aerolimani wrote:TTailedTiger wrote:aerolimani wrote:Would you prefer your bureaucrats be less qualified, or take a less direct interest in important issues? Perhaps it’s just envy that your résumés don’t look like his.
I'd rather they stick to the facts. No need for all the extra expressions. To say that the Max would have to be the safest plane in the sky to get recertification would imply that the other aircraft are somehow less safe.
His job is more than just technical, addressing engineers and pilots. He must also engage in public relations. It’s pretty classic US-style PR to make statements in a hyperbolic manner. I think the theory is that it demonstrates confidence. I can’t say that the style appeals to me either, but I accept it as the norm.
I also would appreciate less bombast and a more to the point mission statement. After all, the fact he'll be ready to put his family on the newly re-certified MAX will do very little for me when I'll be trying to decide whether to put MY family on the thing.
I hope that he will:
- check that the redesigned MCAS 2.0 has dual input channels with input validation (or - next acceptable alternative - control output comparison) and will automatically disable itself in an input (or output) disagree scenario;
- check that the redesigned MCAS 2.0 has control authority limited to the intended use case. Come to think to it, I would also like him to check that the "intended use case" for MCAS is finally stated unambiguously;
- check that pilots are getting full documentation on what MCAS is, how it's supposed to work and its failure modes;
- check that Boeing has restored the function of the NG's STAB TRIM A/P CUT OUT switch - or equivalent - re-enabling pilots to disable all FCC trim control inputs WITHOUT loosing electric manual trim (those small manual trim wheels should really be a last, last, last resort);
- check that the "Runaway Stabilizer " NNC has been finally updated out of the 60' - when the most probable cause for a trim runaway were stuck switches - to the twenty-first century - when the most probable cause are haywire automations
- ensure that pilots will get appropriate training and simulator time for the revised NNC and to manage safely "MCAS out" contingencies - e.g. new memory items to stay clear of the flight envelope areas where MCAS is intended to activate
His extensive qualifications are not strictly required to run this checklist, but they can't hurt.
As FAA chief, I would also like him to mandate an extra focus on checking the merit of any "no sim training required!" claims for new "grandfathered" models.
As for communication style, I agree that you should always be aware of the cultural background of the speaker, and "translate" accordingly in your head: claims of successful achievements coming from the USA should be cut down by 50%, lack of a negative statement coming from Japan doesn't mean it's not a "no", "we're on time and on budget" coming from Italy means no more than 100% over time and/or over budget, etc.