I am shocked. Considering how long the MAX is grounded I thought it's taken serious.
Agreed, nobody has the expertise as Boeing employees. And as long as those Boeing employees who were involved in certification had to report and take orders from the FAA and not from Boeing, everything was fine. I really expected the former system which worked so well would be reintroduced.
Is Boeing unable to get the MAX safe or why this drama?
It's just like with Glass-Steagall. A good and proven legislation exists. Lobby groups prevent them to be enacted.
"In a democracy the elected representatives represent the interests of the people." Sure, and a king is king because he's chosen by god. A little bit more evidence would be nice.
Anyway not a smart conclusion. Foreign countries may not consider the FAA an authority any longer.
There does seem to be an effort to avoid getting to the root cause of the problem.
FAA is being allowed to largely pass judgment on its own actions.
Congress's main investigatorial thrust seems to embarrass the Boeing CEO about his compensation because such snark elevates the jackals in Congress.
There are some very basic unanswered questions like how did MCAS get judged as non critical from a safety point of view, how was MCAS on MAX deemed the same as KC46 when it clearly was not, and why did no one do a test with a bad AoA sensor that would have shown MAX's issue before it was certified.
No one involved seems to want to get to the answers to these questions.
All of these seem to be core issue with Boeing's and FAA's processes, yet the FAA is now saying there is no problem with these processes.
We seem to be told that the processes are sound and would produce the right answers in other circumstances but no one is explaining why the processes got the wrong answers under the circumstances of the MAX program.
To use an old term, I am suffering from cognitive dissonance.
The report says the FAA will "try to ensure a more complete review of how the multiple systems in a jet may interact to provide a broader review of safety risks
.". Try? Is this an admission that they have lost the ability to understand how multiple systems in a jet interact and can't evaluate safety risks?
I think one reason why these threads have gone dead silent is because it seems these questions are going to go unanswered.
Seattle Times has collected its Pulitzer Prize so it seems the press has patted itself on the back and can't be expected to do more.
The only hope for clarity is if the international regulators all say WTF, but then politics will be fully engaged and the last thing we will get is clarity.