6 ms·

It's the White House that is responsible for doing that "house cleaning" of the FAA's upper management, since those folks are political appointees that serve at

It's the White House that is responsible for doing that "house cleaning" of the FAA's upper management, since those folks are political appointees that serve at the pleasure of the President. I don't know about you, but I don't see the current admin prioritizing the flushing out of regulators in bed with industry. That's why I say name some names.

nolok 7y ago
Just a remainder: at the start of his presidency, Trump wanted to appoint his own personal pilot at the head of the FAA. So yes, don't expect too much from them in cleaning the upper levels.
- briandear 7y ago
  Maybe appointing a pilot would be a good idea. Probably better than appointing someone who never flew an airplane. Obama’s appointee had zero aviation experience. He had transportation experience, but appointing a non-pilot to the head of the FAA is like appointing a non-doctor to be Surgeon General.
  - V_Terranova_Jr 7y ago
    More important is to appoint someone with the right motivations and with a technical background. A pilot with a good formal technical background might be a fine FAA leader, but so might someone with technical expertise in the operations of the national airspace, or a Chief Engineer type involved with aircraft certification. What's critical though is that they remember they are supposed to work on behalf of the people, not the short-term economic interests of the regulated, and not to see themselves as firstly serving political patrons.
  - nabla9 7y ago
    Trump's personal pilot nominee (John Dunkin) was not qualified. He was the man in charge of Trump's presidential campaign’s air fleet. There were multiple incidents. One of the pilots was convicted violent felon that had to be fired. The landings were constantly so horrible that press joked that nobody survives covering Mike Pence. It all ended with serious incident where one of the crews overshot the runway resulting shut down of Laguardia airport. Mike Pence was on board. I mean what it tells you about a man who can't even hire competent pilots in America.
    - dieselerator 7y ago
      > It all ended with serious incident where one of the crews overshot the runway resulting shut down of Laguardia airport. Mike Pence was on board. The aircraft you are referring to was chartered from Eastern Airlines (since acquired by a different airline) and flown by Eastern Airline pilots. [1] [1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Air_Lines_(2015)> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Air_Lines_(2015)>
      - nabla9 7y ago
        John Dunkin was responsible for the fleet, selecting airline that didn't train their pilots enough. He was responsible for decision to vet or not vet the pilots and their experience. > The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident to be: >The first officer's failure to attain the proper touchdown point and the flight crew's failure to call for a go-around, which resulted in the airplane landing more than halfway down the runway. Contributing to the incident were, the first officer's initiation of the landing flare at a relatively high altitude and his delay in reducing the throttles to idle, the captain's delay in manually deploying the speed brakes after touchdown, the captain's lack of command authority, and a lack of robust training provided by the operator to support the flight crew's decision-making concerning when to call for a go-around. https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?EventID=20161027X20715&AKey=1&RType=Final&IType=IA https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?E...
jorblumesea 7y ago
Agreed, as much as the current administration has pledged to "drain the swamp" the hill is looking just as corrupt as ever, if not more so. Instead of corrupt industry insiders and lobbyists, we just have corrupt industry outsiders or those who will immediately bow to the administration.
drevil-v2 7y ago
I'd like to point out that vast majority of this lax enforcement of FAA oversight of the Boeing 737 Max certification happened during the Obama Administration by political appointees of Barrack Obama and the Democratic Party. I am centre-left political (socially liberal, fiscally conservative) and It really really bothers me to see the double standards. Once you start to notice the pattern of one-sided appropriation of blame in pretty much every fking scenario, you end up discounting any criticism of republicans as bias.
- stevehawk 7y ago
  It's really disappointing to see this comment downvoted. Apparently we're all fine with blaming the current administration for not firing them but we're not ok with blaming a previous administration for hiring them? We've also had countless posts talking negatively on the very merger that lead this iteration of Boeing (McDonnel-Douglas) with no regard for the administration that basically encouraged the merger. It's okay to admit it guys: both parties suck and are corporate shills.
  - unlinked_dll 7y ago
    > Apparently we're all fine with blaming the current administration for not firing them but we're not ok with blaming a previous administration for hiring them One of these two parties has the ability to affect change. It's not the latter.
    - kovac 7y ago
      The official report just came out. On what grounds would the existing administration just fire upper level management at an early stage? The appropriate response would be to force FAA to ground the planes (if and which FAA did not do themselves), and wait for the official report and then open an investigation in to Boeing and FAA. Time is a factor to take into account.
  - 1shooner 7y ago
    Appointing someone that ends up breaking the law vs. keeping someone that is known to have. These are not the same thing.
pyrosome 7y ago
More effective would be to put in place a lengthy blackout period (years) for aviation industry employees before allowing them to join the FAA and vice versa. The point being to significantly degrade the influence and political utility of "revolving door" hires.
- jakoblorz 7y ago
  Why would anybody then switch from industry to the FAA? No industry related pay until hired by the FAA - thats a bold transition
- mobilefriendly 7y ago
  I'm a former Congressional staffer -- these types of blanket restrictions on employment are thought to be unconstitutional (like a blanket noncompete). People have a right to careers. Plus the FAA needs industry expertise. Need a different solution.
bagacrap 7y ago
Why wouldn't Trump want to fire someone at the FAA? He fires staff constantly. Would be a strong publicity stunt to make it seem like he's delivering on draining the swamp.

