Even the most complex software is not going to change the laws of physics. Our problem is we're pretending that isn't true, and the time effort and expense devoted to algorithms and glitch patches leaves little time for anything else.
1
I wonder how many wealthy and informed corporate owners and Republicans want to fly unregulated airlines with no inspections, drink untested water from industrial waste areas, breath toxic air from our most polluting industries, or eat meat, poultry, fish and produce grown in polluted soils and water?
The fact is that the corporate owners and Republicans who demand deregulation are careful and able to avoid all of these obviously unhealthy situations. However, they knowingly subject unsuspecting Americans and citizens in other countries to these risks for the sake a higher profit.
Even when we know about these unsafe conditions, many Americans cannot afford to avoid them, have no options, and cannot afford to move to a more safe situation.
Where we learn that the tobacco, fossil fuel, pharmaceutical, auto, aircraft, finance or other industries have known that unsafe conditions existed that they could have been prevented, those business owners and executives should be held criminally responsible.
9
Concern about the FAA’s oversight and inspection responsibilities pertaining to certification of Boeing’s 737 Max 8 and the MCAS system appear to overlook, if not ignore the more fundamental problem of the aircraft’s design to accommodate the larger, more fuel-efficient engines. Those engines were moved forward and upward to give them better ground clearance. At the same time, this created a “nose up” tendency in take-offs and the MCAS was developed at a solution. Unfortunately, for most airlines, only a single external sensor was affixed to the forward fuselage to indicate when the aircraft was approaching a stall (nose too high). An extra sensor could be purchased to offer safety redundancy. Flight crews were not informed of MCAS in most instances involving overseas airlines and pilots were not trained to react in case MCAS overcompensated for a nose up attitude. Today’s hearing got down in the weeds about the FAA’s oversight responsibility but apparently ignored the fundamental design flaw in the 737 Max 8 and 9: the positioning of the larger engines. MCAS is a band-aid.
3
This is certainly a strong and justified reason for regulations. Ignore Congressional Republicans and the incompetent and ignorant Trump.
Industry cannot regulate itself and this story explains why.
2
I remember hearing during the BP oil rig explosion & the Big Branch coal mine disaster that the far too cozy relationship between the inspectors & the inspected might be somewhat to blame.
This seems to be a recurring theme when people die in a way that should have and more importantly COULD have been prevented.
4
Gee. Might this have any similarities to the EPA, FDA, DOE, and a host of others?
All part of the long term plan from the GOP to shrink government and then "drown it in a bath tub." To shrink it, you first neuter it. If you first make it useless, then the public will be less likely to oppose its elimination.
I have to say, it seems to me that the plan is working quite well.
3
If you think the self-regulation of the aircraft manufacturers is bad, then, the self-regulation of the airlines is far worse. Their ability to abuse customers especially those with urgent family needs has no limits. Their unreasonable and unfair form letters to customers about poor service or no service at all while pocketing your money in concert with the credit card companies is an outrage.
5
Boeing's next challenge is the new and improved 777.
Who wouldn't want to read this decal at the airliner entrance: This Boeing Airplane has Boeing Approved Safety Features?
3
I'm all for allowing the industry to regulate itself. As long as we implement capital punishment for company executives when their negligence and greed results in unnecessary deaths. With perhaps a little waterboarding thrown in first.
2
Quarterly profiteers regulating their own industry. Sounds like an inherent contradiction to anyone who's followed the proximal 50-year history of US corporate behavior.
3
It's too erpp inspiring to read this article, but I would note that Trump's latest pick to head the FAA, after the crashes, is a former head of Delta.
3
Self-regulation for industry is deadly for Americans
4
When you put a fox in charge of the hen house your going to loose a few chickens.
5
My few cents working for large corporations:
I have worked for many of these Defense Corporations. I had considerable tense moment within these organization and most of them were supplying half baked half ready solution to customers and in particular to those who are putting their life in line. Luckily, these customers ARMY, MARINES had their own independent inspection team and they rejected claims of my employer. I stayed quite while my manager fought tooth and nail. Sure I kept customer informed and gave them talking points.I resigned. While my boss got promoted. Though I left with impression that I saved lives.
5
I thought this Boeing Jet was grounded until further notice and a corrective action was in place to assure the safety of the passengers and crew; but yesterday one had to be forced to make an emergency landing.
Why are they still flying?
3
It was being shuttled with no passengers
Boeing should not comment on the 737 Max. Their aircraft is accused in the deaths of at least 346 people, Rest In Peace. The investigating authority has the sole responsibility to make public comments, release information publicly, and advise on the status of the investigation. The NTSB and Boeing are part of the investigation as support. This investigation is carried out by the State of Occurrence (or their delegate), Within a Safety System framework the IATA and ICAO recognize. Speculation works against safety, by possibly influencing the resulting recommendations. Safety is a science.
2
Letting industries regulate themselves its begging for disaster.
We let the financial industry regulate itself and ended up with the Great Recession.
A market that is not regulated is a mugging. The government has a responsibility to keep people honest and safe.
4
Questions
1. Do other planes require the same system that is used on the 737's. If so, are there any problems with it. If not, why is it necessary on this plane?
2. I understand that Airbus has a similar plane. Does it use a similar flight system?
"Industry Regulating Itself" is a wonderful idea if you are a corporation.
We the hard-working taxpayer will pay for pay for the failures and bankruptcies.
3
It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. - Warren Buffett
The US is the last country to ground the 737 MAX.
Ethiopia sends the black box to France, not to the US.
FAA transitioned from an independent government regulatory agency into a mere shell for industry self-regulation years ago.
The reputation of the FAA has been ruined.
Anybody see a pattern here? Anybody see a problem here?
Does anybody think the rest of the world does not know what is going on here?
6
The world was not created with regulatory infrastructure. Regulations are a product of history. Before people shred them up, they should think long and hard about the reasons regulatory requirements are created in the first place.
While we're talking about industries run amok through deregulation, let's not ignore the FCC. Remember the days when broadcasters were required to present opposing views? Remember the days when media cross ownership was restricted? Remember the days when government understood the need to separate carriers and content providers?
Oh, and while on the subject, how do we feel about the FDA deregulation of the pharmaceutical industry which, thanks to their capitulation, evaluates drugs based on clinical data PROVIDED BY THE MANUFACTURER?
8
This piece misses two vital points. 1. The main impetus of the certification/delegation process is the fact that FAA inspectors are not nearly as knowledgeable and sophisticated in assessing new, proprietary software and hardware as Boeing's own experts, who designed and built it—In many cases, Boeing would have to teach the FAA folks to understand what they have done, in order for the FAA folks to turn around and regulate it. The FAA is years, if not decades behind, and it would take an immense injection of cash and training to fix that. Then, the minute you do, those trained, now invaluable FAA employees are going to instantly quit and go to work for Boeing. In an age in which every airliner is controlled completely by computers, with what amounts to suggestions from the pilots, the sophistication of aircraft has simply outstripped any regulatory agency's ability to keep up. 2. The piece briefly mentions the strides in safety that have occurred while this process has been used, but it bears clear repetition: There has not been a single crash of a passenger airliner in the U.S. since 2009, making modern air travel the safest transportation in the history of mankind. So, even counting these two recent tragedies, which were probably the outcome of a number of different factors, including training and pilot error, the trend of aviation safety is quickly heading to a point where we may see the last-ever airliner crash in our lifetimes.
2
@Dexter Ford
The first portion of your statement is telling of your desire to squelch anyone outside of Boeing from making negative comments about Boeing’s huge mistake that cost many families their loved ones.
Boeing’s experts apparently failed horribly with this Max 8 design. If Boeing’s engineers had done a much better job at really being experts, they wouldn’t have placed an engine that shouldn’t be in such a configuration on the aircraft to cause the aircraft to stall and then take a lethal nosedive killing hundreds of people.
3
If all certification work were to be performed by the FAA, they would still be working to certify the DC3. The complexity of modern transport aircraft would simply overwhelm their capability. As things currently stand they take years to promologate simple regulations.
@Bill
Then It sounds like the FAA investigators need more comprehensive training.
2
"One factor in the debate is the F.A.A.’s budget. If Congress wanted the government to handle more certification work without slowing down the approval of new planes, lawmakers would most likely need to drastically increase funding for the F.A.A. so it could expand its staff. Instead, Congress has encouraged the F.A.A. to delegate more certification work to manufacturers."
Why don't we claw back some of the tax cuts for the wealthy that were recently passed and use some of the increased revenue to fully fund impartial oversight at the FAA?
8
From what I understand this was one of those cases in which competition hurt quality rather than improve it.
It is alleged that Boeing was eager to get this plane out to compete with Airbus' offerings. Therefore, rather than slowly redesigning a new plane from the ground up and risk losing sales to Airbus it modified its 50 year old 737 design. Then Boeing used software to patch a problem with stalling caused by those 737 modifications. Issues with that software patch is alleged to have caused these two crashes.
3
How much has the ceo taken home in the last couple of years?
4
@Bhj
I can’t believe the CEO still has a job. He or she should be fined hugely and then put on trial for negligent mass homicide.
1
When dealing with highly technical matters such as the engineering of an airplane, I am puzzled where FAA would find the intimately knowledgeable engineers to vet such matters unless they hired ex-Boeing engineers. Nor do I understand how Boeing would be intimately aware of FAA interests unless they hired ex-FAA officials. This is a problem across a wide range of regulatory matters from regulating Oil companies to regulating Drug companies. The knowledgeable people work for the companies.
It puzzles me when otherwise intelligent reporters and commentators don't get this. It suggests to me that the goal of getting eyeballs is more important to the newspaper than a dose of common sense.
Where am I confused here? Perhaps the FAA needs to look into cloning. Perhaps, since this is a democracy, the FAA should use randomly selected engineers found in airports? Or maybe have Northrup/Grumman vet Boeing designs? Or maybe rely on the European equivalent of the FAA - people hired from Airbus?
1
@alexander galvin: One begins to wonder if the FAA has any pilots on its payroll.
History and the evidence of corporate greed indicate that no industry should be permitted to police itself. Not airplane manufacturers, not banks, not drug companies -- and particularly not Congress.
9
Not to be an extremist but: it should be written into the ten commandments or something -- maybe a constitutional amendment that there is always to be a separation of interested parties in everything involving testing. Right now, not just airplane manufacturers, but big pharma companies, SAT takers and graders, and who knows what else violate this basic premise of a good civilization: you can't trust people to effectively test, police if they have a vested interest.
This mindset is reaching a critical point: we need to have good scientists (double blinded etc.) especially now because the stakes are getting into the catastrophic level, not just for a company or two, but for all generations of humans in the future. The news channels should not be allowed to utter false statements -- they are in effect the testers of facts for the public.
Trump and, as it seems, the republicans are dangerous to many living things, especially us and the US.
3
Smash our organized health care system into a dogfight the likes we've never seen (Teapot Dome included).
Then work over our organized protection of funds invested for old age called Social Security after these people destroy Medicare, another organized fund that has been raided repeatedly by republicans to the point nobody gets to have some. And now they will beat it into the ground where your body will be buried years before you reach age 100, the minimum you are expect to live to.
They want you dead because then they get your money.
4
Industry regulating itself, the trampling of the civil rights of the poor & non-white, the destruction of the environment, the lack of accountability or of punishment when corporations violate laws, all of this and more has been the Republican way since the time of Ronald Reagan. And when a Democrat comes in and tries to change all this the Republicans cry "socialism" or too much regulation stifles freedom or some such other falsehood.
Business dislikes govt. regulations and regulators for the same reason criminals hate laws and policemen.
2
I read that the day before the Boeing Max crashed a rogue pilot was catching a ride on that plane and was sitting in the cockpit. It started to pitch down and because this rogue pilot had been trained to fly this deathtrap, he saved the plane. Next day that plane crashed. Is this not proof that Boeing was not training pilots for this plane?
2
As a result of deregulation, watch for Boeing to spin off it's soon to be unprofitable commercial aircraft division and saddle it with all their liabilities. It will be said to be a move they have been considering for a long time.
3
Lawmakers need to ask how Congress has allowed industry after industry to be deregulated, or have their oversight done by the industry. We learned in the 20's that capitalism only worked humanely with supervision and regulation by the gov't. We won WWII, grew a huge Middle Class, became the envy of the world. And then the modern GOP started deregulating, lowering taxes, defunding our infrastructure and voila. Now we are the joke of the world. ... Odd, it isn't funny.
4
self regulation could easily work, but, and this is a huge if, only if it could be made certain that whenever gross negligence like this max8 design disaster is committed, the top 20 managers and everyone who were involved in the safety of the design would serve jail time and forfeiture of recent income.
The decision to make a $200-costing logic chip and warning light an expensive option on an airplane is criminally negligent. Take away the CEO and CFO's past bonuses and at the very least put them in jail for 6 months so that their careers end. When your decisions kill 300+ people, that's what should happen, at the very least.
3
Self-regulation works great. Just ask The Bankers.
3
There are no "questions" about industry being able to regulate itself. It can't. Period.
How many more need to die before Americans learn to ignore this "free-market-flat-earther" fantasy propaganda?
5
The same thing happened during the fiscal crises of 2008, when the SEC was unable to keep control over the banking industry which was allowed to regulate itself and then proceeded to implode so badly that we, the tax payers had to bail them out...And no one went to jail.
Can you see the any similarities? The beast consumes itself, always.
6
Airplanes today have so much non-critical, luxury stuff, like screens at every seat, while penny-pinching on critical safety sensors. I'd gladly bring my own book, and food, if that means a safer flight.
3
Hey, what's a few hundred dead people compared to allowing businesses to THRIVE, without pesky government oversight? Expect a lot more of this kind of thing with the current administration's view of governments oversight and regulations. Maybe after a few thousand Trump Supporters relatives die in plane crashes or earthquakes caused by fracking, etc. they'll wake up. Unfortunately the dead won't.
1
This reminds us of Alan Greenspan’s belief (before 2008) that banks could regulate themselves. We all know how that turned out.
1
When will the mainstream media stop playing the false equivalent game.
OF COURSE industry should not regulate itself. It NEVER should have in the first place. Whether we are talking airplanes, cars, or widgets, the job of business is profit.
Profit is at odds with regulation - which has an entirely different purpose: to protect health, safety, and fairness. Those things invariably increase cost.
Reagan was probably the worst president we ever had from a quality of life perspective. His drive for de-regulation opened the door for this ridiculous perspective that industry "knows best". Industry knows what's best for it, not you and I. That is government's role.
The role of the Democratic party these past forty years should have been to RAIL against industry practices and deregulation. Instead, they have cozied up to them in search of dollars and not 'alienating' conservative, mostly white, voters who see curbing business practices as an attack on their job security.
The one thing the media as a whole has failed to do, is to force the hand of the Democrats by publicizing the inherent good in regulations.
By highlighting any attempts to deregulate (think airlines for instance), and the cost to be born - reduction in absolute safety margins (not necessarily an increase in fatalities), flying convenience, quality of service...the media COULD HAVE prevented the scale of this roll back. It chose not to...because like Dems, it did not want to look 'biased'.
1
Experienced pilots understand that the industry - in its obsession to lower costs - has grown to rely on automation to fly aircraft. Pilots are increasingly being (intentionally) written out of the equation in operating aircraft safely. The lack of training is all part of the travesty. The traveling public are just viewed as pawns who can be sacrificed - as long as their deaths do not exceed the ‘acceptable loss rate’.
1
Letting industry regulate itself is like putting a drug addict in charge of a pharmacy. Gee, what could go wrong with that setup?
4
Whoever takes responsibility for the corrective work on the planes, tough and transparent scrutiny must be applied to all aspects of re-certification. Boeing can't just say "Hey-we fixed it". Each individual airline must ensure (at Boeing's expense) that all pilots have Max8 simulator training and pass it.
Therefore the planes can only be slowly put back into service, literally on at a time. After that the pilots should have annual simulator training on the MCAS. If Boeing spends enough time and money on this they might be able to step back from the precipice.
1
They just need to let capitalism self regulate. After enough people die the invisible hand of the market will correct itself.
2
Self-regulation is a problem?
Ya think???
When will voters in the "red" states pay attention and LEARN? The Republican Party doesn't care if you drink water full of lead, if your family is at risk from worse hurricanes, flooding, and tornadoes, or if you literally fall out of the sky in a plane deemed safe by an unregulated industry (so some rich dude can be even more wealthy).
Wake up. You're killing all of us.
We're looking at you, Utah, the home of Mike "Just Go Make More Babies" Lee.
Vote the Republicans out at every chance, in every election.
2
Everybody knows it's not a good idea to let the fox guard the hen house.
2
Wow Senator Blumenthal, The AMERICAN people put at risk!?
Under the delegation program, “the staff responsible for regulating aircraft safety are answerable to the manufacturers who profit from cutting corners, not the American people who may be put at risk,” Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, wrote to the inspector general last week.
What about the non-American HUMAN BEINGS on those two flights already dead — and their grieving families? Shouldn’t they expect that when they purchase a plane ticket they too can expect eve4y safety precaution has been taken?
1
This SHOULD be a no brainer. Essential safety features as options? For which you have to pay a high price?
This is nothing short of gross malfeasance and immoral profit.
Why this is even being 'debated' is an insult to people who simply want to live - fly safe.
And yet our FAA, government agencies and corporations - looking at you Boeing - seem to be more concerned about managing the 'fallout'. If you consider over 500 lives lost 'fallout', then you are not conducting investigations in good faith at a minimum.
The public is not that stupid and the debate over accountability needs to stop.
Focus on safety first and go From there. Then you will be looking to solve the problem as opposed to running from it.
We are asked to decide what the role of government is in protecting the public. Whether the FAA, EPA, USDA or OSHA what do we the citizens expect. Contractor self certification is not new. I worked in Quality and Reliability Assurance within DoD for almost 10 years. Much of that time I was involved product quality management at the buying activity for high reliability weapons systems. During the mid 1980's we began focusing on contractors self certifying products meet all contractual requirements. The end goal was to minimize government oversight and save money by eliminating government employees. The start up was very rocky with stark differences between individual contractors and manufacturing locations. Ironically one system I worked on had a critical failure during the first Gulf war resulting 14 soldiers killed. There is a role for government oversight when lives are involved. Just ask the families of the dead passengers from the Ethiopian and Indonesian. Will Boeing recover from this fiasco? Certainly, after all they are too big to fail!
1
Here is an aviation industry take on the corners Boeing cut to adapt the 737 airframe to the over-sized high bypass-ratio engines on the Max models.
https://leehamnews.com/2018/11/14/boeings-automatic-trim-for-the-737-max-was-not-disclosed-to-the-pilots/
After crashes, sharp questions about self regulating industry - this headline says it all.
Large corporations and trade groups work very hard to "capture" the government agencies that are supposed to regulate them. They love the "revolving door" that allows industry hacks to get government jobs - the better to infiltrate the government agencies and stymie their regulatory work. And of course they can then go back to industry with a much better idea of how to hide their poor work from government regulators. And, even better, get morons like Trump (and the Bush(s), Reagan and Nixon) to install industry hacks as head of the agencies so they can completely stall, ignore or try to eliminate all regulation
This mistake is like many in the name of nationalism and ignorance plus irresponsibility playing with life ,the whole of the Boeing directory working and follow orders and don't stop when they saw mistakes have cost life, the careless president and his desire to take the North Korean banner
Well duh- fox watchng the hen house NEVER works. There is a reason we have to regulate- greed and money. It's always $$$$$$.
I think we should discuss this with Volkswagen or Ford or Massey Energy. So far I have not seen any corporation that exhibits a human level of conscience. The reason for corporate social conscience is always stated as profits not that it was or is the wrong decision for the community or the employees or the country.
