4 ms·
I'm generally blown away at the audacity people have to suggest casually changing any FAA regulation, considering how good they are at their jobs...
by diminoten 7y ago
I'm generally blown away at the audacity people have to suggest casually changing any FAA regulation, considering how good they are at their jobs...
- Twixes 7y agoWell, clearly they didn't do their job that well in this case
- diminoten 7y agoBoeing fucked up, not the FAA. The FAA is the one preventing Boeing from flying these planes because they're not safe!
- berkut 7y agoErm, it's pretty obvious something was wrong at the FAA, in that it seems fairly clear they let Boeing dictate terms to them on multiple occasions, and effectively overrule them. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/new-questions-raised-on-safety-of-both-737-max-and-787-dreamliner/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/new-q... Also, the FAA were the last aviation regulator to ground the MAX.
- diminoten 7y agoThe FAA's goal is to prevent aircraft related accidents. While you may not agree about the sharpness of their pencils or the color of their uniforms or some other tangential nonsense, flying is insanely safe in America because of them. They're so good at their jobs, you should be asking what they know that you don't when they make decisions, not trying to correct them.
- berkut 7y agoHistorically, yes. There was a reason previously the CAA and EASA were historically happy accept the FAA's certification for new aircraft, on the assumption the FAA were very good at its job. That no longer seems to be the case (given the fact that EASA now want to have their pilots fly the MAX before it returns to service), and there's well documented evidence (many news articles over the past few months talk about this) showing that over the past 10 years, the FAA's budget was drastically cut, forcing them to effectively outsource certification in part to Boeing to "self-certify".
- diminoten 7y agoSo there have been fatal airline accidents in the past 10 years? Interesting, I guess you're also going to claim they've been hidden and only you have the secret knowledge.
- kalleboo 7y agoLion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopia Airlines Flight 302 were caused by the FAAs failure to adequately regulate the safety of the airplane type.
- diminoten 7y agoNope, as the FAA has no jurisdiction over those flights. The FAA isn't the global airline police.
- kalleboo 7y agoThey are the Boeing police though, which is where they were delinquent in their duties. > The FAA isn't the global airline police. Then why were they on-site in Indonesia doing the investigation?
- diminoten 7y agoThey aren't the global Boeing police, and doing an investigation doesn't mean you're in charge or capable of regulating the entire planet. But you know all this, and are just being a troll, so I'm done.
- philwelch 7y agoThe problem is that the 737-MAX behaves so differently from the base 737 that it shouldn’t be regulated as the same plane. Definitely a regulatory gap that can and should be addressed. Boeing built an unsafe plane and definitely exploited the issue, but the whole point of regulations is to stop a company like Boeing from shipping an unsafe plane.
- ken 7y agoWeren't they just as unsafe before the FAA grounded them? The FAA are the agency that originally certified them to fly. The FAA was actually one of the last regulators in the world to ground the 737-MAX [1]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX_groundings#Regulators https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX_groundings#Regu...
- loeg 7y agoI don't see how you parse that out of my comment without some extremely uncharitable interpretation. I haven't suggested any particular change, nor that any particular change be carried out "casually," without due consideration.
- diminoten 7y agoYou were being uncharitable, why are you surprised it was interpreted that way?