Re:Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 ...
by dahart on Friday September 27, 2019 @12:09PM
(#21093480)
You're right. Boeing did not make an outlandish leap of logic, or any leap of logic at all in this context, because it was fully their intent to get away with no training. They worked their butts off to minimize the training, to minimize even the very idea that training was needed, and to prevent the Max from having to be re-certified by the FAA.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 ...
by bdamm on Friday September 27, 2019 @07:01PM
(#21097051)
Of course, we can just as easily blame the FAA. If it's so hard to establish a differential training program then maybe the re-certification program the FAA requires (to certify a pilot to fly a slightly different aircraft) is too onerous. It's easy for the government to require too much work and seize up innovation, and I think we see that at work here. If the re-certification program wasn't so onerous, we could have seen Boeing put in some new warning conditions, or a better control layout that more clearly indicates the presence and activation of the MCAS, train pilots on that, and have a better, safer, airplane.
Re:Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 ...
by dahart on Friday September 27, 2019 @10:04PM
(#21097900)
The FAA definitely bears some responsibility, but not because the regulation is too stringent, it’s because they looked the other way. Recertification is onerous for a reason; it’s safety we’re talking about, and the result of not being careful enough is exactly what happened, hundreds of deaths. The FAA’s process in this case is already a product of regulatory capture; Boeing is already practically certifying themselves. Lots of reporting on this already; it’s easy to find more info.