The FAA self regulating ODA program used by ALL manufacturers is very efficient getting new aircraft to market and works when a company places safety as its highest priority. The one I work for does and the ODA department is all powerful in fact much more stringent than the FAA ever could be. If manufacturers had to wait around for the FAA to approve every nut and bolt of an aircraft design this country's aerospace program would go bankrupt.
2
Since the 2008 election, congressional republicans have engineered fiscal havoc on all federal agencies by serial shutdowns. The shutdowns, along with budget cuts and sequestration, have upended agency programs and prevented the execution of mission-critical functions.
When government was run sufficiently, regulatory agencies such as the FAA and FDA were already "captive, " that is, subject to the expertise of technologically evolving industries. Now, with industry people running hobbled regulators, public safety and health is at substantial risk.
3
@Blessinggirl: The Republican Party has done everything possible to make working for the federal government stink since Reagan fired all the air traffic controllers striking over intolerable working conditions.
Just in case anyone is curious: guess how many MCAS activations there have been in 737 Max's in the U.S. since the plane was introduced in 2017? Zero. None.
Nobody knows what happened here. My guess is that it will involve some combination of shoddy maintenance, inadequate pilot training / lack of pilot experience, and environmental factors (heat, humidity, dust, sand).
2
Feel free to fly on them by all means.
1
@Mike: The system is supposed to be invisible to the pilot. If pilots had to be retrained to handle the peculiar pitch instability characteristics of this airplane when this system fails, it might have called the airworthiness of this fix into question.
1
Actually that’s incorrect. Both American and Southwest pilots have reported numerous activations via a confidential reporting site for pilots that is administered by NASA.
These reports are WHY Boeing took the step of grounding the aircraft.
But you are correct that these US airlines and United (MAX-9 customer) have more adequately trained their pilots on how to respond to this situation.
Trust me however when I say that you DO NOT want to be a passenger on an aircraft where this occurs even if the pilot safely regains control of the aircraft.
1
If this is how the FAA is run it should be abolished. There is no point of having a regulator without the resources to regulate. As a Millennial, it is clear that this country started swirling downward under Raegan and I resent the downward trend that has been obvious over the course of my whole life. Why do Baby Boomers know only how to wreck institutions? And they have the audacity to call everyone under 40 lazy and entitled. They are not fit to govern.
3
Yet constantly show us how lazy and cool they were in the 60’s!
Why do we still have questions about industries regulating themselves? Why do we continue to believe the fox is the best caretaker of the hen house? Why are we so complacent about our own health, safety, and well being?
1
It's truly amazing how these things happen. Doesn't Coast Guard do the same with cargo ships? I think El Faro sinking brought that to light. But did anything change? Money over lives...always.
So if the FAA is given the authority to regulate and certify an air plane as "safe", does that then leave Boeing off the hook when their plane crashes due to something the FAA missed?
@Gary: The FBI takes responsibility for all the gun purchases it approves on behalf of gun merchants.
The question of pilot training is also worth covering here. As usual, nothing is "black and white". The training of pilots outside the U.S. is significantly different. My pilot friends in the U.S. typically had thousands of hours of military flight training before joining an airline. They learned to fly planes without any auto pilot. Today the foreign pilots are more often than not trained to fly as if they were playing a video game. Thus, when problems arise they are not prepared to fly the plan manually. I believe this was the case in the two Boeing crashes in the last few months.
What a world it would be if we all were responsible for self-regulation.
No need for armies, police, religion, government, etc, etc.
We would all just get along, caring for one another, walking down the global highways and byways with our brethren in peace.
To state the obvious: the trump cabinet is full of industry insiders that are allowing their respective industries to "self-regulate"
Letting industry regulate itself: what could go wrong?
1
The article reads: "The practice has been repeatedly endorsed by Congress and successive administrations to speed up the certification process for Boeing and the rest of the aviation industry while holding down costs for the government."
The problem is that members of Congress and presidential administrations only consider potential problems after they come "crashing down."
2
@David Lockmiller: Congress says "We don't have a clue what we are doing, so handle it yourself" to everyone from Boeing to the Federal Reserve Bank.
Why are there questions about industries regulating themselves? It does not take a graduate degree to discern that those who stand to make money off of loosened regulations and lax oversight should not be given the authority to manage themselves. At what point did we become so completely clueless or worse yet willing to sacrifice public safety and well being for corporate profits.
6
This is the Republican Party. Smaller government that provides policies, regulations and laws that only serve the pockets of those who help create them. Full bore capitalism where it is consumer beware. Your tax dollars at work for the Republican backed corporation and one percent until it isn't.
6
Did you even bother to read the first sentence of the article? Remind me again who was in the Oval Office SEVEN years ago. Government as a feeding thought permeates local, state and federal agencies from the union shop stewards through the heads of this agencies, Congress and the White House.
Somehow, both parties are able to hoodwink their base into thinking that it is the OTHER party that gets on their knees before corporate America.
Goebbels would be impressed.
While there is no argument over which party is more obsequious to corporate rule, There is also no argument that both parties are controlled largely by corporations.
1
Why is it that the folly and danger of self-regulation in critical industries, such as aviation, is obvious to everyone except Congress? Or is it that delegation of oversight to this industry is very rewarding for politicians? In any case, there must be a major reversal. The FAA MUST be given the resources and authority to regulate aircraft manufacturers and other parts of the industry. As for cost- how much are hundreds of lives worth? If dollars are the only gauge, how much will lawsuits and lost sales cost? And finally, if Boeing is using its own people to do safety analysis- they can lay them off and give the money saved to the FAA, which would hire them as permanent FAA safetry specialists.
I think the I.G. or the GAO should investigate whether the 6 week government shut down delayed or hindered corrective actions required of Boeing after the Indonesian Airlines crash. While air traffic controllers had to work through the shutdown, other parts of FAA and the NTSB were deemed to be "nonessential." Do we really believe that "nonessential" government workers can be furloughed without negative consequences?
2
These investigations are so common after a tragedy occurs, but do we want to go back and reveal constructive changes to the past approval processes that actually happened. No, we don't, because history has shown us we love the media frills, the attention, the pointing of fingers, those lacking accountability, the chance for politicians to stand up and banter, or what the truth is all about what a lobbyists does, etc., etc., etc. A perfect example: Wall Street. The causes of the Recession of 2008....all the changes made to "make" Wall Street and the financial industries clean up their act, etc. has mostly gone to the wayside. History repeats itself, right, wait a few years after another airplane disaster and ask what was really accomplished today in improving the safety of airplanes for the future. Lives are expendable, and cheap, very cheap. Look at what Boeing will pay for the death of someone as a result of their airplane failure in Indonesia. A few pennies on the dollar. Pitiful. Our GOP gov't does look after and care about its citizens, just as long as it is included in the payoffs.
The financial sector regulates itself in the US too. Crashes, airplane and financial, are what happens when pure capitalism is permitted. Regulators need to regulate.
3
As a frequent flyer, I thought and hoped that not shortcutting safety was priority, especially since Boeing families are passengers as well. Another industry regulating failure.
2
Just to give you a different perspective, I am a pilot and aircraft owner. Last year I put a Garmin aviation GPS in my plane. The total cost for a 6.5 inch touchscreen device, akin to what I have in my car, cost over $15,000. Yes, that's correct, $15,000.. I did it because it is a safety device, gives me much better situational awareness, and increases the likelihood that I will complete my flights safely. How much of that cost do you suppose one can chalk up to regulation? How much does a touchscreen GPS in your car cost?
From an aviator's perspective, the FAA does not increase safety, but more often hinders it. And I am NOT a deregulationist, antiigovernment type. I have voted for every Democratic presidential candidate in my lifetime. I would get on a 737 Max today so long as the airline and flight crew is from the United States, and if you ask me who I trust - Boeing or the FAA - to ensure my safety, it's Boeing every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
Details, please.
Ironically, the corporations themselves are often among the biggest losers in deregulation (excluding, obviously, those who lost their lives). Boeing is going to take a crippling hit from this. No one will want to board a Max 8 aircraft, even after it's "fixed". Auto companies fight fuel economy standards, then lose market share when gas prices rise. Financial powerhouses (Bear Stearns, Lehmann Bros) destroy themselves whenever govt turns them loose. Resource industries would cut down the last tree and kill the last fish if they could. Short term profit trumps long-term stability every time, and the companies, along with their workers, customers and communities, end up losing in the end from deregulation.
71
@Jomo: Gresham's Law is as old as guilds. Where there is no enforced baseline of acceptable conduct, the bad will drive the good out of any human pursuit.
10
@Jomo As a country we have forgotten the lesson of the 20's. Post .com all that matters is the quarterly profit. We have the country, government, and people who support that. I'm not sure our extinction can come soon enough to save all the other mammals.
3
So basically it’s just another situation where industry is wanting to increase profits and production by speeding up the process of checking/reviewing the safety technology in the new Boeing planes. When it comes to protecting the people you’re bringing up 4,000 feet (or however high they go) into the air the safety should be number one priority, for it should be higher than the priority to beat out overseas competition. Life’s more valuable than money and profit margins at the end of the day.
2
31,000-38,000 feet. via, Time Magazine
There is a reason why government has a regulatory role and why it often does not work out well when the job is largely is outsourced to industry. This is a good time to look at the whole issue of airline safety, including questions around the approval process for new planes, who is servicing airline fleets, and where? Who determines how many seats should be placed in planes and what factors, are considered?
Part of the difficulty is the certification process itself, which is lengthy, inefficient and very expensive. It's time to figure out exactly what is really needed to evaluate a new or modified aircraft and how to gather the data more efficiently. Some tasks should be done by FAA personnel but this doesn't necessarily solve the problem since the FAA does not necessarily have any more information than the manufacturer and in this case did not act on information they clearly had.
The FAA did not require simulator training even though the changes from the prior version were complex. Even after the first crash the FAA did not identify the problems with the system and require changes. The most obvious is that the aircraft that crashed were equipped with dual redundant angle of attack sensors but incredibly the angle of attack was not shown on the pilots' display screen. This was an extra cost option even though it is just a piece of software. Virtually all US 737s display the angle of attack, so it would be apparent to the pilots if the system was malfunctioning.
I have been a physician who has worked in the pharmaceutical industry in what is called "Pharmacovigilance" or "Drug Safety", where manufacturers interact with the FDA and other Health Authorities by setting up defined Departments of Pharmacovigilance (or of Drug Safety) with responsibilities mandated by the Health Authorities. All adverse events, whether reported to the company by researchers, practicing physicians or other health providers, or by the Agencies themselves (and in the US, events reported by patients) are entered into huge computer databases (which are maintained by the manufacturers), that can forward reports to the agencies, and which can be analyzed for previously unsuspected problems. Also, the FDA and other agencies have rights to inspect the pharmacovigilance departments including source documents, operating procedures, et.al.
I do not understand why aircraft manufacturers do not have similar Departments of Product Safety, with defined responsibilities to report all safety issues to the FAA (or equivalent elsewhere).
When I say "all," reports would range from disasters such those that befell the recent 737MAX8, which would require reporting to the agencies in a short defined time period, perhaps 3 days after downloading the "black boxes", to modest issues, such as reports of lavatory smoke detector failures, which might only be lumped with other cases of the same issue, and be reported every 6 months.
Just sayin'
2
I for one have little confidence in Boeing certifying their own planes. It's pretty simple, Boeing is driven by the profit motive. Their executives can weather a plane crash or two as the public has a very short memory. It is no wonder that this new 737 Max is a flawed machine, it was put into service before it was safe to fly. Two planes down in the span of 5 months is no coincidence. But despite the huge loss of life no Boeing executive will be called to account and with almost no oversight at the FAA, the flying public is put at risk while the Boeing executives laugh themselves silly on the way to the bank. Boeing - profits over people.
8
Trump should take a long flight in a Max 8, sans software patch, to show the world how safe it is.
11
Boeing managers have a lot more to lose if they make a foolish decision than government regulators. Boeing managers know that if they damage the company's reputation they'll be fired. Government regulators know perfectly well that making a bad decision won’t have a material effect on their careers.
That risk of making a career-limiting-move focuses attention which is why air travel is far safer than any form of ground transportation.
If you think the safety of air travel is the result of regulation, you must explain Amtrak’s lousy performance. That government-run and regulated organization kills and injures far more people per passenger-mile than travel on privately operated airlines.
2
@Johnny Stark: Most top managers of major corporations based outside the US have engineering backgrounds. Here in the US, MBAs are supposed to be able to manage any business interchangeably.
@Steve Bolger
Perhaps you may not have much experience with technical/engineering-based businesses. In those businesses, no one expects bean counters to make technical risk decisions. In any case, the really versatile managers in technical/engineering-based businesses are the ones with engineering undergrad degrees and then an MBA.
1
Capitalism has no morals. It views the entire biosphere, and all the organisms in it including you and me, as commodities or customers to exploit.
Maximum profits with minimum operating costs is the corporation's religion.
Doing whatever it takes to give more and more money to the corporations owners and shareholders is the religion's mantra.
No industry that has any impact on human health, biosphere health, or animal health should be self-regulating.
Public regulation of all harmful industries should be done by tenacious, civic-minded people like Ralph Nader, not by former corporate insiders and bureaucratic allies in the revolving door, backroom deal regulatory environment we see today.
Boeing is a government-subsidized corporation, taking hundreds of millions of tax dollars per year to build weapons of death.
The idea that they'd be able to get away with rushing a plane into production and marketing without sufficient oversight and due diligence is typical, tragic and no surprise.
After all, we have coal and other earth-destroying industry magnates in charge of our environmental regulatory and Interior agencies.
A sham and a sham = capitalism.
3
@Steve Davies: The people driving the US now think of shareholders as a petty irritation to be rid of. That is why most of Trump's tax cut went to corporate stock buybacks.
1
Letting any industry/business regulate itself is like letting criminals sentence themselves.
Until greed and laziness are no longer a factor in human endeavors (good luck with that!), we need 3rd party regulators.
7
Given that all reporting on aviation is sensationalist and always fundamentally incorrect, there is one cautionary tale that the public should take away from all this, if even at a conceptual level.
A lot of people in the industry are talking about removing the pilots from the airplane. A lot of people are seriously talking about single-operation freighter operations (e.g, flying a 777 with one pilot). Much of this discussion is motivated by a combination of new, idiotic, and NON-EVIDENCE-BASED FAA flight time rules for first officers, and a consequence of a major pilot shortage.
Much of this is based on an opportunistic and unrealized faith in technology. As the various Airbus crashes showed us, from Habhseim to AF447, a modal-based solution, i.e., anticipating the failure cases in the lab, and hoping they'll apply to real life--as opposed to a closed-loop model in which a pilot whose life is also at risk is able to manipulate systems and react to design defects accordingly--is the wrong way to go.
There is no such thing as AI, just flashy algorthmic processes. Remote operation of airplanes just moves control away from where it's needed.
This is a disaster in the making. As a passenger, I want the FINAL AUTHORITY as to the safe operation of an airplane to be a guy on the airplane with me, whose life is also on the line--not some bureaucrat in a nice, safe air-conditioned room a thousand miles away, and not an engineer long since layed off from his original job.
3
The “wisdom” of deregulation or self-regulation is like letting kids choose their diets and screen time.
We are at the point in the culture where even the 10 commandments have been deregulated...I think there are 2 left.
1. Thou shalt honor money as thy god. and
2. Lying is a virtue, do it as often as possible.
2
"The Seattle Times reported last week that a safety analysis for MCAS was delegated to Boeing, and that the company produced a document that had significant flaws." This sums it up. Hopefully this document will be posted somewhere where experts can review it. From what we know right now, Boeing should be considered a prime suspect in the deaths of over 300 people and the FAA had better pursue this with diligence. The revolving door in DC has turned watch-dogs into toy poodles that the industry basically carries around like a white-gloved socialite in Madison Square Park. No offense to poodles or socialites, but they're not exactly known for aggressively holding anyone to account (except the truly ancient ones - the socialites, not the poodles - who have a wicked sneer and can be lightning quick with a cane).
If a Republican senator, congressman and a high level FAA person were on a Max 737 which crashed you can bet no one would be defending Boeing's self regulation.
7
Oh yes they would still defend industry’s self-regulation or at least fight any new regulations. Remember Republican law makers were shot during baseball practice for the Congressional Baseball game? Did you see any meaningful action on gun control after that?
1
@Mossy You make a good point . But let's say say a large group of Republicans and their families went down on a chartered Max 737 flight. Might that have an impact ?
By and large government regulators should be sued for malpractice or dereliction of duty.
In their defense, many budgets are razor thin or Regulator staffs are lead by imbeciles on the Right - the Party of No Regulation.
Businesses typically do not want kill anyone because it’s an unnecessary distraction, but money trumps all, even several hundred lives.
Therefore when issues in any industry arise, the Regulators are woken from their daily naps by an aroused Public. The industry, who is watching over the Regulators to make sure nobody influences them, gently soothes the Regulators, and tells them to go back to sleep, which they do.
Does anyone have an alarm clock?
2
Profits before public safety, with the government/regulator complicit in this perverse dynamic.
It makes one wonder what other problems are lurking out there waiting for some deaths to ferret out.
Does very little to inspire confidence ...
Who's looking into the defective angle-of-attack sensors?
Oh - and iPad training … maybe the pilots would be better off with PlayStation.
Yikes.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is the NTSB, not the Press, who conducts investigations of plane crashes. Stop predicting their findings, and start reporting on things that have already happened instead of your visions of the future. You are supposed to be news reporters, not Nostradamus.
Trump prides himself of being a master of deregulation and so far there his administration has submitted 152 regulatory changes. Some small, some bigger, many are already in effect, some has been repealed and many are still in rulemaking.
https://www.brookings.edu/interactives/tracking-deregulation-in-the-trump-era/
Of course, his fan base are applauding him for this although most of the regulations that are being scrapped are put in place to protect them, the average citizen, against corporate greed.
I am at loss over how easy it is to make people believe that what is done for their security and for the good of humanity is actually bad for them. When will we understand that when a billionaire tells us what is best for us, maybe we should take it with quite a few grains of salt. After all - you do not become a billionaire because you like to share your fortunes.
So the airlines are 'transitioning' the grounded planes at what is known as the "Boneyard". How fitting. I hope they sit there and rot, that might teach these greedy scoundrels a lesson.
If Trump's pilot would have been confirmed as the FAA administrator, none of this would have happened... (sarcasm off)
Republican push to have corporations, the astronomically wealthy and the private sector to regulate itself results in economic and health casualties, even deaths - including non-American citizen deaths abroad.
Indeed, Republicans in collusion with trump and his odious administration are letting the worst industries regulate themselves to profits and the destruction of our environment as we knew it.
Self-regulation - what could possibly go wrong?
1
Corrupt, disreputable, double dealing, dishonest, dishonorable, unscrupulous, unprincipled, amoral, untrustworthy! With this many ways to describe Boeing’s actions and activities, this must be a species characteristic. There are so many holes in this balloon, it will never get off the ground.
2
The argument that industry can regulate itself because it has no interest in screwing up - and would risk too much if s... were to happen - does not hold water for a second! The "too big to fail" like Boeing (about 2 out of five people in Seattle have a job related to the firm?) have absolutely nothing to fear from justice because they get away with it every time (Purdue settled for 270 million, a joke!) thanks to non-custodial agreements (big pharma in the USA cannot be prosecuted in certain circumstances) or via out-of-court settlements - like what Trudeau, here, wanted for SNC-Lavallin - which costs them peanuts. No the "they have too much to loose is out of this (2019) world.
Part of the "Making America Great Again" goal, if you will, falls squarely upon the shoulders of the manufacturer who is domiciled in this country. When an entity fails to gain or earn the trust and confidence of their ultimate customer (the passenger), competition will gladly pick-up the pieces and increase their product market share. When market share has been compromised, it is usually a very difficult and lengthy process to fully make up for those losses.
