Live data from Hacker News

Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

justice.gov

171–180 of 367 posts

Re: Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

#171
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like they are knowingly incompetent? If a utility regulator had no one on staff who knew how utility scale power transmission/generation/whatever worked, that’s what we’d call it for sure. And aerospace engineers are dirt cheap. What sort of clown show is the FAA running?

> And aerospace engineers are dirt cheap Inaccurate, please stop sharing misinformation. Seeing this on HN is unfortunate.

Do you have any data to share? Most of my family has been involved in Aerospace, with my dad working for skunkworks, my brother working for Garmin (and a formal aerospace engineer).

Most aerospace engineers are lucky to break 75k/yr to start with little to no equity, and often need to move to the middle of nowhere (compared to say NYC, SF, LA, etc for software), and get hit with periodic catastrophic layoffs with the regular cycles in the industry.

It’s pretty common that software folks are paid 2-5x with far less intense or zero credentialing and better work conditions - at the same company.

Re: Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

#172
post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you talk about the FAA doing thier own testing and validation is (unfortunately) almost impossible. Back in the 90s, a senior FAA official (I think a Director) had said something along the lines of “The FAA does not and cannot check everything, we just see that companies are doing their tests.” The FAA would require several times more manpower to be able to actually audit or test everything, and that is assuming…

Like, how many new major passenger planes do they have to test every year? 0.1 on average?

Let's say it is 0.1 on average, and the FAA would need 5 years just to test. That gives you an expected wait time of 10 years to get something tested, and 20 years if you include development time. I'm sure the industry benefits from lower turnaround times than that.

Re: Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

#173
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like they are knowingly incompetent? If a utility regulator had no one on staff who knew how utility scale power transmission/generation/whatever worked, that’s what we’d call it for sure. And aerospace engineers are dirt cheap. What sort of clown show is the FAA running?

I think you’re deeply misunderstanding the purpose of the FAA and the magnitude of the problem here. Like almost every other agency (the FDA didn’t do the vaccine trials; are they incompetent too?) they don’t do the tests. They just police the industry. Theoretically if you set laws and regulations and dole out severe punishment for bad behaviour, you don’t need to be the one running the tests. People should want the…

So if the FDA is unable to find someone who can understand or can’t interpret/understand the studies themselves enough to see flaws or likely fake data, they should just take the companies word for it that it’s all good?

Last I remember this being a topic of discussion, the stance was ‘trust but verify’ no?

While it may be efficient to rubber stamp things, it is not doing their job. Folks scam all the time, especially if they know no one is looking.

If they lack the competence to be able to independently verify, they aren’t being effective regulators.

Re: Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

#174
post #164

It is important to note that Boeing settled for 2.5 billion in which it is agreed that "...the misconduct by its former employees was “neither pervasive across the organization, nor undertaken by a large number of employees, nor facilitated by senior management". ( https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-reaches-2-5-billion-sett... ). So remember, when push comes to shove, the technical lead always gets thrown to the wol…

I took a gig at a hospital. They got an MBA Karen with 3 years of experience. She learned the very basics of IT, then started micromanaging. As in, she'd tell you what switches to put on CLI commands. If you said that's wrong, or would cause data corruption - you're not a team player. The entire team of 18 people were not team players - the team consisted of her alone.

One time, she told me to do something very dangerous during a data migration. Not a best practice, and a big no-no. I'm seeing open files randomly spread across about 50 NAS shares which should according to her be offline - retired apps. It would take time to identify those, notify people, etc. She has deadlines to meet. You see, this migration that's been put off time and again for 2 years, needs to be finished in about a month, because when she was hired, she made that promise to her boss - without knowing anything about the apps, how much data, what users, etc.

I talked to her over chat, saved the chat, warned her about all the dangers and was told to proceed. It brought down a clinic, resulted in some data loss, and affected patients.

Next migration batch, she asks me to do it again. With a phone call. I ask for it in writing, she refuses. I added the phone call notes to the servicenow change control ticket, put risk as high, and said I need a note in the ticket from her telling me to proceed despite risk.

A week later I'm on suspension for disobeying my manager. HR tells me they will be getting in touch with me to get the details of what happened. I enjoy my paid week off while HR investigates the complaint - they need a full week because they review so much. at 4pm, the day before the week is over, the HR rep calls me and asks be about what happened. At 9am the next day I'm fired.

I file for unemployment and get a corp to corp contract to a company I'm part owner in (contract to the company, not to me). They dispute it, saying I was fired for my attitude, and was written up many times. Both false - I turn over the details - saved chats, emails, a phone call I recorded, etc to the UI officer. The next day my unemployment is approved, and I'm collecting unemployment weekly, while collecting dividends from the company I own for its c2c contract. I do however reply to one email per day from an indian recruiter - I pick ones with names I can't pronounce. They do the needful and submit me to one position per day with "their client." Why only indian recruiters? Because they are a minority and I don't discriminate.

