Elf & Safety - all up in the air.

[M1k3H]

This is literally what happens every time you let business self-regulate. Boeing should be done for murder.

Currently a class action from the victims families, the shareholders and pilots are under way, this is better hurt them enough. (I assume airlines are getting sweetener deals instead to persuade them away from their own suits)

I agree (with the done for murder bit) but can't you see that what you are describing is exactly why this sort of thing doesn't happen almost at all?

The punishment received by any company caught not doing the minimum standards, both financial and potential prison time.

 

[StriderX]

I agree (with the done for murder bit) but can't you see that what you are describing is exactly why this sort of thing doesn't happen almost at all?

The punishment received by any company caught not doing the minimum standards, both financial and potential prison time.

That'd help if the actual people at the top weren't protected by their lobbying power, which for Boeing is rather immense considering they're a military contractor as well.

The executives should feel the heat, even if they aren't directly culpable, some decision has occurred to get to this point and it should be on their heads, too often do they just get a golden handshake and they're off to some other company for equally high a salary.

 

[M1k3H]

That'd help if the actual people at the top weren't protected by their lobbying power, which for Boeing is rather immense considering they're a military contractor as well.

The executives should feel the heat, even if they aren't directly culpable, some decision has occurred to get to this point and it should be on their heads, too often do they just get a golden handshake and they're off to some other company for equally high a salary.

Agreed. I don't know how the upper structure is in the world of self certification, but in EASA jurisdiction the "Head of Airworthiness/Design Organisation" in a company is personally liable for all of the company's designs. Having said that, I've never experienced anything where there was either malicious intent or lack of care, so not sure what happens if you get caught.

I have seen instances where a mistake has been made due to a process not being robust enough, and on those occasions the screws were tightened, until a process change was implemented to ensure it couldn't have happened again.

 

[stockhausen]

No message.

 

[M1k3H]

I didn't overlook it. Since you ignored my comments on how 'self-certification' works, I have chosen to ignore yours as well.

I am also waiting for any evidence at all to support your delusions.

 

[stockhausen]

No message.

 

[stockhausen]

There is an interesting explanation on BBC Online of how and why the Boeing 737 Max crashed and how its evolution was disastrously flawed (LINK).

 

[Destination]

Note, the above is for items that are already covered by existing regulations, i.e. substantial amount of similar items exist and sufficient data was examined prior to issuing those regulations.

Furthermore, if an item is not covered by existing regulations, the FAA issue "Special Conditions" papers, which basically means a lot of pre-certification testing with the FAA to determine how to do the certification testing, which is what the Special Conditions will cover. On a relatively low level project (aircraft interiors, rather than whole aircraft), I believe it took the FAA 1.5 years to write the Special conditions for an item my company was developing. During that time we had undertaken a considerable amount of destructive testing, to satisfy the FAA that we had considered all scenarios.

It may appear that naughty Boeing forgot to tell anyone how different the new plane was, so that they wouldn't have to do this abundant process.
Instead, just let entirely new system slip on through, and not even tell the pilots or purchaser that they were present.
Someone should do jail for this.

 

[stockhausen]

In a perfect world Airbus would pick up lots of additional business; sadly they simply can't ramp up production.
Nonetheless, this is unlikely to do much for Boeing's reputation - or that of the FAA come to that.
Hopefully class actions will remind Boeing and also the US Government that safety isn't an optional (chargeable) extra.

 

[stockhausen]

No message.

 

[VincentHanna]

Another worrying story on BBC.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50461302

Documents seen by the BBC cast doubt on a claim by American Airlines that an "odour" on a flight, which led to two cabin crew falling unconscious, was due to "a spilled cleaning solution".

The incident led to the diversion of a Heathrow to Philadelphia flight, and a passenger being sent to hospital.

Records show part of the aircraft had been leaking oil prior to the flight.

BBC sources say it is likely the leak caused toxic fumes to enter the cabin. However, American Airlines denies that.

There does seem to be a pattern recently of airlines covering up incidents. Are they prioritising their stock prices over customers safety?

 

[Pipe & Slippers]

No. Senior Management are prioritising THEIR stock prices

 

[NVP]

Most american airlines are budget disasters waiting to happen.

 

[Sankari]

Boeing has temporarily suspended production of the 747 Max 'Death Plane.'

 

[sidimmu]

self certification is and always will be a joke, it means you have done your homework and then marked it yourself..... regardless of how many teams of people and money you throw at it.

good riddance to the MAX!

 

[NVP]

True, however not always possible. You expect someone to know more than the experts who research, design and engineer them?

 

[Destination]

Boeing has temporarily suspended production of the 747 Max 'Death Plane.'

737

 

[Sankari]

/derp

 

[Destination]

/derp

Indeed, the rest of your quote is accurate
Flaps to position 1.....

 

[ianh]

True, however not always possible. You expect someone to know more than the experts who research, design and engineer them?

The testers were also experts in the field, that how they get the job in the first place and had done for decades before a lack of skilled FAA testers (FAA doesn't do any training and just buys already trained engineers) forced the FAA to "get in bed" with the builders who still trained lots of engineers from scratch to augment those they had bought who were already trained.

A lot of the ex-FAA testers also went to builders when the wages got high enough to make it worth jumping ship, so then you had FAA team mates testing ex-FAA team mates/friends build jobs, which further lead to issues of oversight and impartiality.