator on your design, flying their own test regime, you shouldn't be making planes period. The new regime basically relegated the FAA to the role of paperwork auditor; a reactive instead of proactive regulatory process.
  - tremon 7y ago
    sorry, yes, I meant manufacturers. Thanks!

CydeWeys 7y ago

They claimed that no training was required to fly this plane (a requirement of it being able to retain the 737 type rating). If it does in fact require additional training then that's very bad for their narrative.