This is a Boeing engineer being thrown under the bus by management. Here's what needs to happen: the engineer is guilty. I was guilty too when the first time I ran the destructive script, despite being told to do that in writing. The engineer is like a nazi soldier. Both the soldier, and his boss, and anyone up the chain who approved or pushed for this, need to be on the receiving side of that courtroom.

Re: Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

#175
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'and dole out severe punishment for bad behaviour' When will Boeing CEO and Board of Directors get locked up as part of the severe punishment?

Presumably when it is shown beyond a reasonable doubt that they conspired or deliberately overlooked the fraud. The prosecutor has every incentive to get participants to roll over and follow the conspiracy as high up the ladder as it goes. Successfully prosecuting such a large profile case, particularly with defendants with very little public sympathy, would make his/her career.

Since you’re not going to find any documentation of that because of CYA, and Boeing is the flagship US aircraft manufacturer with a protected (as in ‘in the interest of national security’ protected) position to offset Airbus - that’s pretty much not going to happen.

Re: Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

#176
post #166
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which a competent regulator would surely be doing randomly across the industry no? If all they are doing is trusting what the regulated folks are saying they are doing, that isn’t what I would call effective regulation.

Most regulators don’t verify much, (the SEC almost never actually looks at bank account balances,) they just look for inconsistencies in the information they receive.

The SEC isn’t regulating banks generally so bank account balances shouldn’t matter much - they are regulating security markets no?

So looking at discrepancies between data from market participants IS verifying and regulating.

Same as if the FDA looked at raw study data and compared it to equivalent studies for similar types of drugs/treatments, or the FAA had an engineer on staff to double check elements of a new design from a major manufacturer for plausibility

Re: Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

#177
post #164

It is important to note that Boeing settled for 2.5 billion in which it is agreed that "...the misconduct by its former employees was “neither pervasive across the organization, nor undertaken by a large number of employees, nor facilitated by senior management". ( https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-reaches-2-5-billion-sett... ). So remember, when push comes to shove, the technical lead always gets thrown to the wol…

I took a gig at a hospital. They got an MBA Karen with 3 years of experience. She learned the very basics of IT, then started micromanaging. As in, she'd tell you what switches to put on CLI commands. If you said that's wrong, or would cause data corruption - you're not a team player. The entire team of 18 people were not team players - the team consisted of her alone. One time, she told me to do something very dange…

"The fish smells from the head" - turkish proverb

Re: Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

#178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FAA could have looked at how the fans were upsized and pushed forward to avoid dragging on the runway, and called for a new type certification. The FAA failed by allowing Boeing to not get a new type certification, which would have required greater scrutiny of the new airframe.

the airframe was fine. the problem was that mcas was implemented in a totally shitty way. If it had just replied on 3 sensors instead of 1, wet likely wouldn't be talking about it now.

No, the airframe was different and didn't handle the same way as the old one. In order to hide that, Boeing implemented in a terribly negligent way MCAS. Had they accepted it's a different one, and had a different type rating, all would have been fine.

Re: Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

#179
post #164

It is important to note that Boeing settled for 2.5 billion in which it is agreed that "...the misconduct by its former employees was “neither pervasive across the organization, nor undertaken by a large number of employees, nor facilitated by senior management". ( https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-reaches-2-5-billion-sett... ). So remember, when push comes to shove, the technical lead always gets thrown to the wol…

It's possible this is the initial charge to get them in the door with search warrants and subpoenas and testimony because someone dropped a dime with some info that there were criminal acts not know to the government at the time, not covered by the settlement. I doubt the settlement was a "you're pardoned for ALL acts related to 737 MAX."

A refresher since this happened so long ago:

Airbus was eating Boeing's 737 sales for lunch. Boeing management wanted to put better engines on the plane to get those sales back. But the better engines were bigger, and that meant they couldn't just swap them out and call it a day. So they moved the engine position. Well, when you move heavy shit around on a plane that also happens to be the thing generating thrust, you change a lot of stuff about the plane - its center of gravity, how the plane behaves when that thrust is applied (think torque steer but for planes) and aerodynamics.

The plane became aerodynamically unstable in certain conditions. Hence the need to add fly-by-wire systems and sensors. Except...they also cheaped out on both the number of sensors and even the frigging lightbulbs to warn pilots of sensor error.

The shit Boeing has gotten away with over the years boggles the mind. At one point the NSA got caught doing industrial espionage against Airbus for them!

Re: Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

#180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to nitpick, you probably mean 'oral'

Wow! TIL! I always use 'verbal' when I actually mean 'oral'.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary:

Verbal: oral, spoken rather than written.

You’ve been using verbal correctly.

Post reply on HN