Going back to trust for a sec:
So this is all still shaking out, but basically it looks like the Boeing 737 MAX has fundamentally different performance characteristics from previous 737s, so in order to save airlines from having to train their pilots, Boeing's software engineers* whipped up some software to make the 737 MAX pretend it's a 737. Going as far as
forcing the system on whenever the stabilizer trim motor is powered, even when pilots think automated control is disabled.
(* N.B. software developers aren't engineers. We don't really know what we're doing, and none of us have ethics. Furthermore, software in a machine is always a cost-saving measure. Always. Just as it is here.)
Then, after the software people finished up with it, the Boeing sales department took over. That software I mentioned above? It requires a certain kind of sensor to work, angle of attack. Commercial pilots normally don't use angle of attack, but military pilots do, so AoA stuff is usually tossed into a sort of "deluxe package" that carriers can buy if they plan to hire veterans; it's cheaper than retraining them. Well, Boeing sales didn't make an exception here - redundant AoA sensors
and the AoA disagree alert (which warns the pilot about a sensor malfunction) were both sold as premium features, like they normally would be on any other aircraft. But on the 737 MAX they aren't premium features, they're essential for safe operation. Which means the stock 737 MAX was sold with zero redundancy in a critical component, software that deliberately suppressed a vital warning for want of a turnkey upgrade, and, most importantly, customers were
never informed that AoA sensors/displays were being used for anything important.
But the US government says it's safe. The FAA certified it, right? Well, no, actually:
- Small government conservatives won power and 'starved the beast', slashed federal funding and instituted hiring and pay freezes.
- Industry engineering prestige/salary runs away from what the US federal government is allowed to pay.
- Important agencies like the FAA can't retain an internal engineering staff.
---- There's
nobody working at these agencies today with the technical skill to evaluate aircraft designs or revisions.
---- But the FAA still needs to approve those designs!
---- But they factually cannot do it!
- Emphasis because reasons:
The only organization left that does have the technical skill to evaluate a Boeing jet is Boeing
- So the FAA outsources the job
to Boeing.
- This works ok for a couple of decades.
- Boeing falls asleep, because they aren't actually a competitive business, they just play one on TV
---- Airbus, Embraer, and Bombardier all make jets that start to eat away at the Boeing 737 market
---- Boeing/US government does a bunch of other anticompetitive stuff, TL;DR: it doesn't work
---- Boeing panics because they've never had competition in living memory
- Boeing (for the first time?) uses its secret FAA rubber stamp powers to push through a jet they reallllllly shouldn't have
So the FAA didn't really approve of anything Boeing has done. In fact, they haven't really approved of much of anything in decades. They're just taking Boeing's word on it.
And now the reason for this rant: Some web**** on HN wrote "One of the lessons learned is that the FAA is no longer a credible institution."
And yeah, it isn't. But here's the thing. It's not really the FAA that's lost all credibility, it's the
United States as a whole. That might sound bombastic (or maybe even a little chauvinistic), but I promise you, it's not. This is a matter of commerce.
Even if you personally believe that governments shouldn't be regulatin' yer ****, the foreigners you want to hawk yer **** to do want it regulated. That's actually great news for Americans, because today the United States has an outsized influence on product regulation. Generally when a US government agency approves something, everybody else considers it "good enough". FAA certification for aircraft is
universally recognized. But it also filters down to a lot of other products, like EPA and FMVSS certification for cars, FDA inspections for food and
even pharmaceuticals. Basically, your exports are gonna be regulated one way or another, but when US federal regulations are doing the work it
bigly greases US exports.
1.) American products only have to get certified in one country, the United States, and
2.) the United States gets to decide what certification means!
So this is the situation as things stand, the way I see it. Basically all of that **** I wrote above? Yeah, that needs to die pronto.
The FAA's word isn't worth the **** it's written on. Everybody knows Boeing is just making it all up now.
But beyond that, I think
all safety-critical products designed in the United States are suspect. This arrangement between Boeing and the FAA isn't just a single captive regulator. It's a consequence of deep structural flaws in the United States and the prevailing beliefs of American voters. And that means other countries can't really afford to trust the EPA, NHTSA, FAA, FDA, etc. anymore. So, yeah. American-designed cars, drugs, food, aircraft, trains, -- you name it, all of these kinds of products need to be banned for import until they've been approved by our own government agencies, because the United States government simply isn't willing or capable of doing that work themselves anymore.