3 ms·

From what I've read, CFM and Boeing committed back in December to making the software fix that's suggested in the video. https://aerospaceglobalnews.com/news/bi

From what I've read, CFM and Boeing committed back in December to making the software fix that's suggested in the video. https://aerospaceglobalnews.com/news/bird-strike-incident-sees-cfm-and-boeing-update-software-design/ https://aerospaceglobalnews.com/news/bird-strike-incident-se... Why FAA and EASA didn't require any procedure changes in the interim to prevent the issue is a very good question.

MBCook 2y ago
Can they force an install? Or will it be a choice? I like Mentor Pilot and Air Disasters, so I know I’ve heard of a few where the problem that caused an accident was already known and a fix was available but the airline just chose not to do it because they had that option. Or it was scheduled but hadn’t been performed yet because it wasn’t thought to be that critical. Having the FAA mandate the fix seems like it would be a much better option.
- V99 2y ago
  Yes the FAA can issue what are called Airworthiness Directives and require an issue be resolved in the timeframe and manner they specify. The timeframe could be anything, but common forms are like: - Within the next X (flight) hours or Y calendar days - You don't have to, but additional inspection needed every X hours or Y days until you do - At next annual inspection - Immediate/before flying again (usually called an Emergency AD)
  - TheRealPomax 2y ago
    That is to say, they used to. Whether they still do is rather entirely up in the air (wahey).
  - MBCook 2y ago
    I know the FAA can, I was referring to the manufacture. If Boeing makes a software patch do they have any way of forcing everyone to install it other than asking the FAA to issue a directive?
    - AdamJacobMuller 2y ago
      They might be able to, but, if they are effectively saying "our product is broken and you can't use it until you do X" they could be responsible for massive contractual liabilities.
      - MichaelZuo 2y ago
        Based on what legal reasoning…? I haven’t heard of any similar successful court cases in recent years in the US.
        p_l 2y ago
        Based on aviation law they can notify the certification authority of a mandatory fix which will be then required to be applied for users to aircraft operators to apply. If necessary with 0 deadline, i.e. "if the plane is on the ground it's not flying till the following change is applied"
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        Can you cite which parts of “aviation law” could have a decent chance of leading to the aformentioned outcome?
        p_l 2y ago
        General worldwide: Chicago Convention aka ICAO convention (currently under auspices of UN), Annex 8 [2] and Annex 6 [3]. For USA [4], Title 14 of Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter I Subchapter C, Part 39 For EU [5] Article 76 (6) of the Basic Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 [1] https://www.icao.int/publications/pages/doc7300.aspx https://www.icao.int/publications/pages/doc7300.aspx [2] https://ffac.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ICAO-Annex-8-Airworthiness-of-Aircraft.pdf https://ffac.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ICAO-Annex-8-Airw... [3] https://ffac.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ICAO-Annex-6-Operation-of-Aircraft-Part-I-International-commercial-air-transport.pdf https://ffac.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ICAO-Annex-6-Oper... [4] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-39 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-C... [5] https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/document-library/regulations#basic-regulation https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/document-library/regulations#b...
- p_l 2y ago
  Sometimes the vendor will provide an optional fix in a safety information bulletin, sometimes they will be mandatory (Sometimes the optional ones become mandatory [1]). They are coordinated with applicable certification bodies (civil aviation authorities) and distributed as airworthiness directives that can, in fact, force a specific action to be taken. [1] (writing from memory unfortunately) an airflow modification for 737 NG (iirc, could be older 737, pre-MAX definitely) avionics bay was "optional", as in mandatory only for aircraft flying in hot enough regions. After a near miss in Poland when steadily overheating avionics essentially slowly lobotomized a plane after takeoff. Turned out europe got hot enough for it. After that incident, Boeing issued a change in safety information bulletin that the modification was now mandatory.

MBCook 2y ago

Can they force an install? Or will it be a choice? I like Mentor Pilot and Air Disasters, so I know I’ve heard of a few where the problem that caused an accident was already known and a fix was available but the airline just chose not to do it because they had that option. Or it was scheduled but hadn’t been performed yet because it wasn’t thought to be that critical. Having the FAA mandate the fix seems like it would be a much better option.

V99 2y ago
Yes the FAA can issue what are called Airworthiness Directives and require an issue be resolved in the timeframe and manner they specify. The timeframe could be anything, but common forms are like: - Within the next X (flight) hours or Y calendar days - You don't have to, but additional inspection needed every X hours or Y days until you do - At next annual inspection - Immediate/before flying again (usually called an Emergency AD)
- TheRealPomax 2y ago
  That is to say, they used to. Whether they still do is rather entirely up in the air (wahey).
- MBCook 2y ago
  I know the FAA can, I was referring to the manufacture. If Boeing makes a software patch do they have any way of forcing everyone to install it other than asking the FAA to issue a directive?
  - AdamJacobMuller 2y ago
    They might be able to, but, if they are effectively saying "our product is broken and you can't use it until you do X" they could be responsible for massive contractual liabilities.
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago
      Based on what legal reasoning…? I haven’t heard of any similar successful court cases in recent years in the US.
      - p_l 2y ago
        Based on aviation law they can notify the certification authority of a mandatory fix which will be then required to be applied for users to aircraft operators to apply. If necessary with 0 deadline, i.e. "if the plane is on the ground it's not flying till the following change is applied"
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        Can you cite which parts of “aviation law” could have a decent chance of leading to the aformentioned outcome?
        p_l 2y ago
        General worldwide: Chicago Convention aka ICAO convention (currently under auspices of UN), Annex 8 [2] and Annex 6 [3]. For USA [4], Title 14 of Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter I Subchapter C, Part 39 For EU [5] Article 76 (6) of the Basic Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 [1] https://www.icao.int/publications/pages/doc7300.aspx https://www.icao.int/publications/pages/doc7300.aspx [2] https://ffac.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ICAO-Annex-8-Airworthiness-of-Aircraft.pdf https://ffac.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ICAO-Annex-8-Airw... [3] https://ffac.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ICAO-Annex-6-Operation-of-Aircraft-Part-I-International-commercial-air-transport.pdf https://ffac.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ICAO-Annex-6-Oper... [4] https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-39 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-C... [5] https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/document-library/regulations#basic-regulation https://www.easa.europa.eu/en/document-library/regulations#b...
p_l 2y ago
Sometimes the vendor will provide an optional fix in a safety information bulletin, sometimes they will be mandatory (Sometimes the optional ones become mandatory [1]). They are coordinated with applicable certification bodies (civil aviation authorities) and distributed as airworthiness directives that can, in fact, force a specific action to be taken. [1] (writing from memory unfortunately) an airflow modification for 737 NG (iirc, could be older 737, pre-MAX definitely) avionics bay was "optional", as in mandatory only for aircraft flying in hot enough regions. After a near miss in Poland when steadily overheating avionics essentially slowly lobotomized a plane after takeoff. Turned out europe got hot enough for it. After that incident, Boeing issued a change in safety information bulletin that the modification was now mandatory.