Boeing Max Jet?

[Pogo]

I'd like to know where the FAA is during the congressional hearing on the 737 Max. Boeing built it but the FAA had to certify it before it could carry passengers or even be sold. If they have no responsibility then exactly what is their purpose and why are we paying them?

Part of what Boeing did was underequip the plane with a single (ONE) pitch sensor, specifically so that it (Boeing) could circumvent the FAA regs -- a more adequately comprehensive multi-sensor system would have required extra training under FAA regs, and Boeing didn't want that delay because they were in such a hurry for Profit.

The whole freaking plane was badly designed by hanging too-big engines where they would throw the balance off and kick in this whole pitch problem, which then had to be compensated by the ultra-super-secret software nobody knew about, wasn't trained on and couldn't be controlled --- rather than designing the plane to accommodate the engines, from the ground up, again in a mad dash for profit. This came back to bite them.

Listen dumbass I'm well aware of the faults of the plane but that is not the point of this thread. The point is why did the FAA certify it to go into service? They have the final say so and have to give their approval before it can go into service. Why did they not point out any shortcomings and make Boing fix them before certifying it for sale and service?
If you don't know how the industry works or have never been in the avation business it's probably best that you simply shut up.

This is the first and last time I'll ever tell a man this.

Dick, you have a good point.

I usually come running to the defense of airplane manufacturers because I'm a pilot and mechanic but this is not something I can defend. There are too many red flags that were ignored because of money.

Someone with Boeing needs to go to the iron bar hotel for a few decades.

Thank you.
But to paraphrase Airplane (the movie), don't call me Dick.

 

[B. Kidd]

This should not have been a Congressional hearing. It should be a criminal investigation.

When a country puts "shareholder value" ahead of everything else though, this is what you get. Dog and Pony shows.

But what's the FAAs part? They have the power yet no responsibility? The aircraft with all of it's supposed warts and faults was approved to go into service by the FAA before a single passenger could climb aboard. So where are they?

They should be part of the criminal investigation.

In what way? They should be held partially responsible so why arent they?

Because Wall Street does NOT want them held accountable.

Why would Wall Street not want the FAA to be held to account? Last I checked there was no FAA stock.

For some strange reason you expect Gov't agencies to be accountable.
Let me count the ways of unaccountable Gov't agencies:
Dept. of Education
IRS
CIA
FBI
I guess you need to add FAA to da' list.

 

[pknopp]

But what's the FAAs part? They have the power yet no responsibility? The aircraft with all of it's supposed warts and faults was approved to go into service by the FAA before a single passenger could climb aboard. So where are they?

They should be part of the criminal investigation.

In what way? They should be held partially responsible so why arent they?

Because Wall Street does NOT want them held accountable.

Why would Wall Street not want the FAA to be held to account? Last I checked there was no FAA stock.

For some strange reason you expect Gov't agencies to be accountable.
Let me count the ways of unaccountable Gov't agencies:
Dept. of Education
IRS
CIA
FBI
I guess you need to add FAA to da' list.

Everyone should expect them to be accountable.

 

[Crepitus]

I'd like to know where the FAA is during the congressional hearing on the 737 Max. Boeing built it but the FAA had to certify it before it could carry passengers or even be sold. If they have no responsibility then exactly what is their purpose and why are we paying them?

I ain't gettin' on one any time soon.

 

[airplanemechanic]

I'd like to know where the FAA is during the congressional hearing on the 737 Max. Boeing built it but the FAA had to certify it before it could carry passengers or even be sold. If they have no responsibility then exactly what is their purpose and why are we paying them?

I ain't gettin' on one any time soon.

I'd buy you a ticket.

 

[Dick Foster]

I'd like to know where the FAA is during the congressional hearing on the 737 Max. Boeing built it but the FAA had to certify it before it could carry passengers or even be sold. If they have no responsibility then exactly what is their purpose and why are we paying them?

Part of what Boeing did was underequip the plane with a single (ONE) pitch sensor, specifically so that it (Boeing) could circumvent the FAA regs -- a more adequately comprehensive multi-sensor system would have required extra training under FAA regs, and Boeing didn't want that delay because they were in such a hurry for Profit.

The whole freaking plane was badly designed by hanging too-big engines where they would throw the balance off and kick in this whole pitch problem, which then had to be compensated by the ultra-super-secret software nobody knew about, wasn't trained on and couldn't be controlled --- rather than designing the plane to accommodate the engines, from the ground up, again in a mad dash for profit. This came back to bite them.

Listen dumbass I'm well aware of the faults of the plane but that is not the point of this thread. The point is why did the FAA certify it to go into service? They have the final say so and have to give their approval before it can go into service. Why did they not point out any shortcomings and make Boing fix them before certifying it for sale and service?
If you don't know how the industry works or have never been in the avation business it's probably best that you simply shut up.

This is the first and last time I'll ever tell a man this.

Dick, you have a good point.

I usually come running to the defense of airplane manufacturers because I'm a pilot and mechanic but this is not something I can defend. There are too many red flags that were ignored because of money.

Someone with Boeing needs to go to the iron bar hotel for a few decades.

Yeah this thing is inherently no longer aerodynamically stable. While it was a good design in the day, this airframe began as the 727 three holer, now it's too long in the tooth to be used with today's engines. Time to start a new ground up airframe with today's engines and engine sizes in mind. You just can't bandaid with software something that is essentially broken. Geometry is not a software problem so it just cant be made safe or stable.

 

[Crepitus]

I'd like to know where the FAA is during the congressional hearing on the 737 Max. Boeing built it but the FAA had to certify it before it could carry passengers or even be sold. If they have no responsibility then exactly what is their purpose and why are we paying them?

I ain't gettin' on one any time soon.

I'd buy you a ticket.

You can keep it.

 

[pknopp]

So in testimony we learn there were those raising a red flag over safety only for it to get ignored.

While this is being uncovered Boeing stock prices go up.

Not only is Boeing corrupt but the entire system is.