4 ms·

> 737 MAX 7 — the still-uncertified smallest member of its newest jet family The first would be reasonable if there were hundreds of such planes already flying

> 737 MAX 7 — the still-uncertified smallest member of its newest jet family The first would be reasonable if there were hundreds of such planes already flying and grounding them would result in huge disruptions. But this plane is not yet certified. How can you go to the FAA with a half-baked product and tell them that you'll get it right eventually? Considering the whole MAX history?

bombcar 3y ago
And how does this not apply to the bigger ones? Or does it and they already got that exemption? Many questions, few answers.
- aidenn0 3y ago
  The FAA is free to apply different standards to planes already in operation than to planes not yet built. To a certain extent, that's the only sane way to make forward progress on the standards (the other two choices involve airlines continuously retrofitting their fleets or the standards never changing).
sofixa 3y ago
> How can you go to the FAA with a half-baked product and tell them that you'll get it right eventually That's the beauty of it, Boeing until recently certified themselves, with minimal FAA oversight. It's precisely because of the MCAS fiasco that there is actual scrutiny from the FAA, and much more importantly, from the actually competent people at EASA that will actually check things instead of trusting Boeing's bullshit. Note that this is actually unprecedented, normally air authorities trust each other, but FAA dropped the ball so bad with Boeing that EASA had to step in and insert itself into the process and stop automatically assuming the FAA did it's job.
- noir_lord 3y ago
  The long term effects are potentially pretty bad for the US (and it's aerospace industry generally), if the FAA is no longer trusted then that's a loss of prestige and a business cost because anyone wanting to sell abroad can expect local regulators to get involved, FAA and EASA have had a bilateral agreement for a while to basically cover a "you do yours and we'll do ours" approach.

bombcar 3y ago

And how does this not apply to the bigger ones? Or does it and they already got that exemption? Many questions, few answers.

aidenn0 3y ago
The FAA is free to apply different standards to planes already in operation than to planes not yet built. To a certain extent, that's the only sane way to make forward progress on the standards (the other two choices involve airlines continuously retrofitting their fleets or the standards never changing).

sofixa 3y ago

> How can you go to the FAA with a half-baked product and tell them that you'll get it right eventually That's the beauty of it, Boeing until recently certified themselves, with minimal FAA oversight. It's precisely because of the MCAS fiasco that there is actual scrutiny from the FAA, and much more importantly, from the actually competent people at EASA that will actually check things instead of trusting Boeing's bullshit. Note that this is actually unprecedented, normally air authorities trust each other, but FAA dropped the ball so bad with Boeing that EASA had to step in and insert itself into the process and stop automatically assuming the FAA did it's job.

noir_lord 3y ago
The long term effects are potentially pretty bad for the US (and it's aerospace industry generally), if the FAA is no longer trusted then that's a loss of prestige and a business cost because anyone wanting to sell abroad can expect local regulators to get involved, FAA and EASA have had a bilateral agreement for a while to basically cover a "you do yours and we'll do ours" approach.