Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FAA is granting Boeing “limited delegation” to certify airworthiness

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 121 posts

Re: FAA is granting Boeing “limited delegation” to certify airworthiness

#91

Post by gmac »

pfexec wrote: post #35
linuxhansl wrote: post #18

The cynical part in me wants to say: "Because it worked so well the last time!" Did Boeing implement internal and process changes to justify this? That's an actual question, if they did this step would make sense. I want to trust Boeing to do the right thing when it comes to safety. As is, I still prefer Airbus when I get a choice.

> As is, I still prefer Airbus when I get a choice Better pack a toxic fume respirator in your carry-on: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/delta-engines-airbus-toxic-fume...

Is there any reason to think this doesn’t apply to all aircraft using bleed air from the engines to pressurise the cabin? If not, only the 787 would be exempt, as far as I understand.

Re: FAA is granting Boeing “limited delegation” to certify airworthiness

#94

Post by EdwardKrayer »

M95D wrote: post #77
jjav wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're wondering - hey, that sounds terrible, why doesn't the FAA do anything about it? Answer, because it practically can't without maybe a 10x or more budget boost that's practically impossible. You're correct in that the FAA can't (or at least, it would be wildly impractical) have a staff of in-house experts that equal or exceed the experience of the manufacturer engineers on every possible topic. But, that's…

> It can be done by enforcing that the company must establish and document the processes to ensure quality You have no ideea. It's sooo extremely easy to fake everything! I'm working with ISO15189 right now. I could just fill paperwork saying I did things that I didn't really do. Nobody could tell the difference. Sometimes there's an audit. It's announced months in advance and they only just look at the paperwork. I'…

falsified paperwork is better than no paper trail in the event planes start falling out of the sky - spotting one moderate falsification could very well lead to further verification when it comes to investigations deemed important by the public.

Re: FAA is granting Boeing “limited delegation” to certify airworthiness

#96

Post by M95D »

EdwardKrayer wrote: post #94
M95D wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It can be done by enforcing that the company must establish and document the processes to ensure quality You have no ideea. It's sooo extremely easy to fake everything! I'm working with ISO15189 right now. I could just fill paperwork saying I did things that I didn't really do. Nobody could tell the difference. Sometimes there's an audit. It's announced months in advance and they only just look at the paperwork. I'…

falsified paperwork is better than no paper trail in the event planes start falling out of the sky - spotting one moderate falsification could very well lead to further verification when it comes to investigations deemed important by the public.

Ah, yes, no paperwork, I completely forgot about that. It's even more common than fake doing stuff.

Don't be so confident that falsification can be spotted. It usually can't. Or require very time-consuming cross-checks that I never saw happen in my entire 20y career, such as comparing the number times an internal control was run vs. the quantity of consumables used in the process that were bought.

In case of Boeing, the other problem is... who's going to look before the plane crashes?

Re: FAA is granting Boeing “limited delegation” to certify airworthiness

#97

Post by wizzwizz4 »

nine_zeros wrote: post #59
eastbound wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Looks like you are just a racist trying to pin things on black people. Mr. Racist, here's a little fact check from chatGPT. You are still blaming people for their skin color - have some shame. 1. No "2013 airframe scandal" like that exists. Boeing has had multiple controversies (e.g. outsourcing of 787 Dreamliner parts, later the 737 MAX crisis), but none that match this story. In the 2000s and early 2010s, Boeing di…

It's not really worth replying to racists, but I can't trust a ChatGPT rebuttal to be anything resembling factually correct. In future, I'd advise pointing out the bigotry, rebutting the things you know to be false, and then ending the comment there.

Re: FAA is granting Boeing “limited delegation” to certify airworthiness

#98

Post by conartist6 »

Welp, we can pay costs in blood or money. Looks like the idea is to pay in blood.

That said, money didn't go great for Boeing either after the last batch of people died.

I have a hard time not imagining that the engineering culture at Boeing is not just as moribund as it was.

Re: FAA is granting Boeing “limited delegation” to certify airworthiness

#99

Post by yfw »

vuln wrote: post #42
jordanb wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember when they moved to Chicago the argument was to be closer to their Airline customers. They wanted to shift from a focus on building planes to a focus on selling planes. Now they can't even sell planes so their new focus is corruption I guess. The good news for them is that business is booming.

Government money will never run away.

Elections matter

Re: FAA is granting Boeing “limited delegation” to certify airworthiness

#100

Post by M95D »

eastbound wrote: post #57
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #55

Do people trust the FAA on this matter though?

I don’t. It seems Europe didn’t either, because it grounded the Boeing planes before FAA did, and FAA followed just to keep face. I guess the FAA can do all they want, let’s see how the UE validates it now.

The next thing they could do is invalidate FAA certifications and require separate certifications from EASA.

Or maybe Trump can help by withdrawing from ICAO? /s

Post reply on HN