Panel Clears 737 MAX's Safety-Approval Process at FAA -- Update
January 16 2020 - 4:44PM
Dow Jones News
By Andy Pasztor and Doug Cameron
A federal advisory panel evaluating the safety-approval process
for Boeing Co.'s 737 MAX found regulators adhered to policies in
certifying the plane, and concluded the plane wouldn't have been
safer if it had received the scrutiny of an all-new aircraft.
Lee Moak, co-chair of the independent committee set up last
year, declined to identify mistakes made during certification of
the now-grounded jets, instead describing current procedures as
"appropriate and effective."
Previous reports by outside experts have sharply criticized the
Federal Aviation Administration's approval process, and the agency
itself has acknowledged various errors.
Mr. Moak, former head of the largest North American pilots
union, told reporters his panel concluded an overhaul of the
process isn't warranted. The panel provided its initial report
Thursday.
Citing "thorough work by aviation professionals" involved in
clearing the MAX to enter service in 2017, Mr. Moak urged the FAA
to push ahead with delegating additional certification authority to
Boeing and other aircraft manufacturers.
The report also calls for enhancing FAA-sponsored
safety-management techniques, along with increasing the size and
experience of the FAA staff.
The thrust of the latest study, commissioned nine months ago by
Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, differs from earlier panels'
findings as well as bipartisan comments from senators and members
of the House calling for reversing decades of increased delegation
of such FAA oversight to industry.
With the MAX's grounding likely to stretch into late spring,
Boeing's new management is scrambling to rebuild trust among
airline customers and international regulators.
Thursday's report and press conference largely endorsed the way
the MAX was certified as safe to fly. That conclusion is at odds
with recent findings by other advisory groups, testimony at
congressional hearings and statements by Boeing itself, which has
acknowledged shortcomings in the certification process.
The five-member panel didn't lay out technical slip-ups or
mistaken design assumptions on the part of the FAA or Boeing. The
FAA, various investigative agencies and safety experts have all
said such lapses, in both engineering and procedural issues, led to
two fatal MAX crashes in less than five months that killed 346
people.
The panel concluded that the FAA properly followed its own
regulations and processes in approving the plane, and exerted the
appropriate degree of oversight regarding MCAS, the automated
flight-control system that misfired and put both jets into fatal
nosedives.
Reaction to the latest report by some victims' families was
immediate and negative. Michael Stumo, whose daughter was killed in
one of the accidents, said the document is "divorced from reality"
and "endorses the FAA as paper pushers without technical expertise
and direct oversight."
Through a spokesman, FAA Chief Steve Dickson -- who has publicly
blasted Boeing for pressuring his staff to accelerate approval of
MAX software fixes and pilot training changes -- said, "The agency
will carefully consider the committee's work, along with the
recommendations identified in various investigative reports and
other analyses."
A Boeing spokesman said, "We will study these recommendations
closely, as we continue to work with government and industry
stakeholders to enhance the certification process."
Mr. Moak said the panel, as part of its deliberations, didn't
consider a batch of recently released internal Boeing employee
messages that ridiculed regulators, misled airlines and portrayed a
cavalier attitude toward safety. Lawmakers have said the messages
show Boeing employees sought to hide important safety issues and
trick regulators world-wide.
The panel -- also headed by retired Air Force Gen. Darren McDew
-- urged stepped-up analysis of human factors that could lead
pilots in the cockpit to act differently than existing assumptions,
in line with earlier recommendations by other groups.
The MAX's certification was the 13th time the FAA has updated
and extended its original approval for the 737 family of jets,
originally approved in 1967.
The panel said that during interviews with industry and
government experts, there was a clear consensus that evaluating the
MAX as an all-new aircraft wouldn't have produced "more rigorous
scrutiny" or "a safer airplane." Lawmakers and other FAA critics
have reached conclusions that are odds with both of those
points.
In two of its potentially most significant recommendations, the
panel urged earlier and greater involvement of FAA pilots and
agency training experts in aircraft design considerations. And it
urged the FAA to step up efforts to promote enhanced pilot
qualifications as it locks in minimum training requirements for new
jetliners.
Write to Andy Pasztor at andy.pasztor@wsj.com and Doug Cameron
at doug.cameron@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
January 16, 2020 16:29 ET (21:29 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Boeing (NYSE:BA)
Historical Stock Chart
From Jun 2024 to Jul 2024
Boeing (NYSE:BA)
Historical Stock Chart
From Jul 2023 to Jul 2024