We need protection from the protectors, be they industrial yes-men or the political ones. The more bureaucratic oversight, the greater the chances for somebody, with a conscience and the scientific background, to see what's what. If we didn't want regulation, then why do we even have democracy? So inefficient. Elections are so expensive. Monarchy is the way to go. Bureaucracy is democracy.
1
Industry self-regulation is never a good idea. The Boeing crash is gaining attention because people died. Everyday people are being exposed to air and water toxins as EPA, FDA and all other public health and environmental protection agencies are gutted. Oversight is given to companies creating the problems.
The Boeing case is also an example of MBAs and financial executives driving a process over the objections of engineers. Similarly in the case of public health and environmental protection, science-based recommendations are overwhelmed by commercial interests. An excellent example is the wide use of certain pesticides despite toxic impacts known for 50 years.
4
Self-regulation or closeness with the industry may be factors to consider, but one crucial piece of evidence stands out: The FAA and Boeing installed a highly safety-critical stall-prevention system that, according to all accounts relied on a single sensor for controlling the vertical stabilizers.
That fact, in itself, is irrefutable proof that no failure mode analysis was performed on the MCAS system that could be viewed by any reasonably competent observer as adequate given the level of criticality of that system.
Possible areas to look into: Was a failure of the single sensor considered in identifying the resulting behavior of the aircraft? If so, were the ranges of aircraft response to the failure identified, from no impact all the way to fatal?
Apparently, no fatal behavior of the aircraft was anticipated, and the system was not augmented with one or more additional sensors while leaving no corrective actions to the pilots.
The bottom-line: neither Boeing nor the FAA either considered MCAS as highly critical to safety, or, if they did, they considered the single sensor implementation as so adequate that no pilot was ever expected to have to know about even its existence.
2
This experience brings into question the whole Trump Administration approach to de-regulation.
1
@Will Hogan
The regulation-related causes of this incident precede Trump.
They almost certainly also precede Obama, and possibly GWBush.
But I agree that the current administration's approach to (de)regulation deserves review.
Violently!
Let's be clear; if this had happened on flights from NY to LA and Detroit to Dallas, Boeing would be out of business, not under investigation. That being said, self-regulation has never worked. It has, without fail, always led to trains that crash, dams that fall and stock markets too.
The Republican ethos - and it is always the Republicans who do this to us, is cynical and self serving in the extreme.
3
@ijarvis
Not sure Boeing would be out of business.
I recall the Lockheed Convair and McDonnell-Douglas DC-10 having analogous stoopid-decisions-making-it-into-production-with-fatal-results issues, and with rebuilds and retrofits those plane flew again, and the companies that built them did not die of those causes.
But we're more litigious today, let alone partisan. So maybe Boeing, like Standard Oil and AT&T before it, could be broken up, assuming a complete reversal of MIC-government relationships.
However, like the coal, gun, and tobacco industries, Boeing is manifestly too big, powerful and well-connected to go bye-bye in the wake of even a few thousand preventable deaths.
The upper bound on "few (thousand)" in the previous sentence is left as an exercise for the reader. I'd guess low triple digits.
The foxes are in all the henhouses already, not just the FAA.
For example, the EPA has become an agency that deregulates Industry to create more greenhouse gases and environmental pollution instead of the industry watchdog and regulator that it was mandated to do.
The 16 year old Swedish teenager, Greta Thonberg, has expressed with great eloquence the pathetic failures of our generation to protect her future from climate catastrophe.
We are failing our children to protect them from faulty planes, unhealthy air, water, food and destroying our habitats and creatures within and perhaps-destroying, ultimately, all life on earth.
4
It’s not just airlines. Banks, insurance companies, drug makers, you name it.
Small government = no government. Then why government? May as well everyone fend for ourselves with total societal breakdown.
4
I'm sorry, but for the last 30 years Republicans have been calling for deregulation of industry and self regulation.
They now have an administration who is dismantling everything from OSHA to the FAA. Suddenly there's questions about industry self regulating themselves?
We have the country we deserve. The Boeing is just the most public case because it was an international incident with mass casualties. Interesting how there is almost no reporting on the sudden skyrocketing of job related accidents since the Trump administration crippled OSHA. No reporting on the increase number of coal mining accidents and increase cases of black lung, directly correlating to the deregulation of that industry.
So much winning.
1
I cancelled a trip from Albuquerque to Houston because the airplane was a MAX8 (It was a battle but I did get a refund). It was my grandson's first birthday and I wasn't about to miss that. So I drove, almost three days each way. I actually enjoyed it and plan to do more, and to ride Amtrak. I actually saw parts of the country rather than just flying over it.
Even though I'm a private pilot, I have begun to hate flying commercial and now, thanks mainly to Boeing, no longer trust the airlines. Like my case, the impact of these crashes will likely have a deep impact on people's travel plans.
7
As an author and editor - I know full well one can not write and edit ones own work. Forget the fox in the hen house reasoning for a second -- and consider that your mind fills in what it believes is already present. That's how you miss mistakes.
Familiarity with words -- or a process -- means you don't have the distance to look at something critically and take it at its own face value.
Coders need QA, writers need editors, industry needs external auditors.
5
Self regulation is one issue, the other issue is that the NTSB always finds the subcontractor at fault, even when they aren’t. Boeing’s QC is a huge issue when the sub is always blamed...
As for self regulation:
You don't put the fox in charge of the chicken coop.
2
When 45 said he was going to pull back on regs that hurt business I thought he would look closely at regs that really did not serve their purpose or we're redundant. But No, he just dumped all regs he could get his grubby little hands on. Give the Corporations the country. Sure, that will work out for Americans.
So much for a leader that thinks
Our leader stinks
4
More than 300 deaths. Someone is going to jail.
1
Nope.
in the aftermath of the 2008 crisis, one honest red baron capitalist argued with the interviewer.
Crisis si for capitalism to thrive , saying there would be no crisis is heresy, that stability and government oversight etc. is for socialist countries.
just in case , if anyone asks lesson will be learned from this crisis, the answer is no, No body wouldn't like to learn lesson in capitalist world. so do not amaze this ilk is coming right after any collapse, crisis or major boondoggle and still insisting on deregulation, yeah that is all.
Let's deregulate...…...
Nobody has a slight interest in supervising him/herself. Governments that let entreprises regulate themselves are no governments.
3
Before pilots sit in the cockpit of an airplane, they should be required to take a Pilot Ed Class for the airplane they are flying. The pilots of the doomed 737 Max Airplanes should have disengaged the auto pilot and piloted the airplanes.
That wasn’t possible for the pilot to do, they barley had enough time as the nose of the plane went head first very quickly. Also Beoing has states additional training wasn’t required. We can’t blame the pilots that’s extremely unfair
Curious how the only capitalistic industry that doesn’t sacrifice public interest for profit when unregulated is—journalism???
NYT - Very unethical for you to show a photo of SW Airlines in a story about Boeing 737 Max. You're hurting SW Airline's brand and their business. The photo singles out SW Airlines, indirectly blames the company. They take the fall for Boeing. Boeing's brand stays in tact. Think before you publish.
1
"Why can a regulated industry with campaign contributions, influence the politician that appoint the regulators that regulate the industry ?
That is the heart of the problem
---
Data
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/totals.php?id=D000000100&cycle=A
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000100
The worst I think is the pressure Boeing was able to put on F.A.A. staff claiming 'safety' from their own side saying that they knew better about their engines, while perfectly knowing that the real reason was gaining time on the process. Boeing was 'nervous' about the competition. Previously, they had pushed away Bombardier's version of a much smaller plane with the approval of market U.S. authorities. Who's in charge?
1
Why is there even any regulations in the first place?
Bank regulations,
Wall Street regulations,
food industry regulations,
medical care regulations,
stop lights and stop signs,
certification exams,
transportation regulations.
Anyone can understand why there are regulations so why remove the regulations and for goodness sakes why have the fox watching over the henhouse?
Perhaps it’s just s fable but I was told by a commercial pilot that he trusted the dependability of Boeing aircraft because during WW2 their planes kept flying although they’d suffered catastrophic damage. He believed Boeing had a long established culture of designing ‘bullet proof’ aircraft that experienced pilots could keep airborne when all sorts of dreadful structural mishaps befell them. Think of the 747 where the cargo door blew off at 35000ft or the Hawaiian Airlines jet where the roof peeled off mid-flight. I’m aware that those type of mishaps are historical and that most accidents are pilot error, however Boeing culture appears to have moved too far in the direction of smugly believing that Boeing knows what’s best and pilots’ are kept informed on a ‘need to know’ basis only.
1
Trump and the GOP are proud of all the deregulating they have been doing. They have been filling top leadership positions at cabinet & agencies like EPA, Interior, Consumer Protection, etc with people that represented the regulated and have sued or lobbied and fought with the regulators. All with the goal of gutting the agencies. We should not be surprised when planes fall from the sky.
1
Unquestionably, the same holds true of regulation of Wall Street.
2
I'm not sure why anyone is surprised by this.
We've had years and years of budget cutting, budget cutting and more budget cutting, at all levels of government, just as technical and environmental dangers have exploded at an exponential rate.
Why is anyone surprised that regulatory agencies can't keep up?
In 2014, when hazardous chemical spill into the Elk River of West Virginia contaminated the drinking water of 300,000-plus residents of that state, and threatened the drinking water of millions more downstream as far as Cincinnati and beyond, it seems the loudest cries were: "where was the EPA."
Time and time again the regulatory agencies get blamed for the criminal negligence of our legislators and administrative officials, predominantly members of the Republican Party.
You get what you pay for !!!
The physical design of the Max is at fault. Putting an engine too large for the existing body of a 737, to save money, made the plane aerodynamically unstable. Putting a software fix to try to fix the symptom is unethical and dangerous. Applying another software patch? I’m sorry, I will never fly on a Max plane. Whoever certified this plane, be it Boeing and or the FAA, is responsible.
1
"Sharp Questions About Industry Regulating Itself"?
As already seen in thew finance, banking, mining, fracking and "energy" sectors! Not to mention election and campaign finance.
When will we ever learn?
2
The question needs to be answered...is it standard, acceptable procedure to fly an inherently unstable aircraft (due to larger engines) with only an "electronic fix" to maintain level flight?
Us lay people need to know to confidently step on any MAX aircraft in the future.
2
@caljn: It is in fighter aircraft design, where airplanes are designed destabilized to make them more radically maneuverable.
1
@Steve Bolger: Large airplanes tend to "Dutch roll", which the autopilot controlling the ailerons and the vertical stabilizer damps out. It is a comfort rather than a safety issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_roll
Clearly Boeing, The FAA and the whole US airline industry is in a serious credibility crisis based on the evidence mounting that the Boeing 737 Max is a seriously flawed plane that was not ready to go into service and should never have been certified by industry rubber stamp FAA. Where so many lives are at stake daily and now lost because of what now seems like negligence, Boeing, the FAA and the industry can not be allowed to make decisions on a basis that probably factored in revenues, profits, bonuses and jobs. Bodies such as the FAA and NTSB are there to protect lives not work with nor partner with the industry. Boeing and any other manufacturer (including Airbus) should think three or four times before sending a new plane up for certification. The FAA's first and second inclination when faced with a new plane is to deny certification. The burden of proof that a plane is worthy should be heavy and on the manufacturer. This "Organization Designation Authorization" is the most absurd and dangerous concept that one could have where safety is paramount. It is a guarantee that safety is secondary to any number of factors. Clearly the FAA and Boeing failed big time and heads need to roll and the regulatory standards reviewed and tightened. Boeing has a massive task now on its hands to convince people, airlines and governments around the world that it is a fit and proper company and that safety comes first, not just in words but in practice as well.
2
One of two really important stories of regulatory capture -- the phenomenon of industries "capturing" the agencies charged with regulating them. Boeing - FAA; and in other news, Dow and other chemical makers and the Interior Department, re. pesticide regulations. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/26/us/politics/endangered-species-david-bernhardt.html
Very disturbing, and perhaps the most damaging practice of the Trump Admin., among its many sins. Who will defend the public's interest in these matters? Does the public care?
We used to be smarter as a nation, as consumers, as voters. But we have become a nation of dummies with a Congress composed of too many corporately owned moral cowards, a vulgar President who can barely speak in complete sentences or spell correctly and who insults the rest of humanity, and a Court whose thinking is so ingrown that it confuses language used for contracts (corporations as “bodies”) for actual reality: corporations as people with “civil rights”.
Why on earth does anyone expect a company with the ability to control its own oversight will maintain a safety standard that values human life over profits? Capitalism is first, last and always an a-moral system that will cut corners if it can in order to produce the highest profit. That is the Darwinian fact of capitalism. When it works, it is fantastic at producing for the good of humanity; but left to its own devices capitalism/ corporations do what is expedient for profit.
When human smarts slides below the level of common sense, as our collective intelligence apparently has, corporate drive is right there to pick up the gap for profit: it will poison, distort or kill us unless we actually use government to protect us and not them. Everything touched by Republican corporatism without community oversight (government by and for people) is ultimately despoiled and destroyed. The FAA failure is simply the most recent and obvious. Behind the scenes Republican Cabinet members are eating away at everything.
Show us a self-regulating industry and we'll see callousness, corruption, carelessness, cover-ups and yes, continuing collusion to carve out outrageous profit from the public.
EVERY TIME.
2
The headline should read, "After Boeing Crashes, Sharp Questions about Republican Plans to Undo Most Regulations and Privatize Most of Government." They are making Americans less safe and less healthy, targeting programs that help working class and middle class Americans, and stealing the assets of the American people.
2
This should not even be a question. Would you let your toddler run free in a candy store? They are unable to self-regulate.
We all know now that corporate leaders overwhelming fall into the "spectrum of sociopathy." They are disordered humans. Sociopaths have no moral center, and corporate sociopaths are particularly malicious because they're acting in the abstract as a corporation not as a human in context of human life (empathy and consequences).
America has become a corporatocracy, a nation where corporate billionaires, like those at Boeing, own politicians and thus run our government and its laws via a back channel. Until we repeal Citizen's United, end gerrymandering and end the electoral college, we will continue to experience these malignant monopolies and corporate rule.
Oh, wait, you mean trusting an industry to self-regulate itself DOESN'T result in better safety for consumers? Who would't thought?!?
1
Mr. Bahrami has to wear this one, I mean these two, and be shown the exit. His standing and credibility with respect to certifying airworthiness no longer exists.
This condition in the FAA is of a piece with the pervasive corruption of the Trump administration in particular and Republican party general; deregulation as a thing unto itself, for its own sake. Never mind risk to th public, but race to the bottom.
It's preferable that essential governmental services not be privatized. However, with Trump and the majority of his Cabinet personifying the Peter Principle, we're faced with a Catch-22.
3
I'd really like to know why a Boeing 737 Max 8 was flying yesterday when they were supposed to be grounded. The "reason" was to get the plane across the country to the place where the airline was holding all the rest of their 737s and it was okay because there were no passengers on board. Sorry, but that doesn't work for me. Grounded is grounded and there are lots of people living underneath the path that the grounded plane flew who were put in danger by the plane flying. It turned out to be a safe flight, but it could have been quite different. So, why did that grounded plane fly and who allowed such a thing?
7
As an engineer and professor at CCNY in the area of fluid-thermodynamics for the last 43 years I have written earlier that the problems related to crash of 737 max8 may be related to three factors;aerodynamics of wing body interaction and the size of the engine, engine stalling or failure of its new components in the turbine area due to use of new materials,bending of the last part of the plane due to extended length and the instruments Mal functioning.The crash needs very vigorous and sophisticated look and examination into all aspects and may not get fixed just by the computer software as is being mentioned.
2
Would be fascinating to find out whether insurance companies increased the cost of insurance when the FAA ducked its responsibility.
1
I hear the voices echoing now: “Government is controlling people’s lives! Socialism! Let the free market decide how to deal with it!” The ‘free market’ allowed 300 people to die in two mind-numbingly terrifying plane accidents, and even afterward some of these planes — only in the US, mind you, the capital of the free market — were still flying. If the small government trumpeters grasped the free market, they would understand that plane manufacturers have an incentive to maximize profit with some ‘market clearing’ loss of life, an unacceptable policy: ANY loss of life is unacceptable, especially if it’s yours. Let the regulators do their jobs and regulate.
4
Exactly. The MAGA people don't understand that paying taxes, paying into social security and Medicare, paying for fire departments, police, public schools, roads, libraries are all part of a healthy socialist democracy. The government of a democracy is a service of the people, for the people, by the people via taxes in order to protect and provide for the nation as a whole. We need to regulate industry and capitalism. Otherwise, we become a kleptocracy.
From everything I've read Boeing knew exactly what it was doing in designing this airplane to fly the way it was supposed to with the equipment and software to make it happen. Unfortunately a sensor got stuck and miscalculated and a pilot didn't know what to do. By the end of this story's cycle it had been made out to seem Boeing was planting bombs in its airplanes and detonating them in flight after take off. I'm tired of hearing everything made out to be always some kind of diabolical conspiracy. Covering the Mueller investigation for so long has turned us all into paranoids afraid of their own shadows. Mourn the deaths and fix the problem and let life go on. This is hardly a case worth ending the world over.
This is what we can expect when deregulating industries. If people in our government think this is OK I suggest we do away with filing tax forms. Every 4/15 each American could send a card to the Treasury as to how much they are owed or they need to pay. If Americans working for Boeing can be trusted to always do the right thing, why can't tax payers? Think of the money saved!!
3
No industry should ever be in charge of its own regulation and oversight. This is also a problem with the industry insiders Trump has put in charge of the agencies they are suppose to regulate and oversea. It encourages a culture of corruption but also a danger to the public.
3
Why is this discussion being limited to the airline industry? How about all of our drug recalls? Food recalls? The tobacco industry? Oil and gas execs? Hello revolving door from industry to government. This is what we get when capitalism runs amok!
6
You could have seen the writing on the wall for this deal when the two aircraft builders were facing off. Boeing used its lobbying power with our government to get a deal that has murdered hundreds in their safety equipment OPTIONAL planes. Do we need to see a few crashes from US take offs to care?? Which planes have safety equipment? Spin the wheel, and take your chances. Now, with no pesky regulations from the FAA in the way, we all can kiss flying confidently good-bye, unless you are jetting privately at 30 thousand feet above the din and fray of the common person.
Self-regulation is no regulation and it leads to death and destruction but it makes billionaire CEOs happy. As a result, the GOP loves it!
4
Who could ever have imagined or foreseen that underfunding regulatory agencies would result in hundreds or even thousands of horrible deaths?
The real issues that should be discussed are:
1. Why did the Indonesia airline not cancel that flight in Jakarta after that very close call just landing there.
2. Who was that third pilot in the cockpit having the knowledge and experience to avoid that crash - he saved lives.
3. Why did Ethiopian Airlines not use a more experienced captain and first review with Boeing what went wrong in Indonesia.
4. Obviously Third World Countries were way in over their head and poorly prepared to fly a new design. Inexperienced pilots and saving a quick buck did the killings..
1
We don’t need any more government in our lives. Riiight.
1
How Americans have come to believe in the sophistry of corporate self-regulation and other subterfuges like trickle-down economy, against all common sense, is a symptom of the depth of deception to which they are subjected by some of their leaders.
2
You can call it whatyou want - deregulation, privatation, self inspection, self certification - it has been tried in many industries from highway construction to airplane manufacturing, it is still a case of the wolf guarding the hen house. Contractors take short cuts that will save them money even if is dangerous, illegal or counter to their contract because it the easy way to do it or it will save them money. Inspection and oversight are important to building a hospital and doubly important when building a ship or an airplane.
2
Hold hearings; ask questions. Get name recognition; publicize to get re-elected.
