Todos
← Back to Squawk list
FAA inspector says she felt bullied by Boeing’s ex-chief technical pilot during 737 MAX certification
FORT WORTH, TEXAS — An FAA regulator who was in charge of the certification of Boeing's 737 MAX jet said she felt “bullied” by Boeing’s ex-chief technical pilot Mark Forkner as his company pushed for lower training standards on the aircraft. (www.airlinerwatch.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Corner cutting never saved lives.
Re “Who came up with this very stupid policy?”
I believe the $1 million per frame discount, if the FAA required simulator or flight training to qualify pilots on the 737 MAX, rather than just computer-based differences training, was in the purchase contract between Boeing and launch customer Southwest. So, blame both Boeing and Southwest for creating an incentive for Boeing to push hard for a differences-training-only ruling by the FAA. Money talks….
I believe the $1 million per frame discount, if the FAA required simulator or flight training to qualify pilots on the 737 MAX, rather than just computer-based differences training, was in the purchase contract between Boeing and launch customer Southwest. So, blame both Boeing and Southwest for creating an incentive for Boeing to push hard for a differences-training-only ruling by the FAA. Money talks….
If an inspector can feel "bullied", the wrong person was selected for the job.
I see the problem a bit differently. When the inspector was hired their knowledge and skills were current and qualified them for the job. Now they have enjoyed their job for 20 years interest in staying current in the aviation engineering space and no need to remain current to keep their job. They try to inspect a new carbon fiber structure with titanium augmentation using old school aluminum published formulas and stress factors. The new engineer doing the work looks at them like they are out of their mind. The new engineer must now spend lost of time training the old school inspector in how the new materials work. Congressional testimony called this Boeing excerpting undo influence over the certification process as Boeing, and yes AirBus, both have to invest large sums of money "Training" the FAA inspector with the data they need to do their job. Yes the FAA has some great talent, but the sad part is most line inspectors do their 9-5 and go home. The FAA should force them into school on a regular basis. A common example is a carbon structure dissection, which greatly reduces strength, is referenced as pealing paint. When the inspector should be taking action to block the use of the resource vs giving a waiver until it can be repainted.
Then maybe the problem IS with the infrastructure at the FAA. Assuming you are correct in your analysis, she should have been able to tap into the knowledge resources of her colleagues and/or training curriculum to determine the correct level of training.
I believe it’s call RECURRENT training!
Pilots do it twice a year. So do flight attendants, engineers, A &Ps and airport operations personnel. Also airport fire fighters and fueling tenants. All are mandated by the FAA who inspect them at least once annually.
Surely they have the same? Tell me it ain’t so. And if so, why!…..
Pilots do it twice a year. So do flight attendants, engineers, A &Ps and airport operations personnel. Also airport fire fighters and fueling tenants. All are mandated by the FAA who inspect them at least once annually.
Surely they have the same? Tell me it ain’t so. And if so, why!…..
Yup. It's not my fault, cuz I'm a victim.
Perhaps if that was not structured in such a costly manner this never would have happened? Who came up with this very stupid policy?? If you want something done the right way, then make the right way the easiest way! Its what I always thought being an aircraft avionics/mechanic for 47 years.