nolok 7y ago

Just a remainder: at the start of his presidency, Trump wanted to appoint his own personal pilot at the head of the FAA. So yes, don't expect too much from them in cleaning the upper levels.

briandear 7y ago
Maybe appointing a pilot would be a good idea. Probably better than appointing someone who never flew an airplane. Obama’s appointee had zero aviation experience. He had transportation experience, but appointing a non-pilot to the head of the FAA is like appointing a non-doctor to be Surgeon General.
- V_Terranova_Jr 7y ago
  More important is to appoint someone with the right motivations and with a technical background. A pilot with a good formal technical background might be a fine FAA leader, but so might someone with technical expertise in the operations of the national airspace, or a Chief Engineer type involved with aircraft certification. What's critical though is that they remember they are supposed to work on behalf of the people, not the short-term economic interests of the regulated, and not to see themselves as firstly serving political patrons.
- nabla9 7y ago
  Trump's personal pilot nominee (John Dunkin) was not qualified. He was the man in charge of Trump's presidential campaign’s air fleet. There were multiple incidents. One of the pilots was convicted violent felon that had to be fired. The landings were constantly so horrible that press joked that nobody survives covering Mike Pence. It all ended with serious incident where one of the crews overshot the runway resulting shut down of Laguardia airport. Mike Pence was on board. I mean what it tells you about a man who can't even hire competent pilots in America.
  - dieselerator 7y ago
    > It all ended with serious incident where one of the crews overshot the runway resulting shut down of Laguardia airport. Mike Pence was on board. The aircraft you are referring to was chartered from Eastern Airlines (since acquired by a different airline) and flown by Eastern Airline pilots. [1] [1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Air_Lines_(2015)> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Air_Lines_(2015)>
    - nabla9 7y ago
      John Dunkin was responsible for the fleet, selecting airline that didn't train their pilots enough. He was responsible for decision to vet or not vet the pilots and their experience. > The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident to be: >The first officer's failure to attain the proper touchdown point and the flight crew's failure to call for a go-around, which resulted in the airplane landing more than halfway down the runway. Contributing to the incident were, the first officer's initiation of the landing flare at a relatively high altitude and his delay in reducing the throttles to idle, the captain's delay in manually deploying the speed brakes after touchdown, the captain's lack of command authority, and a lack of robust training provided by the operator to support the flight crew's decision-making concerning when to call for a go-around. https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?EventID=20161027X20715&AKey=1&RType=Final&IType=IA https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?E...

jorblumesea 7y ago

Agreed, as much as the current administration has pledged to "drain the swamp" the hill is looking just as corrupt as ever, if not more so. Instead of corrupt industry insiders and lobbyists, we just have corrupt industry outsiders or those who will immediately bow to the administration.

drevil-v2 7y ago

I'd like to point out that vast majority of this lax enforcement of FAA oversight of the Boeing 737 Max certification happened during the Obama Administration by political appointees of Barrack Obama and the Democratic Party. I am centre-left political (socially liberal, fiscally conservative) and It really really bothers me to see the double standards. Once you start to notice the pattern of one-sided appropriation of blame in pretty much every fking scenario, you end up discounting any criticism of republicans as bias.

stevehawk 7y ago
It's really disappointing to see this comment downvoted. Apparently we're all fine with blaming the current administration for not firing them but we're not ok with blaming a previous administration for hiring them? We've also had countless posts talking negatively on the very merger that lead this iteration of Boeing (McDonnel-Douglas) with no regard for the administration that basically encouraged the merger. It's okay to admit it guys: both parties suck and are corporate shills.
- unlinked_dll 7y ago
  > Apparently we're all fine with blaming the current administration for not firing them but we're not ok with blaming a previous administration for hiring them One of these two parties has the ability to affect change. It's not the latter.
  - kovac 7y ago
    The official report just came out. On what grounds would the existing administration just fire upper level management at an early stage? The appropriate response would be to force FAA to ground the planes (if and which FAA did not do themselves), and wait for the official report and then open an investigation in to Boeing and FAA. Time is a factor to take into account.
- 1shooner 7y ago
  Appointing someone that ends up breaking the law vs. keeping someone that is known to have. These are not the same thing.

pyrosome 7y ago

More effective would be to put in place a lengthy blackout period (years) for aviation industry employees before allowing them to join the FAA and vice versa. The point being to significantly degrade the influence and political utility of "revolving door" hires.

jakoblorz 7y ago
Why would anybody then switch from industry to the FAA? No industry related pay until hired by the FAA - thats a bold transition
mobilefriendly 7y ago
I'm a former Congressional staffer -- these types of blanket restrictions on employment are thought to be unconstitutional (like a blanket noncompete). People have a right to careers. Plus the FAA needs industry expertise. Need a different solution.

bagacrap 7y ago

Why wouldn't Trump want to fire someone at the FAA? He fires staff constantly. Would be a strong publicity stunt to make it seem like he's delivering on draining the swamp.