Hire more employees for the FAA to more closely oversee safety concerns in the manufacturing process? Sorry; can’t do that; it’s too expensive.
1
"Congress has encouraged the F.A.A. to delegate more certification work to manufacturers."
Time to list Boeing's campaign contributions to members of Congress of both parties.
2
Two crashes out of how many thousands of planes Boeing has in the air? Seems like their safety standards are pretty good to me. Yes there was a slip up, but the market is already self-correcting without any need for heavy-handed government action: faith in Boeing has plummeted and several orders of their planes have been cancelled, their current line grounded. Their revenue and stock is going to take a serious hit and heads are probably going to roll in the company over this. A formal inquiry into possible professional negligence is probably going to follow but I doubt it will find any evidence of criminal or even legally liable misbehavior. Nonetheless I don't expect whoever gets investigated to have a future in the industry, and I expect strict policy changes from Boeing to avoid this in the future.
Contrary to what people in the comments seem to think, Boeing does not in fact profit off the deaths of innocent people flying on their planes. How does that even remotely make sense? Just look at what's happened from only TWO crashes, they have lost a tremendous amount of trust and business over it. You think Boeing, a company staffed with brilliant engineers, has no idea what the consequences of lax safety standards is? Give me a break.
2
Competent regulation depends on knowing what questions to ask, and getting them answered.
Is there anyone in the whole Trump entourage who could stand up to that?
According to GOtrumP free market logic, the airlines will be safer than ever now that people are finally expressing that they don't like to die in plane crashes caused by the manufacturers.
It only took two tests of the theory. This time.
2
"Regulatory capture" has been a concern since WWII, in that the expertise to regulate an industry often came from the regulated industries themselves, and these people retained loyalty to industries to which they intended to return.
Agencies need highly-trained career employees who plan on a lifetime in the regulatory agency, and who are not moving through the "revolving door" between agency and private sector work.
The description here goes far beyond "regulatory capture." It is a willful refusal to fulfill agency functions, and complete deference of the regulator to the regulated.
Anti-government mythologies have run amok, privatization has run amok, and this is an exemplar of the need to restore primacy and career expertise to regulatory agencies.
3
NPR the other day had a feature that claimed the FAA lacks sufficient personnel, especially personnel with current levels of technical knowledge, to assess/certify aircraft as complex as the Max-8. This makes me think of differing approaches to cope with that. One would be to jack up the budget and recruit hi-tech bureaucrats. One would be to contract with aircraft manufacturers as advisors (Lockheed for Boeing aircraft, Leer for Lockheed aircraft, Boeing for Cessna aircraft, etc.) One would be to outsource the technical evaluations to companies like Bombardier (Canadian) for case-by-case certifications.)
I don't think executives who want to maximize profit do not care about the safety of their crew and passengers. However, the bad publicity and resulting financial bottom line, in the face of such tragedy, brings needed attention to manufacturing systems, testing techniques and oversight.
2
@rixax: Boeing built its whole reputation on airplanes stick and rudder pilots love to fly, because they are so naturally responsive to the controls.
Like the automakers and the diesel scam? Please. “[T]he financial bottom line” means lining their pockets.
1
The Boeing-F.A.A. story strikes me as a useful case study on the dangers of privatizing government services. The private sector is driven first and foremost by profit-motive, the business equivalent of the "biological imperative". The public sector or government is driven first and foremost by the public interest and the public trust. Profit-motive is rarely going to agree much less align with public interest and public trust on best practices, because safeguarding the public interest and public trust necessarily involves types of restraint that are fundamentally at odds with optimizing profit. For folks who think it would be great to privatize social security, education, health care, and others key government services, now seems a useful time to take note. Boeing and the F.A.A. are the Ghost of Christmas Future.
202
@Michael Way
I suspect that someone, somewhere, performed a cost-benefit analysis and thought that the cost of a couple of crashes would cost less than actually doing the job profitably in the first place.
33
@Michael Way
And there is already a rapidly revolving door between private industry profit and politically appointed public " service".
Running for and being elected to public office or serving in a high public government service capacity is the route to and root of finding and funding a pot of director/lobbyist/mass media/ writing gold.
The Obamas have joined the Clintons in making millions from their public " service".
4
@Michael Way: The political system is governed by the imperative of fundraising.
3
Industries self regulating is common, whether oil and gas, pipeline safety, chemicals, food etc.
It takes plane crashes, pipeline explosions, oil or gas well explosions and leaks, pesticides causing bee colony collapse and many other crises for Government to respond.
The Republicans especially have been a party that drowns the government in a bathtub, by slashing funds, regulations and by appointing heads of the departments whose goal is to weaken or destroy the very agency they've been appointed to "lead".
As long as Americans continue to elect short term goal idiots to positions of power, we will continue to be three steps behind the curve, until a final crash.
147
@James Barth
Yup.
I would like to outlaw private jets and planes for all government employees and very wealthy people. Make them fly on the same planes that the rest of us fly on. Sound ridiculous? But if THEY and their spouses and children have to fly on the planes without regulations the rest of us are traveling on, then they would get it that regulations are a necessity.
3
@James Barth
The Aim of the Club for Growth & the aim of Republicans is clear.Its Profits first . Country way down the list.
Profits & Campaign donations no matter where it comes from.
In other words the Aim & singular purpose of the Republican Party is the Deconstruction of America. A nation more people overdose, die,& are injured from opiods,defective airplanes,worn out highway bridges & tunnels.Where Americans die from Asthma from air pollution,contaminated ground water from industries allowed to dump their wastes where ever they wanted& heart attacks or
Republicans have been the driving force behind taxes being viewed as Not a necessity of [duty] part of Americans life..Not a responsibility to contribute to & maintain a nation .Where businesses fail to contribute to social security & Workers compensation & never have to pay for unemployment compensation when they fire Americans for no just cause.
They refuse to Upgrade IRS infrastructure & go after those who fail to report Income from foreign sources .Where The rich can hide their $$$ in foreign bank accounts.
Trump wants to establish Royalty as the American way.Where the connected are immune from punishment & pay no taxes.
7
@Peter S.Mulshine I prefer to think of the GOP as an insurgency. They put themselves above the law and Constitution at the expense of the people and voters. All for greed.
3
Breaking News: Trump is appointing the Boeing CEO as head of thr FAA!
5
The R lie (one of so many) is that "regulation kills jobs."
The real truth is "regulation saves lives."
6
this situation is very reminiscent of the attorney general and Trump, hire someone who will say what you want, have them say it, and then it becomes fact rather than opinion. clearly we need to take more money from the FAA and use it to build the wall. I guess what's good for Boeing is good for the USA...
2
GOP hard at work deregulating everything 20 plus years goes hand-in-hand with tax cuts for the wealthy. There's no money for regulation if you keep reducing government's income. But hey, rich people fly private planes.
4
Since when do you allow the fox to watch the hen house? This is nothing but stupidity. Every thinking adult knows that.
2
All these foreign actors posting as Americans to criticize Boeing. What a farce.
2
Like you have many options. I guess foreigners need not complain about Boeing, as long as all foreign-based airlines fly Airbus.
That’s actually a great idea for Airbus, and a terrible one for Boeing.
Stupid people with stupid idea.
1
What am I missing in the title of this article? Asking sharp questions?? Start with a dumb one---who thought this idea up?
Big Pharma has been regulating itself for years. It should come as a surprise to no one that allowing an industry to regulate itself, including responsibility for safety testing, is the road to disaster. What is a real shame is that it takes so many deaths to bring the problem to the forefront. Those who handed this power to the relevant industries were, I hope, not stupid; the risks should have been obvious.
These tragedies are occurring at a time when the ability of consumers to bring lawsuits against the manufacturers who are making safety decisions about their own products has been severely limited. This makes such self-regulation even more tragic. If consumers had adequate tort remedies, manufacturers would be more hesitant risk such harm. As things stand now, industries regulate themselves and consumers cannot obtain adequate remedies in court. The unholy alliance of government and corporate America grows stronger all the time, with consumer lives being sacrificed in the name of shrinking government and increasing corporate wealth.
1
Stupid is as stupid does.
Name one industry in the history of capitalism that has appropriately self-regulated.
That’s what I thought.
4
Aaaaa the lobbyist and Republicans hard at work.
1
Why is the NYT ignoring the many valid comments from readers who correctly identify the lack of funding for the FAA as a crucial part of this disaster?
3
Excellent piece of work. And very, very scary. With so many competing interests at play, the FAA should be absolutely independent and above the fray. Self-regulation should not be allowed where safety and security of real people is at hand.
Period.
1
Yes, US regulatory agencies have been decimated by GOP ‘small government’ advocates who hate regulation. The Fox is regulating the chicken coop.
3
Just as the banks were going to regulate themselves. How did that work out for you?
5
Looking at the 737 Max 8 head on, one can see that the dihedral of the elevator exactly matches that of the wing, and it is mounted right where the turbulent wake of a stalled wing would probably make the whole elevator ineffective.
Did any test pilots stall this thing in flight testing?
1
What has Ralph Nader been telling us for the past fifty years? The idea of a self-regulating industry is preposterous on its face and yet we’re willing to sacrifice people’s lives out of hubris and the false notion that CEOs are modern-day prophets just by dint of their position. We live in a fundamentally irrational society. No wonder we’re in decline.
2
Isn’t this simply a manifestation of the unregulated free market capitalism that the Republicans advocate? They argue that consumers will reward or punish corporations by voting with their wallets.
I recall that a Republican legislator proposed that restaurants be allowed to repeal the anti-freedom rule that requires personnel to wash their hands after using the facilities, arguing that if customers become sick, they’ll stop eating there.
Boeing and the FAA together have killed hundreds of people. Their reputations are shattered, probably permanently. America has lost face worldwide.
Regulations protect corporations from the greediness of human nature that would destroy from within. I’ve always been proud of this aspect of American Exceptionalism. We don’t hear stories of overpacked American ferry boats sinking, because regulations limit the number of passengers according to safety calculations. Now I will always wonder who’s minding the ship.
2
Resources are constrained. Uh, gosh, could this be a pattern? Starve government, shrink it, privatize and outsource. And if that’s not enough, take what’s left and appoint a department head from the affected trade associations.
Perhaps in an updated Constitution, we might consider direct elections for Cabinet/Department heads. Right after we correct the Citizens United government purchase plan. We might get people actually serving the public interest.
4
It is a bit absurd to ask a manufacturer to double-check the safety of their products when they are, I assume, already anxious about producing safe products. Asking a manufacturer to regulate themselves is the same as giving them a carte blanche since there would be no new perspectives introduced.
1
Libertarians and Republicans think with their wallets. If their decision hurts every day people but helps THEIR bottom line they will put as many peoples lives at stake as necessary. Great humans Hugh?
5
Oh but they're fine "Christians."
Under the delegation program, “the staff responsible for regulating aircraft safety are answerable to the manufacturers who profit from cutting corners, not the American people who may be put at risk,” Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, wrote to the inspector general last week.
Are Boeing aircraft only sold to 'Americans' Senator Blumethal? Is it only Americans who are at risk? Boeing is answerable to all their global customers, including the 'non-Americans' that lost their lives so horrifically.
2
Two truths:
1—No one can do business without government: without courts and enforcement, few would feel the need to honor contracts.
2—No one and no entity can regulate itself: there is no such thing as self-regulation.
In a perfect world, government and business would be equally powerful and would oversee one another.
This is not a perfect world. Corporations rule the lawless globe. Dictators enable them, and themselves.
Someone has said business is dog eat dog, and government is just the other way around.
Political Darwinism?
50
@Naples
« This is not a perfect world » you say. But in this respect Europe is definitively leading the way. Why?
3
@Naples
Our fearless leader doesn't honor contracts so why should anyone else?
1
I was actually discussing European chocolate with some coworkers yesterday and the same principle applies (hear me out).
In Europe, much of the "chocolate" sold in the U.S. cannot legally be considered chocolate since it barely contains any cocoa and is mostly sugar and fillers.
Cadbury makes incredible chocolate in the U.K., but the theoretically same chocolate bars they sell in the U.S. aren't anywhere near as good. Why? Because the U.S. has no regulations on what you are and are not allowed to put in a chocolate bar so they fill it with cheap fillers as well. One would like to think that Cadbury makes delicious chocolate bars because they care about the integrity of the product, but if that were true they wouldn't let it lapse the second they can.
Telling industry to regulate itself is ridiculous. It's like a murderer standing as his own judge and jury and deciding he doesn't deserve any jail time. What a surprise!
146
@Kristina
Or, like having someone cheat lie and steal to win the Presidency; and then appointing attorneys general and Supreme Court Justices (Justices who will determine the Prez's guilt or innocence).
As long as they're "winning," Republicans do not care about any silly "conflicts of interest."
24
@Kristina. Agreed. Just like when you appoint an attorney general because he says he will declare you not guilty!
12
@Willy P
What does the Boeing 737 MAX have to do with Trump?
The Boeing 737 Max has a design flaw of the engines thrust line being below the air frame's center of gravity that causes it to be unstable. The correct solution is to modify the air frame to bring the thrust line in line with the center of gravity. A software fix still leaves the air frame unstable but is much less costly and is a faster fix that enabled them to offer the air transport in competition to other aircraft manufacturers. Safety was sacrificed for profit. Oversight was not there to demand that the air frame be built stable.
3
It has become the American way under the current neoliberal political system: other industries that are regulating themselves by having their representatives in the regulating agencies are pharma, agro business, consumer protection and Boeing is just part of that bigger pattern. I think we now have ample proof that such a system can not work to the advantage of the public: the opioid crisis, glyphosate and crashing airplanes are just a few of many examples.
1
Boeing is too connected to fear the senate. What are you going to do? Buy Airbus? Clinton allowed the Boeing - McDonnell Douglas merger and created a monopoly and it is no surprise the last successful Boeing design, 777, was from before the merger. Sonic Cruiser, 787, 747-8, 737MAX neither never get off design or have serious problems and are forced on allies through diplomacy.
1
The release of the 727 in the 1960s is an analog to today's 737 tragedy. Three 727s crashed shortly after coming on the market. Those tragedies, like the 2 with the 737, reveal how lack of rigorous pre-release testing results in unnecessary deaths. Airplane software bugs aren't like those found in, say, word processing software where they can result in over 300 unnecessary deaths.
3
It looks like Boeing, and presumably others, are relying on those flying to test the efficacy of their software since they claim to have "updated" it in a matter of days.
3
This airplane goes into an unrecoverable dive 40 seconds after this stall-prevention system malfunctions, if the pilot does not recognize the problem immediately, flip the two switches that turn it off, and hand crank the elevator wheel on the console to correctly trim the airplane by hand.
I think nobody is in charge at Boeing.
2
The FAA uses people designated as FAA-DER (Designated Engineering Representative) to review "simple" certification documents. If anything is controversial, they are supposed to turn it over to FAA employees. The DER's are paid by the company whose product they are reviewing. If the FAA did not use this system, they would have to employ many more reviewers, who would be paid by the government. Congress needs to make a decision which system we should be using, and provide the funding.
1
I truly appreciate the many long hours of research and time that has been spent by the various reporters in writing these informative and necessary articles. The information must be shared, no matter where it leads.
But I have to be honest, the more information I read, the more nervous and worried I become. I will be flying several times this year and the next and yet my trepidation and concern continues to climb like a plane towards the heavens.
I realize this information is vital, I just don't like how it is effecting my already scared and petrified state of mind. I never enjoyed flying but I tolerated it. These days, I keep asking myself what's next.
2
@If you are that nervous about flying, maybe you should take a train, if one is available, or drive to your destination. Consider taking an inter-city bus. As to what's next, the FAA safety oversight seems to be a case of having the fox guard the hen house. Nobody should be surprised when this sort of problem comes up again. Marge Keller
@Al Lapins
Unfortunately we will be flying to London. But thanks for the suggestions - great possible alternatives.
1
It might shake a few budget dollars loose if the law required every elected or appointed government official including and their entire immediate families to fly only on planes self-certified by the manufacturer. Do that and the FAA inspectors and certification folks at the Boeing plant in Renton will look like ants at a picnic. Who other than government should have the responsibility fo set safety standards? OK, in concert with the relevant interested parties including industry but also consumers and users. But there have been too many instances of companies selling a product known to be dangerously faulty for purposes of profit to throw in the towel on regulation, though the current administration appears intent on doing so. One cannot help imagine the whining and spin that would follow the crash of a 737 Max by a domestic carrier within our shores replete with photos of charred MAGA hats amidst the wreckage and sanctimonious uttering by the current administration that Obama was behind it all.
2
Whether it’s food safety, prudential banking, or transportation safety, companies need self-regulation but also external regulation.
Profit motive and private greed are just too overpowering.
The market is punishing Boeing. A major order of new planes was awarded to a competitor. Just as the market punishes those with lax food safety or risky banking.
But we shouldn’t wait for disasters before we take steps to prevent them.
63
@Rita. Ironically, corporations will also work the “other side of the street” as they privatize profits and make punishments something covered by the public through government expense. For example, when they put in pipelines that fail, the cleanup is often at least partially covered by government (the public.)
6
@B. Rothman the financial burden of environmental cleanup costs & ongoing health issues caused by unregulated industry is always paid by we the consumers & tax payers long after the corporate & individual wealth is pulled out. Those responsible are frequently long gone OR let off by our govt.
Basically money & greed / lobbying need to be removed from our govt.
2
This pile-on is analogous to a public outcry over a medical matter. Let the experts sort this out. Yes, there was a misconception about risk on this particular software mode. It’s really tragic. Maybe they will learn a testing technique that can catch this, as software only will only get deeper over time. If FAA lacks the capability to test software systems they may need to build it. What stands out to me is, after the Lion Air crash, Boeing and FAA knew of this issue, a real threat to life, and yet they did not take effective action commensurate with the known or obvious risks to life. So The Ethiopian crash happened, which in retrospect should have been foreseen. I do have confidence that this was a software bug that can be fixed, and the fix certified. I do not think “the sky is falling” and the experts know nothing. That is an anti-intellectual attitude and the experts, who are indeed at FAA and Boeing, can fix this.
8
@rjs7777: This system was introduced because the new engines made the 737 airframe unstable in pitch. All previous models tend to resist stalling with an aerodynamic negative feedback as the angle of attack increases. They don't need this system.
9
@rjs7777. Easy for you to say, no one in your family was on either plane — both of which went down because Boeing was able to make its own rule on whether the plane was safe. They did not think it necessary to provide every single pilot with the ability to overcome their teeny, tiny computer problem. Would you stand for this kind of thinking and decision making if your food depended upon it? I think not.
8
@rjs7777
Had pilots actually been informed AND trained on a key difference between the 737 MAX and prior 737 models (ie: the presence of an aggressive software system and how to deal with it when it puts an aircraft and it's passengers and crew in real danger)... perhaps there would not have been two fatal crashes within months of each other and on a relatively new aircraft in production.
The real and justified public outcry here is not that a plane crashed, but rather that it crashed largely due to a undisclosed new system that had an aggressive action profile to the point where it would give pilots very little time to recover and over-ride the system (recent tests by pilots who were fully informed and trained on how to deal with MCAS said they had at most 40 seconds to interrupt an unrecoverable loss of control of the aircraft, at low altitude to boot).
Boeing failed. Boeing cannot be trusted with largely self certification. The FAA... and in fact Congress.. is complicit in that they removed the long standing process for aircraft certification by the FAA and with 2002 legislation. I would like to point out that Boeing had only released two new aircraft designs since the new legislation (the 787 and the 737 MAX) and both have had serious safety issues after certification and had the entire fleet grounded accordingly.
16
The GOP started their deregulation crusade in the 80's and have continued to deregulate anything they could get their hands on since. And now this dangerous trend is carried out at warp speed by Trump and company so corporate profits and stockholders can look at their portfolios with glee.
