Interested wrote:According to the lawsuit reported in this article - the same tactics to hide design flaws and deflect blame onto the pilots have been used on previous Boeing crashes
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/21/politics ... index.html
From the document:
109. BOEING intentionally designed the MCAS to take data from one of the 737 MAX 8's two angle of attack (AOA) sensors and to alternate the sensor from which it accepts data each flight.
110. BOEING hos not publicly disclosed why it decided to have the MCAS take data from only one indicator,
113. Even though Rockwell Collins (Collins Aerospace) build the 737 MAX 8 flight control computer and the software and coding that run the MCAS, and Rosemount manufactured and supplied the Angle of Attack indicator, BOEING remains responsible for its suppliers and contractors, and for the design, production, manufacture, certification and airworthiness of its BOEING aircraft,
114. Rockwell Collins witch produced the flight controls computers and software on the 737 MAX 8 also provided software update to BOEING after the crash of Lion Air in 2018, but BOEING has not taken the necessary action to make all changes needed on 737 MAX 8 and the subject aircraft before the crash of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302.
[... lot of blames on BOEING ...]
134. As a result of BOEING's intentional and knowing decisions, the pilots of the subject aircraft had not received any simulator training or testing on how to handle emergencies caused by the BOEING 737 MAX 8 airplane's MCAS.
135. BOEING knowingly failed to conduct a proper failure mode and effect analysis during development of the BOEING 737-8 MAX to ensure that the airplane's MCAS was safe.
139, In BOEING's rush to get the 737 MAX 8 to market, BOEING knowingly, intentionally, wantonly, callously, egregiously, negligently, and possibly criminally, compromised and endangered the safety of BOEING 737 MAX 8 crews and passengers, and killed two plane loads of people.
BOEING DECEIVED THE FAA AND PURCHASERS OF THE BOEING 737-8 MAX BY
ASSERTING THAT CRITICAL SAFETY FEATURES NEED NOT BE STANDARD,
OFFERING THEN ONLY AS OPTIONAL EQUIPMENT AT EXTRA COST
140. Evidence that BOEING put its profits ahead of safety in its design, production, assembly, manufacture, and marketing of the BOEING 737 MAX 8 airplane includes that BOEING charged it customers extra for the installation of important safety features.
155. BOEING has so completely assumed the FAA certification process that the FAA airworthiness certification of an airplane or airplane system no longer means that the FAA independently considered and determined whether that airplane or airplane system was safe, but rather that BOEING has largely supplemented the role of the FAA. For example: [...]
[... lot of blames about the BOEING lobbying the U.S federal government ...]
BOEING "FIX" AFTER TEH LION AIT CRASH DID NOT WORK
210. Rather than grounding the Boeing 737 MAX 8 until it was fixed and made safe, BOEING chose to prioritize profits over passenger safety, keeping its Boeing 737 MAX 8 airplane in service first after Lion Air and again after subject crash, intentionally misleading its customers, the FAA, passengers and the public that the airplane was safe to fly. Such acts and omissions demonstrate intentional reckless indifference and conscious disregard for the safety of the flying public and Decedent.
THE PILOTS DID NOT CAUSE THE PLANE TO MALFUNCTION
250. The pilots had completed all the training which BOEING claimed was necessary to operate the aircraft.
251. The pilot(s) on the subject aircraft followed the protocol that had been make known to them as best they could under emergent circumstances, with little altitude and thus little time to troubleshoot and overcome the MCAS system.
254. The investigations by the air accident investigators to date has not found other cause that interfered with normal operation or caused the crash.
[... no less than 11 counts ...]