Live data from Hacker News

Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

justice.gov

301–310 of 367 posts

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

#301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also this feels a lot like Boeing offering up a sacrificial lamb. I find it hard to believe that the FAA can focus on one person at Boeing as the reason for the failure in reporting the issue. There are too many managers and engineers involved. On the surface this sounds a lot like the Challenger disaster story.

Overall though, I'm at least happy some individuals are getting prosecuted, it sends a message that there are legal risks to individuals involved in this kind of thing, not just diluted corporate responsibility.

Only if the people actually responsible get prosecuted; prosecuting the wrong person sneds the message that the people really responsible get away with it - so there is need for some care.

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

#302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The flight previous to the LA crash also experienced the MCAS malfunction. You don't hear about that one because the crew used the electric trim switches to return trim to normal, then turned off the stab trim system with the cutoff switches. Then, they continued the flight and landed normally. The next flight on the same airplane is the one that crashed. The crew restored normal trim with the electric trim switches…

Yeah, it's a memory item on the 737. Pretty short too. http://www.b737.org.uk/images/runawaystab1975.jpg Not to mention I think they ran the plane at full takeoff power during the recovery attempt - I can't even imagine what they were doing in terms of speed monitoring (in a nose down you normally reduce power, no go to full takeoff!).

The pre-MAX 737 has a cut-off switch that switches of the automatic trim system, without also switching of the electric trim (there's another one that switches off the electric trim). The 737 MAX also has two switches, but they both switch off the automatic trim (including MCAS) and the electric trim.

So you can't switch off MCAS without also switching off electric trim, leaving only manual trim. But in situations like the Ethiopian flight, you need inhuman strength to control the manual trim (as Mentour Pilot demonstrates in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoNOVlxJmow). You need electric trim to have any chance to fight MCAS, but you can't enable electric trim without also enabling MCAS. Must be horrific to be in such a situation.

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

#303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also this feels a lot like Boeing offering up a sacrificial lamb. I find it hard to believe that the FAA can focus on one person at Boeing as the reason for the failure in reporting the issue. There are too many managers and engineers involved. On the surface this sounds a lot like the Challenger disaster story.

Overall though, I'm at least happy some individuals are getting prosecuted, it sends a message that there are legal risks to individuals involved in this kind of thing, not just diluted corporate responsibility.

What really needs to change is the corporate culture that led a person to think that they would be doing the company a favor by lying to the regulators. This probably goes all the way to the top.

Also, whomever decided that a basic software safety check would be an optional extra with a price tag should definitely not be in the management chain. That's the sort of next quarter profit-only thinking that rots companies from the middle out. That is the kind of thinking that results in your brand new product killing 346 human beings.

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

#304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Overall though, I'm at least happy some individuals are getting prosecuted, it sends a message that there are legal risks to individuals involved in this kind of thing, not just diluted corporate responsibility.

Only if the people actually responsible get prosecuted; prosecuting the wrong person sneds the message that the people really responsible get away with it - so there is need for some care.

Even prosecuting the wrong people at least encourages whistle blowing. If someone thinks they might be the sacrificial lamb if excrement hits the fan they can protect themselves by being the first to report it to regulators

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

#305
post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds a whole lot like you’re agreeing with me - but seem to think you’re not?

I believe the OP's point is that if you're not just using engineers to audit the tests Boeing does, then additional engineers are a fraction of the cost of running a full parallel aerospace test programme. The capex to set up the test infrastructure is significant even if Boeing is legally obliged to supply you with prototypes to destroy at no cost (which obviously has an impact on the amount of R&D Boeing is willing…

Eh, that doesn’t sound like it?

1) Boeing lays off thousands of aerospace engineers regularly (they did as part of the max disaster), and doesn’t rehire them all back - the industry is highly cyclical, and Boeing is periodically shifting locations anyway

2) the stated concern was Boeing brass was applying undue influence to engineering correct? If those folks worked for the FAA directly after being laid off , wouldn’t they be more than happy to stick it to Boeing brass if they were telling them to cut corners?

3) we’re talking design overview and identifying where Boeing (or others) may be ‘putting their finger on the scale’ or trying to snow regulators by asserting bogus test results or designing tests that they can pass by not including important test criteria they may not pass right? That is certainly something an engineer who was previously in the industry would be aware of, or even a independent engineer should be capable of spotting from ‘the outside’ - and require they do.

4) at (linked in a parallel thread) a median salary of $118k, which is well within something the feds could cover, the FAA can certainly afford to hire a non-token amount of aerospace engineers onto their staff if they actually wanted too/Congress wasn’t trying to kill them. This isn’t like hiring on a FAANG staff software eng for 700k or whatever which would cause outrage or break the pay scale, and this is for something for which there are clear large body counts that can be pointed at.

Now if we want to say Congress has been strangling the FAA for a long time (like the IRS and USPS) and forcing them to outsource to industry or whatever, hey - I could believe it - but that is something that should be yelled from the rooftops because that can be fixed, and that will cost us a lot in blood.

I don’t want more Americans dead due to corruption of a regulatory process, especially not my friends or family, and those are the stakes here.

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

#307
post #253
post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

https://online-engineering.case.edu/blog/highest-paying-engi... Median numbers, so masks variability. But it looks like AEs are generally paid decently, relative to other engineers. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/architecture-and-engineering/mobile/...

Oof, even worse than I noted. So median (and that includes established mid and late career aerospace engineers too) is $118k all in?

That’s roughly half of the initial comp for an entry level software engineer at any of the SV firms, and most folks will be making much more than that at said SV firms within a couple years.

Being able to get a team of 4-5 experienced and credentialed aerospace engineers for the comp of a single ‘senior’ (mid-level somewhat competent but not amazing) software engineer sounds dirt cheap to me?

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

#308
post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the OP's point is that if you're not just using engineers to audit the tests Boeing does, then additional engineers are a fraction of the cost of running a full parallel aerospace test programme. The capex to set up the test infrastructure is significant even if Boeing is legally obliged to supply you with prototypes to destroy at no cost (which obviously has an impact on the amount of R&D Boeing is willing…

Eh, that doesn’t sound like it? 1) Boeing lays off thousands of aerospace engineers regularly (they did as part of the max disaster), and doesn’t rehire them all back - the industry is highly cyclical, and Boeing is periodically shifting locations anyway 2) the stated concern was Boeing brass was applying undue influence to engineering correct? If those folks worked for the FAA directly after being laid off , wouldn’…

> Eh, that doesn’t sound like it?

It should, as it was what I said. I'm really not sure if it's possible to make a point any clearer.

> Boeing lays off thousands of aerospace engineers regularly (...)

Sounds in line with the classical big corp style of management. I'm not sure what any of that has to do with humans not being the critical element of providing a service. In fact, are you sure you're not supporting the point you're trying to refute?

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

#309
post #307
post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://online-engineering.case.edu/blog/highest-paying-engi... Median numbers, so masks variability. But it looks like AEs are generally paid decently, relative to other engineers. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/architecture-and-engineering/mobile/...

Oof, even worse than I noted. So median (and that includes established mid and late career aerospace engineers too) is $118k all in? That’s roughly half of the initial comp for an entry level software engineer at any of the SV firms, and most folks will be making much more than that at said SV firms within a couple years. Being able to get a team of 4-5 experienced and credentialed aerospace engineers for the comp of…

You realize you just compared Silicon Valley software engineer salaries in high margin industries to all location aerospace engineer salaries in normal margin industries?

If you want to baseline off SV salaries, you shouldn't be looking at median all-AE numbers.

Post reply on HN