Unfortunately, 401K's also benefit from these deregulations, but at what price; the safety of our water, food, environment, travel and anything that make this presidency look "good" to his supporters. And of course let's not forget the non supporters who just care about the money.
13
@bea durand: It looks to me that inherent instability has been built into this whole system of unregulated positive feedbacks.
What a stupid snowball of decrepitude has grown from the least credible presidential election in US history.
2
@bea durandReagan, the worst president of the last century, started this obnoxious trend.
2
One would think that we have enough experience with the profit motive to understand the dangers of letting markets take care of themselves.
If is unfortunate that the need for government to thoughtfully regulate markets is being cast as “socialism” by one of our major parties.
In fairness, some of the resistance to government regulation is rooted in regulatory overreach.
2
@Michael Roush: What do you consider to be "regulatory over-reach"?
Generally speaking, inventions can be freely exploited until they create problems that motivate regulation.
For Times readers who would like to see a case in which an aircraft engineer fights for safety, I would urge you to watch the 1951 film, No Highway in the Sky, based on a Nevil Shute novel. It stars Jimmy Stuart, Marlene Dietrich, and Glynis Johns. It might provide some inspiration in these depressing times, and it's a wonderful movie.
5
@ShenBowen: A close brush with a lost career for an engineer who had to prove the tail of the airplane would just break off from flutter fatigue.
2
This sort of thing is why I consider Libertarians naive.
40
@Craig ScottLibertarians and Neoliberals.
1
@Craig Scott
Libertarians are not naive. They are greedy. Crudely, savagely, amorally greedy.
2
With lying, cheating and dishonesty now the national norm, why are we surprised to see that fewer regulations kill people?
24
Good job Boeing. You were cocky enough to think no international rival would beat you so you cheated the system and put lives at risk. If this is MAGA, I want no part of it and neither does the rest of the world. Government separate of corporate interests does have a purpose - at least it used to
20
@P: Now that money is the ONLY thing that matters in politics, people don't matter at all.
2
@Steve Bolger sadly I have to agree with you. Maybe more politicians like AOC will change the course
It is so obviously illogical to have industries/companies do their own regulating. It's akin to having people make up their own rules. How would that go?
8
@Nancy G, if not people, then who, machines?
If a profit-based industry requires regulation, by definition it can't regulate itself. Isn't this too stupid to argue? Like having "sharp questions" about med students grading themselves and printing their own diplomas.
"Sharp questions," i.e, unconscionable lobbyists successfully dictating policy while avoiding personal use of the airplane in question.
3
Pharmaceutical companies “self-regulate,” airlines self-regulate, air- and water-polluters self-regulate, and one would be hard-pressed to judge which toothless lion is the weakest and most pathetic - the FDA, the FAA, or the EPA.
That’s what you get when you put former executives from those industries, or puppets of those industries, in the top jobs.
“Self-regulation” is non-regulation. We have foxes in charge of guarding our chicken coops.
35
Will Boeing top brass commit to taking commercial flights that use its new plane, on a regular basis? If not, it should be grounded.
8
@Ilya Shlyakhter, there have been thousands of flights & millions of passengers carried on this airplane, I'm not sure if your point?
@tom wilson If the risk is so small, Boeing executives should have no trouble taking it, right? And yet they aren’t offering.
1
It is a time-honored practice for FAA upper management to take industry jobs at aircraft manufacturers or trade associations because of their "inside connections" with their buddies to get sticky issues resolved and make double the bucks they did in government. And what industry doesn't do that with government watchdog agencies? Big oil and defense contractors do this is spades.
Outlaw the practice? Not under this pro-business administration. Nothing is going to change here folks, not while T is in office and even then I doubt you'll see real change.
3
The FAA and Boeing deserve additional scrutiny, but airline safety in the US is second to none. The operation of the MCAS system obviously created major problems but part of the reason is being overlooked.
Inexperienced pilots, particularly outside the US and Western Europe.
Research shows that as the middle class grows, so does demand for air travel. Global fleets are expanding but availability of pilots needs to catch up. Knowing how to handle emergencies is something that comes with experience. Look at Sully. Superbly capable. Close to retirement.
Statistics indicate that in the next 10 years, fleet growth will require about 125,000 more pilots. About 105,000 current pilots will retire during that period. So 230,000 new pilots will be needed. How are they going to get experience.
Yes, the government should review the certification process.
I am more worried about who is at the controls and less about the airplane.
7
@Steve Ell
Didn’t Boeing hype its 737 Max by saying that new pilot training was not necessary?
And didn’t include any information about the software in the manual?
@Steve Ell
How are pilots supposed to gain "Experience" if the software kills them before they get the experience? It seems that Boeing didn't provide the information for pilots to gain the experience and know how to over-ride the software trying to crash their plane.
@Tony N by acting for a number of years as first officers with experienced pilots
the ethiopian airlines pilot had 8,000 flight hours - enough to be a regional airplane pilot in the us
the first officer had 200 hours
the airline doesn't own a simulator and didn't send the pilots to a training organization
not enough to know how to act in an emergency - they were looking for the manual
you can't just blame boeing
I keep reading about "holding down costs for the government", "bringing out new planes faster at a time of intense global competition", "profit from cutting corners".
Speed, profits and revenue should never be at the foreground of this industry, but it has and safety for the flying public, not to mention the pilots and crew, is either low on the list, if even ON the list of factors to take into consideration.
While planes do not fall out of the sky on a regular or daily basis (thank heaven), what these two fatal crashes have done is illuminate the unconscionable partnership between the FAA and companies like Boeing. They should not be in bed together. Somewhere along the way, the FAA have lost what their primary mission and goal is - to keep the flying public safe by monitoring and enforcing safety regulations within the industry. Not only do they seem to have lost their way, they have lost the confidence of many, beginning with me. Right now I find it difficult to trust anything that comes out of the mouths of the FAA or the airlines.
4
@Marge Keller, what was lost was good maintenance practices (Lion Air) and causes as yet unknown with Ethiopian Air. Until the investigation(s) are complete, everyone is just guessing.
1
@tom wilson
Very wise words Mr. Wilson.
They need to take their time . . . quickly.
1
The issue of regulation of highly technical processes is more difficult than some people understand.
People don't get a degree in aeronautical engineering so they can get a job with the FAA.
Assuming that any government agency actually has staff with the requisite knowledge to judge a techincal industry, is very generous and often incorrect.
Case in point: After the Deepwater Horizon incident the Obama adminstration arrogantly determined, and attempted to implement, that government functionaries would oversee drilling operations on deepwater rigs.
That sounds good, but the only way to do that is to send federal marshalls to oil company offices, seize petroleum and drilling engineering employees, and force them to leave their jobs and join a federal agency and remain there without quitting.
Good luck with ttah.
The policy quietly failed, for obvious reasons.
Further, conspiracy theorists are usually proven wrong in circumstances like this. All the people are trying to do what they think is right for their sphere of influence, but the interactions of complex systems, materials, and series of events can lead to unanticipated consequences.
Reckless endangerment is rarley proven.
This will turn out to be nothing more than an attempt to shift blame from the operators to the manufacturers, because manufacturers are an easier target.
It is already clear that airlines went cheap on the specs, and pilot training was inadequate.
@Objectivist, I agree but would add just about all people rather than some. The Gov't doesn't pay enough to attract those at the top of theirfields with advance degrees.
Industries regulating themselves? What could possibly go wrong?
5
Government's "revolving door" policy applied to FAA is too liberal and dangerous. A former government employee that supervises this particular industry can jump right to that industry and become an employee is "unethical and counter productive." We know that the 2008 financial crisis to certain degree is linked to the "revolving door" syndrome between Wall Street firms and government regulation body. If the legislation cannot curb this phenomenon, problems will occur again and again in the future.
2
The airlines regulated themselves in the 90's when they decided that reinforced cockpit doors were too expensive. After 9/11 they decided they were mistaken.
9
@hal9000
I agree with you to a point. Passengers on Flight 93 were able to garner entry into the cockpit, thus preventing the terrorists from completing their insane mission by crashing the plane into their desired target. These brave souls mustered the courage and gave their lives in order to save others. Who knows what would have happened if they were unable to enter that cockpit door. Events which took place on 9/11 were as tragic as they were unimaginable.
Frankly, I thought the cockpit doors became reinforced after that Germanwings plane crash where the first officer was locked out of cockpit by the second officer who then deliberately crashed the plane into the Alps.
1
A free market will actually self regulate, although we may don’t want to pay the price (understandably).
Please, raise your right hand those who are willing to take (buy a ticket) this week on a flight operated with a Boing 737 Max?
Airlines want to sell tickets if they do not because of a brand or model of airplane, they will ground these planes because flying empty planes is quite expensive and will search for an alternative.
This holds true in a market where almost perfect information is available to all players. Yes, I know it’s an utopia. And more so nowadays when we have almost obliterated The Press.
You may have heard the popular saying in economics: “There’s no such thing as free beer” and it seems to hold some truth after all. Regrettably in the Internet age we have come to expect reliable information (News) to be free beer but instead we are most probably getting dirty water.
1
@abetancort, yes but the masses will quickly forget & economics (i.e. cheap tickets) rather than any misconceived danger will be the deciding factor. I wouldn't hesitate to fly on a max 8 provided it was US airline. The guiding factor being well trained pilots with lots of flying experience. Forgotten in everyone's panic attack is the reported second pilots flying time, 200 hours. You'll never see that in the U.S.
@tom wilson
Remember that any commercial airplane is designed for the ground up to be flown solo, the presence of the first officer is first of all a security measure designed to command the plane in case the captain becomes disabled.
Please, don’t get a Max 8 until you are sure it has been retrofitted with the security measures and overrides that should have been in place from the begging.
At this point, the accidents seems that were not due to operator error but a system error. In such cases, no captain (almost non) could have prevented the crashes, much less any first officer that wasn’t an acting captain.
Regulation in the US is such a joke. Financial institutions pay rating agencies to get top ratings for toxic financial products, Ex/ Boeing executives certify their own products, a head of Goldman Sachs can become the treasury secretary.....
2
What’s more important, a steady stream of corporate profits or a few fatal airline crashes here and there?
Corporations are people too, you know, in this age of Citizens United.
Besides, compared to Boeing, how many crash victims contribute to re-election campaigns? I thought so.
2
Sigh! The tendency of humans to put a sly finger on the scale goes back a long time. This less than noble aspect of the human condition is exactly why we need to craft, support and be watchful over regulations. Not falling for the deregulation arguments is so important. Now that doesn't mean there are not heavy handed and literally stupid regulations that should have never been written and I see the arguments over that aspect of our commerce as healthy. But at least we could error on the side of due diligence and especially in areas so critical to safety.
2
Boeing planes are the SAFEST transportation EVER known to man. They have developed a small software glitch which will be fixed in 6 months.
The nature of aviation is such that even a small glitch can kill hundreds and all should work hard to avoid them. But even with the glitch Boeing planes are the safest means of transport know to man!
@Neal Kluge
That would be Airbus planes as no A320neo have ever crashed and there are twice as many A320neo flying as 737MAX.
You can also go read the long list of accidents on 787 vs none on A350 on Wikipedia
1
I think the FAA is just too incompetent and joined at the hip with Boeing. Boeing is a private company and driven by profits and will behave the way it did. But FAA is a regulator and the world relies on it to be fair and objective. But in this instance, China took the lead and only after 30 countries banned the plane from their air space did FAA act. Going ahead FAA certification will mean nothing. Other countries are going to take their time, in certifying Boeing planes. FAA certification does not mean Americans will be willing to fly in those automatically. FBI has opened a criminal investigation into FAA certification process. I suspect there are many skeletons lying in the cupboard there. The FAA head having worked for the industry trade group is of most concern as regards to his objectivity and ability to not being influenced by Boeing. Ethiopia was not even willing to allow FAA to examine the black box voice recordings, because most countries have lost trust in FAA to be fair. Sorry state of affairs indeed.
74
@Ben. The big issue coming up for everyone is going to be when the FAA at some point in the next few months declare that the problem is fixed and the 737 Maxs are safe to fly.
At this point, what do the other aviation authorities do? Will they accept the word of the FAA? After Trump's recent record of throwing his ("very healthy") weight around, will these aviation authorities come under political pressure one way or the other.
The sums of money are significant with the recent single order from China for Airbus worth close to $35 billion.
6
@Ben I agree with all but one point -- it is not that the FAA is incompetent -- it is that management was. Employees had been complaining that management was too cozy with Boeing -- and none of us cared. It was in the news. We did nothing.
We don't protect whistle blowers, we don't want to be bothered. We get what we fight for. And we have laid down for this chaos.
7
@Ben Congress has steadily pushed the FAA into an unhealthy relationship with Boeing, undoubtedly at the request of Boeing. This most be reversed, the FAA needs to have the resources to independently do certification. This can be paid for by taxpayers (who want safe travel) and/or by Boeing via their profits.
1
In my dealings with the FAA in an international environment (ICAO) over decades I noticed a very strong and increasing ( right-wing, private-trumps-state inspired?) tendency to retreat from the core mandate of a regulator, by claiming that it was in the best interest of the industry to operate safely , and thus the State regulator could be limiting itself to rubber stamping and printing the regulations worked out by the industry. This has indeed worked for quite a well not too badly, but in a fiercely competitive environment, the pressure on middle "tech" managers to "cut corners" coming from the beancounters is simply too high.
I have been involved in several Threat Risk Assessments. One risk that seems to always come up is oversight without a true separation of duty. And here it is again.
2
Time and again it has been shown that industry, any industry, cannot self-regulate. The attempts always highlight the inherent conflict, ironically, between the interests of the industry and the interests of the public. Each needs the other, and so not at the expense of the other. Only a non-vested third party can fairly and safely determine a sustaining balance between the two.
3
I’d like to know if Airbus and the regulators who regulate it also cut corners when it comes to safety. In other words, can we count on Airbus where we cannot count on Boeing?
3
@Mark
Having worked with AIRBUS also for many years, it can be noted that the French influence on this company is rather strong, and there "Etatisme" is a core value of the culture. The problems there are rather coming from an over-reliance on highly sophisticated and sometimes over-ambitious engineering, which also occasionally challenges the tech-savviness of the regulatory oversight personnel.
@Mark. In a sense, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. The Airbus equivalent machine - the A320neo - first flew in September 2014, and entered commercial service in January 2016. There are now around 700 in service - roughly twice as many as there are 737 MAXs. And so far, touch wood, while there have been incidents, they have been minor.
3
This is one result of the relentless drive to defund, if not demonize, the federal government's agencies charged by Congress with carrying out the myriad health, safety and environmental protection provisions in law, hard won - every one of them - in legislation like the Clean Water Act, etc. ("written in blood" as a merchant mariner I know says). These agencies, far from being "bloated", struggle to enforce the law as their personnel and resources are squeezed year by year. Trump's new budget is reported to cut them all 5% across the board.
The GOP has for years railed against regulations but lacked the guts to actually name those they want to defang. At least the Trump administration is honest about the protections they're removing.
The Coast Guard has a similar "alternate compliance program", in which much inspection and enforcement work is delegated to "classification societies", industry funded outfits that establish and maintain technical standards for ships. This was similarly in response to a squeeze in marine safety funding and personnel at the Coast Guard.
These regulations should reviewed on a regular basis for currency and practicability, and updated - even eliminated - as needed. But the agencies charged with enforcement must not be shortchanged, and the Reaganite cry that "the Government is the problem" should be seriously reconsidered when it comes to public safety.
5
A couple airplane crashes, and liberals are all about saving lives and safety. What about profits? America has voted again and again for profits over a few paltry lives and corporations doing anything they want as long as they make their stockholders happy. This is American Exceptionalism. No country in the world has our values. The will of the American people is reflected in the government we vote for, and it is clear, for decades now, how little anything except money means to Americans. Want to judge something, then look at the results.
10
Industry or any business doesn’t regulate itself. They only do it if a non-regulation habit would harm because customers address it.
1
“Capitalism without rules is theft”. Elizabeth Warren.
She’s right. I don’t think anyone should disagree with that statement.
For all the attacks by the Right calling Progressives as Socialist or Communist, which of the two is putting forward policies that help the people and the consumers? It’s the progressives.
For all the propagandistic labels used, Capitalism is about markets. Markets thrive on competition. The Right wants to obfuscate monopoly power with Capitalism. It’s not.
We need independent and strong market oversight as we can’t leave it to the players. They’ve shown themselves, repeatedly, as not up to the ask.
3
It's like putting the wolf in charge of the sheep.
Trump, FAA chief and Boeing are guilty of civil if not criminal charges for the loss of the hundreds of lives in the two Boeing plane crashes and should be held accountable.
Of course it will never happen here but if Boeing was located in some third world country, you better believe the guilty would be prosecuted.
1
Sadly, 341 people have died between the two recent Max 8 crashes as a result of Boeing’s placement of profit over safety. An icon of aeronautical mastery with a heretofore stellar corporate reputation, Boeing must not only fix the plane, but it’s newly tarnished reputation.
Isn’t the role of government to protect the public, while also protecting the private sector from themselves lest the unchecked and unbridled quest for profits and market share at all costs run amok?
3
Industry Capture: What happens when a regulatory agency (FAA) places the wishes of its industry above the welfare of its users.
1
I can promise one thing, that no matter what happens, I’ll never board a MAX jet. You can’t delegate oversight to the folks whose top objective is to generate revenue and then assume that because nothing has happened in terms of crashes that it’s working. Trust me, it isn’t.
2
I'm in the market for aircraft. I definitely won't buy anything American until that country gets the fox out of its hen house. Full stop!
3
@James Murphy Every country in the world delegates certification to manufacturers. If you need the fox out of the hen house, then I guess you are out of the aircraft market.
It is the so-called invisible hand of the so-called free market in a real free fall. Profits over people.
17
Would a farmer put a fox in charge of a henhouse? This maxim applies to deregulation as well as privatization as well as regulation.
1
Repeated goosing by that invisible hand has passed the point of endurance.
If I were a foreign air carrier in the market for new planes I would reach the obvious conclusion that the current administration is unwilling or unable to enforce minimum safety regulations on new planes; I would go shopping elsewhere.
A clear example that government regulation is good for the economy. I doubt the current administration understands the concept.
This is true in all areas; what will be the cost of this administration's gutting of environmental regulations?
17
When the DOT was created the functions of the CAB were shifted to the FAA and the CAB was eliminated and the FAA a previously independent agency was merged into DOT. Prior to the creation of the DOT, the CAB was charged with safety and the FAA with promotion. The question raised at the time was can an agency whose primary responsibility was promotion of the aviation industry assume the safety function previously performed by the independent CAB? Are there inherent conflicts?
2
When active researchers in an Academic field seem to get a fresh significant result they send it to a respective research journal's editors.Then the Editors send the research manuscript to referees who are almost all the time not close acquaintances of the Author(s) and these anonymous authors decide if it is worthy of publication or not.That is possible because in the specialties there are several star or leading top experts.However, the leading Air Vehicle (AV) manufacturers can be counted in one finger.So,the Q is not that often Boeing's engineers are the ones who vetted it but could they have been more thorough, under the circumstances?.Even now the possible fix to 737 Max's,through non stop effort,came from Boeing itself, is there a more qualified entity?. Besides,B.Co has invited Pilots and others to test the suggested improvement.I don't know if in the Air Lines business some degree of self regulation can be altogether done away with.Some commenter on an NYT's report about Max's in March 24 issue daringly said Air Plane building is just Engineering and not Sci.Again Engineering has to use Math +Physics as its language and tool from Sophomore level and up and being versed in Science adds more perfection.Hence when pushing the boundary of the subject the discussion becomes complex and things are not always that obvious.All the articles in NYT since the accident have tried to make the discussion plain but still its nature remains technically quite involved.TMD.
1
Recently Donald Trump signed an executive order requiring freedom of speech at universities to promote conservative values, even though they already dominate schools of business and economics where students are taught that everyone acting in their own economic best interest, like Boeing basing its business decisions on cash flow and quarterly profit statements, somehow benefits society as a whole. Business schools also teach that "external" costs of doing business are the responsibility of government to regulate. But graduates of these schools go on to become masters of industry having enormous influence over government policy, and Republicans have become their champions as the party of deregulation and drowning government in the bathtub. Under their leadership we cut corporate taxes, cut government regulation , and cut the budgets of regulators like the FAA, so that Boeing is more profitable but does not pay the actual cost to society of doing business. We need fewer businessmen in charge and more scientists and engineers. We need to stop teaching our students that money is all that matters.
15
@Sherry
for the rich and powerful like this president and his inner circle MONEY is all that matters. it's the new world where greed and personal enrichment are all that matters for the top 1%.
2
It seems obvious to me that delegating oversight of the safety issues on aircraft to the aircraft manufacturer is a recipe for disaster. We've just seen that very disaster x 2. I read a comment yesterday in a NYT article on the MCAS issue from a man who questioned why the solution to the engine placement on the 737 Max 8, which made the plane less airworthy, was a software change. His thought was that the solution should be structural, rendering the plane itself airworthy rather than a software patch that leaves the fundamental design flaw in place. This makes complete sense to me although I realize that it will make Boeing executives howl in fiscal agony. That's too bad. That's accountability for putting profits ahead of the safety of the flying public. I don't plan to fly on a 737 Max in the future regardless of how much software Boeing fixes.
6
Airlines certify their planes, chemical and pharmaceutical companies certify their chemicals/ drugs safe. Trump and company now allow these “ safe” products to pollute our waterways. Iowa whose population loves Trump can’t drink untreated water because of agricultural runoff. The companies make money and the people get sick. And now Trump wants to remove people’s healthcare!
8
I would ask that the NYT closely examine why foreign carrier pilots are not skilled enough or properly trained on how to fly these airplanes. I would ask that the NYT fully examine the differences in a U.S. pilot as to a third-world country pilot. Why was it that these under-trained and undereducated pilots had so few hours training and actually flying these aircraft? Why does the U.S. airline industry suffer because the media and politicians are afraid to look closely and report accurately on the shortcomings in the foreign aviation world? Why does the FAA even exist? Self-regulation is not the answer.
1
Like it or not self regulation occurs in many industries , JCAHO for hospitals , INPO for nuclear plants ,and it goes on and on. Im sure there is a relationship to the dollar also. It works more than it doesnt but as all human institutions it falls short at times. Maybe the rational is that experts in the fields are required but then their relationship is too close to the tree to see the forest
Rationally thinking Boeing should never have compromised on safety even when self certifying it self. Excessive greed is self immolating and inhumane towards others.
4
The FRA and railroads have a similar incestuous relationship. I once discovered a a valve that was to be serviced bi-annually that hadn’t been serviced in 40 years causing a brake release and several roll out derailments. Why? They inspected their own work and it was NEVER done.
4
It seems the plan to Make America Great Again requires put foxes in charge of every hen house.
11
Industry doesn't regulate itself. Ever. Falling for the right-wing charade to the contrary is just unhinged. Something America will learn to give up, or continue to suffer ever escalating consequences.
8
Think about how insane that statement is - industry regulating itself. I am sure Wall Street loves it, but like almost everything what is good for Wall Street is usually terrible for everybody else.
7
The more I read on many and diverse topics I fear the US has sunken into a state of endemic corruption like some deplorable 3rd world state. It is all about "winning", "getting ahead" and accumulation of stuff/wealth. Honesty? It's an old fashioned value that has fallen off the radar. Yet honesty is the vital lubricant that allows our feeble abilities , each of us having 70% of the same DNA as a slug, to share learnings and develop stronger understandings that actually allows society to advance. And when we loose honesty, we all move back toward the slime we came from.
24
It's absurd. The government has to regulate it just as with drugs and food and in other industries OSHA and in medicine the board of registration. Especially here because the safety stakes care so high and let's face it our culture is saturated with cheating.
Self regulation is no regulation.
It's bad enough the lobbyists write our laws.
5
In February 2009, US Continental Flight 3407 crashed into a house killing all 49 people aboard and one person on the ground as it was flying into Buffalo.
Since then, U.S. airlines have flown 8 billion passengers without a single fatal crash.
I think the industry has done an admirable job regulating itself.
What happened to The Ethiopian plane was due to pilot inexperience/error.
It’s unfortunate, but true. My father was a military pilot - he said he’s proud of our airline industry.
He said other counties should only have the superior training our pilots receive and the ground support with our air traffic controllers.
@JMS
the plane was not equipped with the safety feature and Boeing knowingly sold the plane to governments and poor nations without the safety features. the pilots did not receive the training that they should have because Boeing marketed the plane telling buyers that their pilots didn't need any new training for these planes. details are found in the articles written by the brilliant and hardworking reporters on this topic.
5
@Rain
It’s why I don’t fly Ethiopian Airlibes - it’s not up to Boeing to force safety options on carriers who are willing to sacrifice safety to save a few dollars.
It is all about a common type rating and pilot costs for Southwest airlines.That is how it started to begin with and now the rest of the airlines are on board.They are looking at the bottom line and are thinking profits. Boeing knows by developing a new jet it will take both time and money so just keep making variations.Eventually the game was going to be up. Hopefully this is the last 737 variation.
FAA should not include as a joint-regulation success-measurement that it “allows Boeing in particular to bring out new planes faster at a time of intense global competition with its European rival Airbus.” FAA work for the people, not Boeing.
4
Correction. FAA SHOULD work for the people. In occasion a regulatory agency is in cahoots with they entity they are regulating.
Who was regulating the banks in the early 2000s?
3
It's simple: In a sane society, no business has any business "regulating itself"; that concept falls to human nature every time.
But for decades, Republicans, big-L and small-l Libertarians, and the corporations have been feeding us a line of garbage about the inherent good of "deregulation" and for some reason, we've been lapping it up. The inevitable end result was airplanes that fall out of the sky, telecom that works less well and costs more than in most of the rest of the world, and a "healthcare" and pharmaceutical industry that is responsible fr many, many unnecessary deaths every year.
Someday, we'll remember why we regulated all of these things in the first place and did it using our government (which, after all, is just all of us acting together).
13
Anyone who remembers why will be long gone. Everyone else will have been indoctrinated that any regulation is too burdensome and onerous. Hey, we have too many people on the planet, anyway (sarcasm).
The title of this article states a self-evident fact - businesses will not provide the public with the best regulatory oversight. The so-called "self regulation" supported by the GOP is a sleight of hand to cut governmental employees and continue its march of budget cutting. The irony in it all is the reality of the GOP then having to hike taxes or borrow more to avoid excessive deficit spending.
It's a tired, old pattern that must end. The so-called fiscal restraint puts us all at unacceptable risk. Let's all remember the spontaneous combustion of the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland, Ohio in 1968 as the worst example of absolutely no regulatory oversight. The FAA must be given the resources to hire the best regulators and there must be enough of them to keep us safe in a timely manner.
3
The Republican joy in rolling back regulation comes back to bite them. Shocker. How many times have we learned that allowing industry to "regulate themselves" benefits NOT the public, but the industry? Sure, there are always people who will do their best job, and there are always people who will do what they must and nothing more. In an industry where mistakes are measured in loss of life (like air travel and/or medicine), maybe best to err on the side of safety rather than expediency?
5
Unfortunately to most large corporations it is a money game even if human lives are at risk. They put corporate profits and shareholders stock prices above everything else. They have analysts that figure out what the cost is to the company for a disaster and if those disaster costs (loss of lives) do not exceed the benefits (of profits) in dollars - then they don't care. They choose profits. It's the new world we live in - greed and corporate enrichment is paramount. And in this administration particularly it's greed, money, power and personal enrichment of this president and his inner circle. We know who will win this debate.
4
Regulations are expensive and show industries down from rolling out the next big money making product. In some industries it will not make such a impact on the customers, the result may be one or two people die or are permanently hurt, the industry pays for the damage and gets the new products out and bringing in more profit. I agree with one of the comments that said America is so driven by greed that the risk is weighted and planned into the final product. Some products can killed more people and certainly the safety should be looked at more closely but when profit for the stockholders and getting to market before the competition is your biggest priority, human lives are a risk companies are willing to take.
When we fly, we trust that as the pilot of most flights says, "your safety is our first concern". Even the pilots have been fooled like the rest of us, how many pilots have died in these crashes?
4
In the airline industry, where a single failure can place the entire company at risk, self regulation would seem to be a safe bet. But it clearly was not. What possible thinking, other than the goal of maximizing profits, substitutes software for pilot training? Why would Boeing be permitted to self certify a system that meant that pilots would ever have to try to decifer an operators manual in the middle of crises? How many more planes was Boeing able to sell on the basis that these planes, with radically different engines and flight characteristics, were self driving automatons that required no training?
Here’s what self regulation is - it’s the President of Boeing calling Trump after two crashes and telling Trump there are no. Problems, and Trump announcing were not going to follow the rest of the world and ground the planes, because the Boeing CEO personally told him they were safe. Self regulation indeed.
13
Part of the problem is our blind acceptance of the corporate form of ownership and the functioning of our markets. The corporate organizational structure does require earnings growth literally at all cost. And market failure occurs predictably when a carefully designed regulatory framework is not properly maintained.
10
Of course a FAA union would oppose Designees, without them it would mean more FAA employees and more union members, I was a Designee and worked with many others and was always thorough and followed the book. We knew that the FAA could always check our work. No one at my aerospace company ever tried to influence my results. Saying they can be influenced also says that no military or government Inspector General can be trusted either.
2
@Richard I couldn't agree more...the delegation system is both efficient and effective. After decades of dealing with the FAA directly, the idea of 100% of certification being retained by the FAA is terrifying. We could quadruple the FAA budget and safety will be compromised without leveraging 'delegation'. Not to mention that the cost of flying will drastically increased.
Guess without those "Job Killing Regulations" the GOP is always ranting about, we just have to worry about People Killing DeRegulation
47
And the ultimate irony is that European cars will be classified as a security risk to the US......I am sure Europeans will closely look at the security and safety of US planes.
16
It’s incredulous that Boeing was habituated to get away repeatedly without so much a rap across the knuckles.
This is not the first time Boeing and FAA are in the news for wrong reasons.
NTSB released a report on December 1, 2014, and assigned blame. 2013, the first year of service for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, a wide body jet airliner, at least four aircraft suffered from electrical system problems stemming from its lithium-ion batteries.
Boeing’s engineers, who failed to consider and test for worst-case battery failures and FAA failure to recognise the potential hazard and did not require proper tests as part of its certification process.
Something is indeed rotten in the state of Denmark as Shakespeare says in Hamlet!! .
8
Many industries self-regulate. Look at finance. And if it’s not explicit, it is implicit. Look at the energy sector where regulatory advisory committees are packed by members placed there by energy companies and their lobbies. Or look closely at any significant piece of regulation and you will see it written by lobbyists for the industry being regulated.
I can’t imagine any reason why a company would want the responsibility of self-regulation except to increase profits which is any company’s prerogative. Good for corruption too!
7
A perfect illustration of the flaw in wanting a smaller government. FAA must rely on industry to regulate. Thank you Reagan, et al.
22
Boeing can do something now to save itself: come clean. They have to admit their colossal mistakes and pay the colossal penalties. They have to slash their profit dreams built on their crashing airplane and cancel it. Bankruptcy may be the only way. With a new design and a new plane, Boeing may come back in ten years or twenty years.
2
Good example of how not to cut costs; minimize oversight of safety if the manufacturer promises not to cut corners. With this same logic we could save a lot of money by giving prisoners the keys if they promise not to leave the prison.
7
This is another example on how greed has devastated U.S. industry. The lethal desire to accumulate money has left U.S. workers unemployed, factories abandoned and led the country to political disaster. What did they say in the boardroom at Boeing? "nooo we don´t want to invest in a new and modern plane" "lets take the last dollars out of this model" "no need for training of pilots that will become an obstacle in the sales process".
12
No private ndustry can or should be allowed to regulate itself.
The ethical legal obligation of any private industry is to enhance the profitable return of their shareholders.
Which is inherently in conflict with safety and transparency and the public interest.
And the revolving door between private industry and public service does nothing to erase the conflict.
Only career non- political public servants should regulate private industry.
11
@Blackmamba
Are there any of those left in America, "only career non-politcal public servants should regulate industry.?
1
@Carol
I hope so.
1
The pharmaceutical industry pays fees that help fund FDA experts to review their products for approval under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act. Why not something similar to fund FAA experts? The Aviation Passenger Fee Act?
2
I'm confused. What is the mission of the FAA? Why did Boeing not bundle a critical safety sensor into its standard pricing package? Why were pilots left to self-instruct on this new aircraft? At what point will passenger safety considerations override fast track approval processes?
Can we imagine what might occur in the healthcare profession if medical and nursing school graduates "self-certified" before entering their professions?
An essential role of government is to provide services for the public in areas where our self-reliance is unrealistic. When that system fails, we are at risk. No amount of "spin" from the FAA nor Boeing will alter the reality that systemic changes to a failed oversight and approval process is not negotiable.
8
This practice isn't really just done in aerospace though:
I used to work at one of the big defense companies as a structures engineer. Now I'm out of the aerospace industry, but still in structural engineering for buildings. In neither context was every single input into my calculator watched over. (We are professionals after all). Therefore, in a way, I regulate myself in making sure all engineering I do is correct. When the regulating official signs off engineering, of course, they will conduct their own independent review and have the right to ask for just about anything, but most of the time, it won't go into specifics. My experience has shown me that the less errors I make, the less I will be audited, and vice versa. For example, when you first get into a car with a newly licensed driver you may have reservations about how trained they are. The more faux pas they make, the more you will watch them to make sure they drive correctly. Therefore, expect the FAA officials to be extra cautious towards Boeing engineers now that they have less confidence. Even after all this is over, however, the FAA cannot 100% audit everything Boeing does and will continue to delegate some authority to Boeing.
In my opinion, we have to have some trust the professionals to do their job with integrity. Most people are good people and will follow through even if it means more work on their part.
3
@StructuresEngineer I appreciate your blind trust in corporate executives, I think most people would disagree. When profit is all that matters executives will never do the right thing unless forced too.
2
After the pilots on a Boeing Max 8 had to have an emergency landing today, the 'reassurance' that the engine problem had nothing to do with the MCAS was actually more frightening -- because this can mean that this aircraft is fraught with even more potentially grave problems that have yet to be discovered and that Boeing itself will never reveal to us before the fact.
21
Agree absolutely. “Only” two of the 737 Max plans have crashed, although there have been similar reported by pilots and crew in an anonymous system, handily, from the POV of the FAA and Boeing, hidden in a NASA-run database.
Most of the time, there are no incidents.
Does that mean there’s another problem out there, now hidden from our view by the tumult over the MCAS system?
I’m very much afraid it does.
3
Safety on the cheap has always led to disaster in the long run. Always will. End of story.
6
For this you can thank: Reagan, The Koch Machine, Ayn Rand, Libertarians (neofeudalists). Those un-"Freedom" and un-"Liberty" intrusions by the violent state just get in the way of profit. To them, Responsibility should be settled by the "free" market. After some people die.
This is the true meaning and result of corporate rule or rule by the financial elite. That has to end. Getting money out of politics and having a real representative democracy will fix ALL of this.
21
I remember well the discussions concerning the elimination of designated manufacturing inspection representatives, persons nominated by the company but reporting, for the purposes of conformity and airworthiness, to their respective FAA inspector in favor of organizational designee programs, essentially, as the piece states, putting the fox in the hen house.
I was one of those former designees who reported to the FAA inspector. And we knew the consequences of poor decisions-the FAA and the company could wash their hands clean and hang us out to dry if subjected to civil penalties.
That possibly kept many of us toeing the line.
However, this program is no worse than the operators and repair stations that employ non-licensed persons, who may or may not be under the supervision of a licensed airframe and power plant mechanic, particularly in the repair station arena and are subject to periodic FAA audits. At least the licensed mechanic is aware of the regulations and the penalties for violating those regulations.
The whole system is flawed from manufacturing to operations. And with the current drive to eliminate regulations we need only to point to the culprits-corporate greed and political pandering.
Sadly, our cry for adequate regulation only happens when lives are lost.
Lastly, I am also a licensed Airframe and Powerplant mechanic.
14
THIS is the tip of the iceberg of a Corporate State. When the corporations have the money they have to leverage the right to approve their inventions, rather than an independent government agency, this is what we have. The move by this President is pushing and pushing for a Corporate State. If one looks at the legislature of Italy in the period of 1922-1931, one can see that the Senate of the Italian Government was totally controlled by the corporations and in controlling the unions also controlled the lower house. As you look at the moves by Interior, Energy, etc. of this government, we are headed for a "fascist" government. And as you read these words, remember that Fascism is Italian borne and added to that was racism which was the German gift of Adolf Hitler. Naziism had a basis of corporate government but the corporations and their leaders believed they were controlling the Fuhrer were wrong. He was controlling them.
17
What's a few hundred dead bodies within 10 months huh Boeing Exec's?
Dear Media,
Start naming names at Boeing.
13
@Mike
If Boeing is found to have engaged in wrongdoing then courts and regulators should and will take appropriate actions.
Let’s do that however based on an impartial review of fact by knowlegable parties taking all factors into account.
For instance: All planes of this type pitch up under power, trim issues and procedures to correct have long been known even before MCAS; manufacturers do not build planes they know will crash; the majority of flight incidents are caused by operators via poor maintainance, training, safety protocols, and finances; Lion air is known to be an unsafe operator; Lion air allowed a plane back into the air without properly servicing a failing part; Lion air did not inform the accident crew of previous flight control problems on this plane; Lion air did not properly a train its crews on procedure to correct runaway trim; Ethiopian air allowed flight crews with similar training gaps to pilot a MAX with full knowledge that runaway trim contributed to Lion air crash and after a manufacturer notice; unlike Lionair, Ethiopian knew of the problem, knew the consequences, and did nothing about it; both incidents occurred in theatres of operation that are well known for having flight safety standards that are well below that of North American airspace where no such incident has occurred. All that, plus the investigation will produce more. To simplify this as a mfg issue is myopic and blatently misguided.
3
@YYZ
Let me try to make my post easier for you to understand.
I want ALL companies and corporations to stop hiding behind the vail of just the company name and be more transparent.
That means individuals again become responsible for their actions and are able to be prosecuted.
In this instance there should already be names of employees who designed the software that pilots have complained about for some time.
I want the "too big to fail" era to stop.
Get it?
Which is the highest priority?
Boeing or safety?
4
@Ben Beaumont As far as the republicans are concerned Boeing (Profits)
4
Why on earth is there ANY question about ANY industry regulating itself? When, in the history of civilization, has that ever worked? The MPAA is a farce, banks have shown time and again that they must be regulated, oil companies destroy the environment, all industry pollutes if forced not to, social media companies run amock, automobile manufacturers whitewash safety problems...there is a role for government regulation in a capitalist system, and there always has been.
26
What agency in Washington has not favored business over the welfare of the citizens it is supposed to protect?
8
Unless Boeing's stock price drops a LOT more than it has since the crashes--unless its top execs feel the pain in their own personal wallets--it will just be business as usual in a few months. We are in a place in the market where there is so much money sloshing around at the top that corporations are artificially inflating their own and others' stock price. Execs are eating foie gras while their customers die at 500 mph and they don't care because short term stock gains are their only metric.
I am never getting on one of these planes. Not only because I might die but because Boeing and the airlines need the clear message that safety is the most important feature of any aircraft.
21
I am an engineer and it's utterly frustrating to be reading this.
The FAA is in an impossible position. They depend on Congress for their funding, and can't hire lobbyists to represent their interests - in sharp contrast to the regulated industry who can dangle a few thou in front of groveling politicians and dictate their rule preferences.
For the sake of argument, if Congress wants to teeter on the edge of self-dealing and pressure the FAA to move to a self-certification model, it would look a lot more genuine if they simultaneously increased by 100x the amount of damages victims could sue for.
Fund the FAA into an iconic engineering organization that is should be and stop pursuing incremental policy with safety agencies.
Unchecked capitalism values profit, and places a very low value on human life.
25
@Nico
America is in the clutches of "abusive capitalism".
5
@Nico The FAA was thrown under the bus by Boeing, the GOP and their lobbyist sidekicks - next up major tax fraud and financial scandals that crush the average American and their pensions as the GOP has chosen to starve the IRS of resources (sorry, but without enforcement, many will avoid paying their fair share - see Greece) and the SEC, along with every other regulatory agency. Under Trump and Ryan and McConnell, look for toxins in water, unsafe vehicles, unsafe food, unsafe drugs. Not because the regulators are unwilling, but because the GOP and their corporate benefactors are unwilling.
7
@Nico The FAA was thrown under the bus by Boeing, the GOP and their lobbyist sidekicks
1
Boeing and other airline manufactures have been too smart by half.
Now it is worldwide public knowledge that the airline manufactures in the US have no quality oversight, the blatant lack of concern for safety will be taken into consideration when airlines are purchasing new planes.
How much money have various airlines lost with grounded planes?
I have no doubt that the system of industry regulating themselves will continue. But the industries should think twice about whether it benefits them in the long run.
2
It’s a little freaky to me that the system was relying on data from just ONE sensor. Just one. And that sensor seems to have failed.
Whatever happened to the concept of redundancy in mission critical systems?
And charging extra for safety systems? Shame on Boeing.
30
The same scrutiny given to Boeing and air safety should be given to ground safety. Currently 53,000 Americans are killed yearly in ground transportation crashes unnecessarily. Additionally, companies such as a Tesla have started deploying autonomous driving technologies without any regulatory oversight. This is happening right now. Software updates being sent to cars to drive themselves without necessary regulation.
2
@Harris Silver -- probably a lot of those ground transportation crashes are due to drivers being on the phone, texting or talking. The political will is not there to put a stop to this. Nor do courts impose stiff penalties if a texting driver is killing another driver. The phone companies are not really keen on managing the phone-use of their customers when they drive.
3
Let's face it. The Republicans who always feel any regulation and oversight is already way too much, take those planes themselves and so do their family members, so this hits home.
So suddenly there is urgency in getting this done properly out of pure self interest.
Now if we could just take away their health care and that of their families, then suddenly there would be real interest in doing something in that area as well.
14
@somewhere in the prairie Michael Lewis covers all the Trump "headless horseman" risk in his book the Fifth Risk.
He is actively weakening our government on every level.
1
737 MAX = death plane but profitable for Boeing
All of the yahoos that initially attributed the downed aircraft to pilot error should have waited until further information was disclosed.
The Boeing 737 MAX will undoubtedly fly again. I won't be flying on it.
5
Please give me an example where in any industry when " the fox guarding the henhouse" worked.
3
@Ken
The past 20 years of aviation safety in the US. It is mind boggling how few airplane deaths there are in the US compared to automobile. The entire 20 years the majority of certification was completed by industry.
Would anyone be able to clarify the geometry of the plane's problem? The stories say that the Max has large, heavy engines that have been mounted further forward than in previous 737 models. To me this would suggest the plane's center of gravity would also be further forward and the nose would be more likely to point down. Yet the opposite seems to be the case. Why do large heavy engines mounted forward push the nose up?
3
@David
It is not the weight of the engine that is a factor.
Each LEAP engine produces north of 32,000 lbf of thrust. At take off the angle of attack is naturally high, and with hi-bypass engine (where over 80% of the thrust is created by the fan) mounted just so, a moment is created that can make it much easier to tip the nose further up thereby increasing the AOA closer to a stall. (Hence the need for a system like MCAS.)
I am simplifying a lot of physics here but that the general idea.
7
@Nico Thank you. Is this engine response kind of like my turbo lag car, when I stomp the accelerator, it sits for a bit and then shoots out faster than I ever initially intended? Except the burst of engine pushes the nose up? And then the pilot has to fight to defeat the MCAS, over and over again because they are trying to control the plane, then the MCAS is and back and forth? How does the MCAS fit in there?
1
We're in a similar pickle with the FDA, FCC and other regulatory agencies which pretty much rubber stamp anything the pharmaceutical and agrichemical companies place before them. This has allowed highly toxic drugs and agrichemicals into the market almost unregulated.
In my state the same philosophy of unfettered corporate expansion with minimal regulation has allowed the widespread proliferation of large hog confinements. It has turned a once beautiful state into a cesspool with some of the worst water and air quality in the nation.
I hope the Boeing event wakes up our population to the need to create proper regulation of industries that impact public health and safety.
4
@TechMaven -- I said the same thing about the agencies, just not as eloquently.
2
Industry regulating itself? Is this a parody, or the game plan for our government since the Reagan year's? So far, it's not worked out so well, and the nation seems to be going down the drain...maybe time for another strategy.
3
As a simple rule, self-certification (or lack of governmental regulation) is bad for your health and longevity.
1
I will tell you, Southwest Airlines last week was scrambling to get us to Denver, 6 hour delay and a 3 hour delay on the return, we were originally on a Max 8 from Baltimore...You can see them parked, its odd, engines covered, resting in a group. SW has a small percentage of these in their fleet , think 8% but it was causing issues. Can you imagine the overseas airlines?
I told my wife, I hoped every SW pilot had read the NY times article about how to deactivate the autopilot by flipping the 2 breakers off, then controlling the plane tail flaps with the hand wheels. Had the plane not been grounded prior to our family trip, I surely would have had a copy of that article with me in case I needed to slip it under the cockpit door.
But in all honesty, I think the usa carriers are fairly safe and better trained. The FAA could segment the grounding to the less trained international carriers with the same safety outcomes. It would have surely reduced the congestion last week and the weeks ahead for southwest airlines.
We ended up with a $200 per person voucher for the disruption. I am looking forward to using it next year on my skit trip via a Max 8 version 2.0 !
Glad that the NYT has reported on the fundamental issue here.
The self certification allowed by FAA goes far beyond the academic concepts of "market failure" and "regulatory capture".
We now have wholesale corporate governance - government by and for the corporations.
The fact that Congress approves and wants even more privatization of core government safety regulation exposes the systemic fraud of Neoliberal corporate capitalism.
FAA is not the only public interest regulatory agency subject to these corrupt dynamics.
We need systemic and radical reform.
3
@Bill Wolfe with both the "neocons" who got us into the Iraq War and the NeoLiberals - I think there are a lot of people in these WA think thanks that should be absolutely be kept out of government.
Stephen Moore is the latest ideologue who Trump is shuffling in to a position of power - let's see how that turns out!
How many more FAA certificated aircraft are flying right now with potentially fatal, undisclosed design flaws? I understand that the Max is the Corvair of the aviation industry, so perhaps I would choose to avoid it. But, what assurance do I have that the aircraft I pick does not have an equally (or more) dangerous issue that has been concealed from regulators and flight crews?
1
The same as FDA, and federal oversight of Water, Food & its labeling, Meat, Chemicals, etc etc etc.
Used to be one of the primary reasons for Government: monitor and regulate for the safety of us everyday people.
3
We trusted banks to police themselves. That didn’t work out so great. Letting airplane manufacturers police themselves sees to leave some holes in the process. Deregulating energy companies flopped with Enron. I am just wondering if deregulation /companies self regulating is such a great idea?
11
@Richard Corporate Government is running wild. This is what we get: Depression (1930's), Recession in this century, polluted waters, worse air, Utilities buying their regulators as in California. THIS is the beginning of Fascism, American style.
2
Now today we learn that a Southwest Max being ferried to California had an engine malfunction shortly after takeoff and the plane made a safe return to the Orlando airport. That begs the question: did Boeing push the engine manufacturers to come up with an engine in record time as they did with their own engineers in creating the Max? Take a lesson from Tylenol, Boeing; get this thing right.
3
@Robert Meegan
Greedsters self-regulate?
That's a very bad joke. On us.
1
Comes down to how you value a human life.
The republicans were warned when they destroyed our government in the 80's that it would lead to the loss of life for lack of regulations with good enforcement.
They complained of how strict and unnecessary regulations were. Regs were over reaching because these regulators were not themselves engaged in the business. A ridiculous notion to any honest person. It happened soon enough to the smaller business and has happened to a lot of other business between then and now. Several thousands of lives have been lost that would not have been had we still had proper regulatory enforcement across the economy.
But here we are with one of our formerly stalwart industry leaders a complete joke with weasely cowards running around playing word games to excuse and get out of responsibility for what they did knowing full well that this would happen to someone at least once.
Yes it is a political issue. The republicans made it so when they attacked our government with lies because corruption is more lucrative than honesty.
7
The Seattle Times is stating that the FAA had an initial prototype of the system seven weeks before the crashes.
But, recall that much of the government was shut down through mid-January, including much of the FAA. (Including the functions of the FAA responsible for testing new systems.
From the National Business Aviation Assn website, note the items associated with the backlog.
"Revisions to existing manuals, training programs and other requests submitted before the shutdown may be reviewed as time permits."
While numerous FAA functions have ceased during the shutdown, the following suspended activities . . .
•Renewal of training center evaluator/simulator qualifications
•Adding or modifying aircraft and personnel listed on OpSpecs of a commercial operator
•Development, operational testing, and evaluation of NextGen technologies
Trump's shutdown 'scores' again. Oy vey!
11
Boeing adds an engine change that affects the flight characteristics, then engineers a Micky Mouse fix with single attitude indicator, dis not even put two of them on the plane in case they did not agree with each other, the self certifies the plane even after this problem was noted.
This is the result of the GOP cost cutting of these agencies. The GOP does not care abut your health, safety, or anything that costs their plutocrat friends money.
2
I don’t need to know anything about aviation to wonder if Boeing executives and their families will fly on the reconfigured Max 8s or do they already zip around on Gulfstreams? Likewise it doesn’t take an expert to question why someone would mount huge engines like lead fishing weights on the wings and not expect the plane to react differently?
3
The takeaway from this is that Capitalism turns everyone into crooks and cheats and it’s participants can’t be trusted to be decent honest human beings, therefore a big brother is necessary to keep people safe from its inherent driving impulses. It should be obvious by now to Karl Marx why he was wrong.
@John Doe No, not everyone turns corrupt. Just the rotten ones, who go on to score big in this twisted economic system. The majority of the world population and even america's population are dumbed down by an underfunded education system, robbed by their employers, fed tranquilizers, told lies, and manipulated by myths presented by a media, owned by the corrupt. Take power away from the corrupt and you'll not need a big brother.
1
Good luck getting future sales Boeing. Your integrity is DEAD. You have international competitors and you just did them a HUGE favor. Other foolish American corporations, pay attention. Quality and reputation MATTER.
1
Colonel Sanders in charge of health and welfare of Chickens.
Ridiculous.
10
Boeing is the Theranos of airplanes...
The belief that an industry, any industry, can regulate itself is a fallacy by right-wingers who, like the idiots who want to curb access to women's healthcare, are stuck in a fantasy la-la land where there is perfect competition in perpetuity. It's like telling people that we don't need a police force because, people will be falling over each other to be the model citizen.
The fact is that businesses always look to their bottom line, first and foremost, ethics and regulations be damned if they can get away with it. I've no problem with the first part, because the goal of every business is to make money. But I also strongly believe that the role of good government is to ensure that businesses don't fleece customers and workers for the sake of that bottom line.
Just take the issue of additional baggage fees. In the right-wingers' ideal world, the first airline (can't remember which) which implemented it should've been run out of town a long time ago. But no, there isn't a perfect competition in many states, because the airlines have long divided amongst themselves who would serve which portion of the country. And so the other airlines saw an opportunity to make more money by fleecing customers, and they all got into the business of additional baggage fees, turning it into a multi-billion dollar annual profit.
Now tell me, how would one actually expect any sort of "self-policing", given the above example, one out of many others?
So Boeing decided to transfer all accountability to itself. I wonder if they realized they now have all liability as well?
2
I agree with the Democrat representative from Illinois as to whether this delegation program played a role in the mishaps of the Max is a legit question.
And it needs to be answered.
But, this is deja vue for me - an employee in the oil patch for over 4 decades.
Macondo happened, the same questions were asked.
Much was gossiped about how government is fooled by oil industry, and how government just goes along with everything it is fed by oil patch professionals.
Yet, nothing in the exhaustive investigations that followed showed this so called "nexus of delegation" was at fault.
Sure, the government reorganized M.M.S. (Minerals Management Service) into more alphabet soups. Yet, the fundamental nature of business has remained essentially the same. Oil industry largely policing itself.
And if anything, the Congress have backtracked on these stringent regulations - now deemed to not contributing to safety.
So, indeed - this legitimate question should be answered. But the fact remains that in our system - expertise lies with folks who produce aircraft or oil and gas.
The checkers - in most cases - lack this expertise.
I believe that Boeing internationally is done. They have shown the world poor airplane production for more money and more money only. They may survive with a plane that American owned air carriers will buy but I wouldn't count on it.
1
What do European regulators do with Airbus? The same thing? Not the same thing? In an article this long it could have been mentioned.
@abo The European regulators use a very similar system. In fact, they allow greater delegation to manufacturers. To the point that US aerospace companies often prefer to work with EASA due to the greater delegation allowed.
Please, even in tragedy Republicans will rush to deregulate. It's the only policy they know.
2
My family members’ lives depend on the safety of planes. They have depended on the manufacturers, the F.A.A., the Dept. of Transportation, and anyone else responsible. They are airline crew members.
To Boeing and the F.A.A. and Elaine Chao: Stop toying with lives, employees, their families, passengers.
You’ve lost our trust. We don’t care about your money. We do care about the future of our grandkids and others. How would we explain the death of more people?
152
@MIMA "To Boeing and the F.A.A. and Elaine Chao: Stop toying with lives, employees, their families, passengers.
You’ve lost our trust. We don’t care about your money. We do care about the future of our grandkids and others. How would we explain the death of more people?"
Boeing, the F.A.A., and Elaine Cho: "That's not our problem."
10
@MIMA
Who among us doesn't ourselves rely on the FAA to keep us and our family's air travel safe? and the same could be said for rail travel which according to recent news is also not as safe as we had assumed.
7
The defects causing the Lion and Ethiopian crashes were due not to Boeing engineers but to top management that ordered them to make an unsafe design to boost sales, and the FAA which allowed Boeing to self-certify. Public confidence in Boeing aircraft will not be restored until its top management is fired and replaced, and the FAA declares it will no longer allow self-certification.
3
Another element of concern, to my mind, is that this seems to have echoes of a similar dynamic that led to the 2008 financial crisis. The new derivatives (CDO's and CDS's etc) flooding the market were such complicated instruments; hard for those who didn't design them to understand, that the issuers were allowed to tell the regulators "these things are complicated - you wouldn't understand them. Trust us - they're safe. We'll make sure nothing bad happens"
17
One more time American greed paid of as expectedly.
Rush a stellar product #1 workhorse in world airline industry to it's demise.
WHY????
What did you get Boeing CEO and decision makers Trustee board etc.?
I mean what is your true need about getting more money grasping the bull from horn attitude.
You must have redesigned this aircraft beginning to end , instead sticking giant engines and trying to fix aerodynamics with software.
This idea doesn't look like coming from a sound engineer designer group in side the Boeing.
It is more like those guys hired for making profitable company , low intelligence but eyes glistening with dollar sign of people.
This is American corporatism nothing else, everything can be sold , show me the money.. Who cares reputation, trust and confidence.
1
This is the price we pay for politicians convincing gullible voters that “regulations kill jobs!”
It seems we know nothing about the incentives of shareholder-driven corporate capitalism. When “strategy” is driven by the need for quarter-to-quarter gains, the ends always justify the means (and yeah, that’s not really a strategy....but it makes a few people vvv rich!)
12
Hmmm..."Industry Regulating Itself." That portion of your headline says everything about what's gone wrong.
With regard to the "Sharp Questions," I think they've been answered already. Self regulation by industries/corporations cannot be trusted.
1
Unchecked Capitalism - makes for Life nasty, brutish, and short...
When will we ever learn?
4
Who will knowingly fly in one of these 737 8 MAXX or 737 ( planes?
seriously. Is anyone going to believe anything that Boeing or the FAA say about this now?
18
@Lefthalfbach
"Who will knowingly fly in one of these 737 8 MAXX or 737 ( planes?
Idiots will. "People" are still vacationing in Egypt, Morocco, Egypt (!!), Algeria, Libya, Ethiopia, Turkey, and all countries in the mid-East. Jumping on a 737 MAX is nothing compared to that.
I can't believe that the CEO hasn't been fired yet. Poor management has put a dagger through the heart of Boeing.
9
Boeing and the FAA - together - have destroyed their reputation and the public trust.
136
Isn't there the same cozy deal in every other regulatory office of the Federal Govt? Goldman Sachs controls Treasury. The Coal and oil industry rules the EPA. The drug and agrochemical industry directs the FDA. It's really a joke, a facade of respectability and citizen welfare hiding a shadow govt controlled by the rich and multinationals. Govt of, by, and for the people? What a laugh.
63
I'm so glad that here in America we have the freedom to let businesses self-regulate until they kill a bunch of people (or in the case of Purdue, a couple tens of thousands), and then slap a tiny little fine on them and sternly warn them not to do it again. So much freedom and liberty! What a great country...
8
Under Trump all the hen houses are run by foxes. By contrast, under Obama, some were run by foxes.
Republicans and corporate Democrats are largely fine with this perversion of the public interest mission of federal agencies. Only progressives I imagine are alarmed by this.
4
Contractor self oversight is fundamentally wrong. You don’t trust just anyone with your money, so why in the world would anyone trust industry when safety of life is at stake?
97
@John
Which brings us back to a serious axiom that has ruled in government in almost every other area of control, for decades .......... Trust BUT VERIFY
Apparently that is still a requirement when dealing with foreign governments, but not with US corporations. It's a disgusting level of hypocrisy on the part of the federal government.
In this case.. the FAA appears to have rubbers stamped the "verify" aspect of this and has lost a great deal of trust with the public. Trust is easily lost and hard to regain.
2
The issue here is how intrusive the Government ought to be in a new product design. Usually the Government specifies a standard to which the company must adhere, and then verifies that testing and qualification has been done. In most cases these are performance standards rather than design standards. That is to say, the Government says that the aircraft must perform in a certain way, but the company determines the best way to meet the standard.
For example, this is how we do our taxes. The IRS doesn't come into our homes and businesses to fill out our tax forms for us. That would be very expensive and too intrusive.
Furthermore, a great deal of product testing is handled by product liability insurance. For example, in electrical equipment the company's insurance premiums might be adjusted by whether they have received approval from Underwriter's Laboratories (UL). The company designs the product to meet the UL standard, UL certifies that everything is in compliance, and the insurance company adjusts its premiums accordingly.
14 CFR § 39.3 Definition of airworthiness directives.
FAA's airworthiness directives are legally enforceable rules that apply to the following products: aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and appliances.
1
Well, Congress, the FAA and Boeing — based on the contents of this article — have convinced me to fly an Airbus over a Max-8 whenever I have the choice, even if the Max-8 is again certified to fly.
Every corporation in American has but one goal: to make money above all else.
For their own good they should consider the long term ramifications of quality and safety of their products as it affects profits and continued survival.
Now Boeing, once the most exemplary of American corporations, has set itself back with untold consequences yet to unfold.
When reputation is everything, short cuts can kill this golden goose.
Self regulation is a bad joke. Federal inspections are virtually non-existent. Check this history of aviation oversight.
http://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/ar0839.pdf
3
Industries and professions which regulate themselves ...
don't.
3
Remember kids, regulation is BAD. We know this because rich people (and their Useful Idiots) tell us so, and they wouldn't lie to us just to make more money, would they?
2
Watch this very credible Australia-produced documentary about Boeing and the FDA with respect to the 737 NG (next generation), and then decide if you really believe our government isn't corporate owned.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWxxtzBTxGU
Today, at 2:50 PM...
https://www.foxnews.com/travel/southwest-boeing-737-max-plane-makes-emergency-landing-due-to-reported-engine-problem
If the story arc for an investigative TV series – a la FBI, CSI, NCIS (x3) – might be called:
"2 1/2 Wrecks"
1
If the stock drops far enough Warren Buffet will buy the company.
1
GE regulated itself. Many decades ago. Remember?
The result was three Rivers DESTROYED in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New York. Destroyed!. We still can't swim safely in those rivers, can't eat fish out of those rivers, can't eat vegetables grown along their banks where the river floods.
And GE refuses to clean up the rivers to this day.
Never trust a corporation to oversee itself. NEVER!
33
Ah, those pesky regulations. Now we need to get rid of clean air, clean water, safe food - you name it. Those regulations are strangling ingenuity. Sigh.
That there is even a need to ask "Is self-regulation a good idea?" is a measure of how much this nation has drunk the let-the-markets-solve-it Kool-Aid.
Wake up, America: this is what "small government" looks like. Boeing certifies its own planes, on which essential safety features cost more (a lot more) and deadly "features" aren't even mentioned. Facebook can sell your data to anyone, anywhere, without your consent or even knowledge. Drug companies can push opioids to anyone they please. And none of them face a serious consequence (i.e. nothing more than a couple hours answering questions asked by clueless members of Congress, followed by a fine seen as the cost of doing business).
We will simply not progress until we decide that it's actually a good idea to rein in big business, big banks, and billionaires. If this means jail time for executives who make decisions that kill or injure people in the pursuit of profit, so be it. Maybe a lot of these companies need to be broken up.
And in this case, maybe a few senior people at the FAA need to spend some time behind bars too.
And none of them should ever be allowed to run a company again --- not even a lemonade stand.
The GOP is the party of deregulation. Let the markets work as they are intended, they crow.
Deregulate the health and safety of our water and air, deregulate the food and drug industries, deregulate the use of the nation's public lands, and deregulate the way industry rids itself of all its environmental wastes. Deregulate it all in the name of freedom and the American Way.
And sure, why not deregulate the airline industry while we're at it? If enough planes fall out of the sky then consumers and the industry will adapt accordingly.
In the meantime, GOP voters, buyer beware.
3
In the meanwhile another 737 Max did an emergency landing in Orlando.
This will be a lot bigger disaster for Boeing than they wish.
1
The thought that in America, it's legal and acceptable for an airline manufacturer to pressurize the FAA to let it take on more of its own safety certification tasks scares the heck out of me. That just doesn't happen in Europe.
Yes, Boeing is capable of producing wonderful aircraft, and yes, they are aware that selling unsafe machines will eventually wreck their bottom line. But a man can't serve two masters. Boeing isn't in the business of producing awesome planes, it's in the business of making money. It's pretty clear what took priority here.
It's strictly Airbus for me now.
33
"That just doesn't happen in Europe"
That is completely false. The EASA certification system utilizes greater delegation to manufacturers than the FAA. Airbus enjoys greater autonomy than Boeing in certifying their aircraft.
The fact is that both organizations are under funded but the delegation system has worked effectively for decades.
March 26, 2019
In the modern social media information era -some questions that arise are so apparent to a cause that one is amazed that strange things happen without responsible rational to those that are the center of the event or ('s.)
We need smart and persuasive guidance and responsible accounting to the event and for the record.
"The practice has been repeatedly endorsed by Congress and successive administrations to speed up the certification process for Boeing and the rest of the aviation industry while holding down costs for the government."
It holds down no costs. Boeing and other corporations own the Congress. Back in the day of Clinton/Gore government was "reinvented." Government vacancies went unfilled. Savings $1.00! The slots were filled by contractors at twice the cost of the government employee. Cost $2.00. $1.00 for the contracting employee, $1.00 for the private contracting corporation.
How much longer will suckers keep buying Uncle Sam's long term debt?
Agree, concept of self regulation is difficult to understand in this context.
That said, FAA has been crystal clear that they are under funded and can’t meet all their commitments for some time. From a funding and taxation standpoint, they have been largely treated as a nice to have instead of must have agency.
In terms of Boeing and their processes, and the 737-800MAX let’s all recognize that 99 percent of what we are seeing now is speculation, opinion, uncorroberated information or just plain misinformation. Investigations have only just started, let them run their course before calling out the possee to head to Boeing and round ‘em up....
In terms of comparisons to other manufacturers, they all have issues of some sort. They all drive as much cost out of their business as they can to increase profit. That’s what they do.
Airbus is no exception. They have lost airframes and pax to both known and unknown faults before as well. Be it autopilot settings that shut off without warning, pitot tubes with failing heaters, AOA sensors with bad boot seals that allowed for freezing at altitude, all Airbus issues that caused crashes with significant loss of life.
Long and short- safety is taken very seriously at every mfg. that said, none of them are perfect. Very close statistically, but not there.
I guarantee you lots of people at Boeing are heartbroken over this, and not because of lost money.
6
Amazingly sometimes regulations save a companies profits.
7
The dream of capitalists is no government at all. It's costly in life and money. Never mind.
2
The fox guarding the hen house has never worked and never will.
Any time there is a buck to be made, human safety comes second unless there are laws in place.
Always remember why we have laws and regulations to begin with, because common sense doesn't work.
Self-regulation is no regulation.
4
Why must we always re-act, rather than be pro-active—
Here, after the loss of 346 lives.
The compromise of the FAA beginning in 2005, along with damage to other critical government agencies—courtesy of George W. Bush—
Should have been rectified soon after Mr. Bush left office. But it wasn't.
The importance of our protective agencies, like the FAA and the FDA and the EPA, cannot be overstated. They must be well funded and staffed with the most competent people, free of industry compromise.
1
It impractical to think that the FAA or any contractor is going to know the software product as well as Boeing. Fortunately, Boeing's interests lie in safe airplanes so they are motivated to get it right with or without FAA.
The fact that US pilots were able to deal with the old software and not crash, tells us something. In contrast, the foreign pilots were not able to regain control tells u another important part of the story. To its credit, the FAA issued an airworthiness directive in Nov. Scuttlebutt has it the Ethiopian copilot had only 200 hours total flight time whereas US pilots have a min of 1500 hours.
But let's not forget that the FAA was shutdown so it was unable to complete their task of overseas oversight.
Unfortunately, Trump doesn't understand the consequences of his erratic behavior.
You never shut down the FAA, just like you never shut down the military, fire or police.
So it doesn't really work to let an industry regulate itself? Who could have ever anticipated that?
10
I think I can make a pretty good argument that the MCAS system was never needed and in fact made the airplane less safe.
Today we know that with the 737 Max 8 if you are entering a full stall and push the power up before you've dropped the nose and gained speed, the new engine position may prevent you from lowering the nose.
But if you are hand flying a jet transport aircraft and changing airspeed and power settings or reconfiguring flaps, you will be constantly changing the stabilizer trim with the switch on your yoke which controls the same stabilizer trim motor that the MCAS does.
So if you somehow got into a deep stall while you were hand flying a departure climb out after takeoff and you pushed the yoke full forward and couldn't get the nose down wouldn't you just use the switch on the yoke to roll in some nose down trim with the stabilizer trim to gain airspeed. Doing this would be such a natural reaction to a high angle of attack that it is hard to believe that you would have to train pilots to do it, but of course you could train them if they were on this new airplane and you were afraid they wouldn't do it naturally.
Clearly some amount of effort from the company is required if a rigorous design check is going to made on these planes. It's an incredibly complex machine, and this practice generally seems to mimic other large/complex manufacturing industries (auto, petrochem, etc.).
In the case of design validation in the auto industry, NHTSA has crash testing requirements which must be carried out and then allows for the company to perform it's own testing and rely consumer trial and error for other issues. They step in with fines if companies don't respond to issues quickly enough. For petrochemical companies, OSHA audits, EPA audits, fines for audit findings, and fines for incidents is the government's means of enforcement for dereliction of corporate duty.
Does the FAA not have any means of punishment for due-diligence failures on this "delegated authority"? Their "Legal Enforcement Actions" web page makes it seem like they can punish companies for failure to follow regulations, but did they void that power in cases of rubber-stamping these delegated reviews? If they don't have a whip to crack in this case, that'd be pretty disappointing, and that'd be something I hope changes out of this.
A recent article described the new algorithm for working with the sensors. Included in the article were the experiences of test pilots who flew simulators. They were surprised at how strongly the old algorithm pulled the nose of the airplane down. If they were surprised; I wonder how much if any testing was done prior to certification of the airplane. Even a cursory look at this system should have caused changes prior to certification.
20
@Richard Miller
The link to the article is below:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/25/business/boeing-simulation-error.html?action=click&module=RelatedCoverage&pgtype=Article®ion=Footer
The defects causing the Lion and Ethiopian crashes were due not to Boeing engineers but to top management that ordered them to make an unsafe design to boost sales, and the FAA which allowed Boeing to self-certify. Restoration of public confidence in Boeing aircraft will not be restored until its top management is fired and replaced, and the FAA declares it will no longer allow self-certification.
49
There was a time, before the merger with Mcdonnell Douglas, when Boeing could be trusted to competently self certify. Back then Boeing was run by engineers, today the bean counters rule and cost control has shouldered quality aside.
99
Same has happened in health care. Bean counters have taken over.
16
Self regulation never works. It didn't work in the automotive industry, step in Ralph Nader. It doesn't work in the aviation industry. Who is going to be the Ralph Nader of the aviation industry?
When is the US going to introduce a Separation of Corporation and State and when is it going to resume upholding a Separation of Church and State?
The answer, sadly, is when the United States of America no longer exists because it never took action to protect its citizens from its corporations.
105
@James Wallis Martin
When corporations and government are not separated, it's called Fascism. When religion and government are not separated, it's called Theocracy. We are rapidly becoming both.
4
@James Wallis Martin
We need to pass Ann amendment to the Constitution that makes clear to the Supreme Court that
"Only humans agree citizens with constitutional rights, not corporations, as money is not speech."
The Supreme Court has been going on the wiping direction on this for 130'years and we the people must correct them, constitutionally.
Google Move to Amend.
1
If industries and capitalists were good at self-regulation, we wouldn’t have needed legislation creating OSHA, the FDA, the EPA, the FAA and a host of other regulatory agencies whose mission is safeguarding public safety and health. For those who scoff, please familiarize yourselves with the history that necessitated and continues to necessitate these agencies.
204
@J. Exactly. Most intelligent comment I've read so far. The historical evidence is overwhelming.
12
@J.
We have largely forgotten that these regulations were written in blood.
12
The same problem is found in Bank Regulation. Congress doesn’t grant regulators the budget necessary to hire the experts expert enough to make the hard regulatory calls. I think this comes down to the Shrink-the-Government-Small-Enough-to-Drown-it-In-the-Bathtub
Doctrine, the guiding principle
that underlies every action the GOP takes in Congress. It's now bearing fruit.
66
I don't understand the context. Are airplanes certified in the country that makes them? Or in the country that they fly in? Does Airbus need the same certifications that Boeing does? If so, how do they get them?
2
Airplanes are certified by the local regulators in each jurisdiction where they operate. In practice, that usually means that, e.g., the FAA certifies aircraft manufactured in the US and the relevant authorities in other nations mostly piggyback on that approval. The same is true for Airbus: EASA does the original certification and the regulators of other nations largely endorse it.
6
@Jack Walsh
The properly staffed European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) certifies Airbus and European aircraft.
And our underfunded, understaffed, corporate-run FAA 'certifies' the Boeing flying coffins.
Welcome to the deadly American skies.
3
The practice of "delegation" is not limited to FAA. Years ago, Congress allowed the Federal Highway Administration to delegate its environmental review responsibilities to states under the guise of "streamlining" infrastructure development. Many states now approve environmental studies that traditionally required federal approval to access federal funds.
3
The last time that Boeing introduce a new model aircraft that was accompanied by a high rate of crashes was the 727 in 1965-66. Since then the 737,747,757,767,777,787 were rolled out safely. Nor did the 707 and 717 have fatal crashes associated with their introduction.
Now, 50+ years after the 727 roll-out, we have the Max-8 with 2 fatal crashes less than 10 months after introduction. Something at Boeing has changed, and not for the better.
151
@Lawrence
Something in government has changed and not for the better.
19
But wait, we have been told by the current Administration and The Republican Congress that the Private Sector can do a better job than the Government in just about everything. And that Governement regulations need to be cut. Are you now telling me this is not true? We should stop firing all the government experts until we make sure that the private sector can regulate itself OK.
54
I’m sure everyone would gladly exchange increased safety for the elimination of Boeing Lobbyists, Wall St. profit. One could legislate rules perhaps. Maybe any entity involved in Air Transport from OME to Oversight must participate in the ICAO and IATA Safety System. Improving safety and compliance worldwide. Including financial stakeholders. Each should form and maintain a safety committee made up of people responsible for airworthiness from concept, engineering to a cross section of employees. Instead of profit, the money could be used to improve safety. Or could capitalism be the answer to safer Air Transport?
3
From what we know, did the O.D.A. program effect the certification of these planes, the obvious answer is yes. An unanswered question: Was the MCAS system installed on the Max-8s before or after Boeing test flew the airplane?
2
"Industry Regulating Itself"
You can only read phrases like this in the corporate-media.
And the Onion.
237
This is what a government that does not believe in government begets. Deregulation means unsafe, lethal travel, bad schools, toxic environment, and...fake news from unregulated social media. End of empire folks.
175
Lol. American society and economy are more robust than ever. Go back to St. Petersburg.
1
And let’s not forget drug companies and the tens of thousands killed by the opiod crisis so far.
21
How many more deaths do we need to be convinced that unregulated, unfettered capitalism only benefits the capitalists? This unholy alliance of greed and cheapness is causing so much pain and death, for people and the environment we share.
80
Because of the view that the FAA and Boeing are too close, there are reports that the FAA does not want to be the first regulator to lift its 737 MAX operations ban. It wants to find consensus with other national and regional authorities for joint approval of the model’s return to service.
Foreign regulators are planning to conduct their own reviews of Boeing’s changes, separate from FAA’s reviews. This is very uncommon because the FAA has bilateral agreements that allow mutual acceptance of each other’s certification approvals.
Several regulators, including the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and Transport Canada, have already said they plan to conduct their own reviews of the flight control computer changes that Boeing will propose for the MAX.
Moreover, no regulator has said the upgrades and new training alone, even if approved by the FAA, will completely satisfy their concerns with the MAX.
Nevertheless, the agency is prepared to act alone if they cannot obtain consensus, meaning the 737 MAX could fly in the US but be banned elsewhere in the world.
The problem with this approach is that no one in the US has to fly in a 737 MAX since there are so many other options... just ask the airlines.
28
@GerardM "The problem with this approach is that no one in the US has to fly in a 737 MAX since there are so many other options... just ask the airlines."
You mean the airlines that are cancelling 10% of their flights every day?
1
Trump/GOP is deregulating everything as fast as they can. Profits are more important than people. People died? Too bad; so sad. Good bottom line is all that matters. Ray Sipe
41
@Ray Sipe
Will the winning never stop?
2
"Industry regulating itself". These days that must be the mother of all oxymorons.
57
The is the Republican no-new-taxes-nincompoop 'free-market' at brilliant work.
Defund the government so it cannot provide basic public safety and oversight.
Then let the sociopathic corporations 'self-regulate' with greedy self-interest until the market crashes society into the ground.
It's the ideology of deeply disturbed and greedy minds that lack any adult development.
It's a former of negligence, and it causes real death and destruction...and the rabid Republican right-wing owns these flying coffins.
The plane was rushed to market for profit's sake.
Regulation is for suckers, according to the Republican free-market....until a lot of people die.
The solution ?
Raise taxes; fully fund regulatory agencies and let them regulate sociopathic greed to death.
This is just another failure of American culture, specifically it's right-wing.
And Airbus wins in the long-term because Boeing pursued profit, not safety.
D for human decency; R for wrong on every conceivable public policy.
250
@Socrates
Airbus will win in the longer term if it can demonstrate that the airlines will make more money with their plane than Boeing's.
Commercial planes don't generally succeed, in the long term, because airlines lose money on them.
2
@Socrates
You really don’t get it Socrates. It’s freedom. Freedom from regulation, freedom from the costs of regulation, freedom to make more money more quickly.
It’s also the freedom to die or get sick when business and industry are allowed to cut corners for the bottom line. It’s all about freedom from government telling you what you should do.
If you guess wrong, well that was your freedom too.
10
@Socrates - I always love your comments.
But you need to get less partisan and look at what's really going on.
Democrats deregulated the airline industry under President Carter.
The Clinton/Gore team created the regulatory model of industry partnerships and industry funding via fees of agency oversight, thus creating the "customer model".
Under Reagan and Bush, that rapidly expanded into full scale outsourcing and privatization.
This is what Neoliberal corporate capitalism looks like.
15
We have FAA regulators because self-regulating airplane manufacturers failed to deliver planes that were safe enough. Now we're trying it again. Are we getting the same results? Sure looks like it. Although MCAS hasn't been proven to be the cause of these two catastrophic losses, it has a clear single point of failure, and we've yet to hear any explanation for letting that design no-no slip through.
14
This is exactly what concerns me when I hear that the government needs to reduce regulations and let industry manage itself.
277
@Marty
And as if "self-regulation" that costs lives wasn't bad enough, guess who will somehow end up bailing out Boeing when Airbus eats their lunch.
41
@Marty
Oversight and self-regulation; oxymoron.
5
The Chinese Government (on behalf of state airlines) has, this afternoon, placed an order for 300+ Airbus A320 Neo aircraft. Macron and Xi have just signed the deal.
This really has worked out terribly for Boeing - who DO have the capacity to produce excellent aircraft.
74
@nolongeradoc
Boeing is hyperfocused on avoiding another strike at its Washington factories. They setup a whole new operation in South Carolina which took a lot of attention bandwidth. They farmed out a lot of the 787 manufacturing which caused huge headaches when they had to bring some of it back in house. All to weaken the Seattle unions. Then they worked and worked on a money-losing contract to build air force tankers, which provided constant headaches. With all that focus on outsourcing and relocating and other things, how could they focus on the basics like redundant 737 safety? They even charged extra for safety features like a light that revealed when the two angle of flight sensors were not concordant. I would say that Boeing executives cannot be trusted to focus on producing excellent aircraft, only temporarily excellent stock prices.
307
@nolongeradoc
chinese and indonesian airlines both cancelling orders with boein and buying airbus. Ethiopian black box sent to France as FAA not trusted. american credibility and honesty, enforced by our president's culture of lying and unreliability, will have dire effects on our economy I'm afraid. expect more losing.
187
@nolongeradoc
It all adds up, last 50 years whenever finance education based guys showed up in Corporations top tiers for one goal, Money.
We ended up in ditch.
Can you imagine ENRON top fraudster Skilling wants to come back to corporate world managing.
Sure take our bone marrows too.
40