from Hacker News

Former Boeing 737 Max Chief Technical Pilot Indicted for Fraud

by frisco on 10/14/21, 10:24 PM with 344 comments

  • by pdonis on 10/15/21, 2:15 AM

    While I don't have any sympathy for this pilot, I also find the FAA's excuses here to be less than convincing. Basically, their position is "Well, we trusted this Boeing employee to tell us the truth about the new flight controls, and he didn't." But if the regulators had actually done their job and independently evaluated the new flight controls, they wouldn't have had to take the word of any Boeing employees. I realize that that's the way the FAA does things now, but this whole debacle should be a warning to everyone that that method of regulation is not acceptable. The whole point of independent regulation is to not allow obvious conflicts of interest to harm the public.

  • by civilized on 10/15/21, 12:34 AM

    Nailed for being the only guy stupid enough to write instant messages bragging about misleading the FAA.

    As a longtime corporate grunt, I can guess exactly how management leaned on him. He should have left and let the scumbags find another patsy to do their dirty work.

  • by dhx on 10/15/21, 4:25 AM

    Internal Boeing e-mails between various Chief Technical Pilots and other Boeing staff are available at [1]. It shows that there was an overarching requirement for the program to to ensure that 737 pilots could fly the 737 MAX with minimal "Level B" training (e.g. no need for hours of simulator training).

    Per [2], MCAS was poorly designed and exhibited a failure mode (e.g. AOA sensor failure) that required immediate pilot action to avert disaster. For pilots that were aware of the MCAS failure mode and how to respond, simulation showed they could respond and avert disaster within typically 4 seconds. A delay of 10 seconds from a pilot to respond correctly to the failure event would be catastrophic.

    A Boeing staffer wrote to the Chief Technical Pilot now indicted[^][1] regarding the pilot action required in those critical few seconds:

      "I fear that skill is not very intuitive any more with the younger pilots and those who have become too reliant on automation"
    The Chief Technical Pilot now indicted[^] responds:

      "This is the path with least risk to Level B. We need to sell this as very intuitive basic pilot skill".
    Boeing it appears then opted for updating Non-Normal Checklists (NNCs) for pilots instead of:

    * Fixing the MCAS flaw to remove the failure mode altogether

    * Ensuring pilots were trained to handle an MCAS failure in a simulator

    * Otherwise ensuring that pilots were aware of the non-intuitive nature of MCAS and the particular failure mode requiring immediate <10sec response from pilots

    If the failure mode with MCAS did occur, pilots didn't even have 10 seconds to find the NNC and go through the checklist steps before catastrophe was set to occur. They were not aware of MCAS being present on the aircraft and per the Boeing staffer raising the concern, "that skill is not very intuitive" in relation to acting on the failure mode should it have occurred.

    [1] https://transportation.house.gov/imo/media/doc/Compressed%20...

    [2] https://www.incose.org/docs/default-source/enchantment/21031...

    [^] Assumed from job titles in the e-mails, as names are redacted.

  • by dgdosen on 10/15/21, 12:06 AM

    I'm sure this guy knew what he was doing - but yes, he was probably coerced or induced by someone with more authority.

    There's no way the buck stops there.

  • by Someone1234 on 10/15/21, 12:23 AM

    Here are the HN threads from both crashes:

    Oct 2018: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18324997

    March 2019: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19351835

    May be interesting to read with the benefit of hindsight and everything we've learned about the process that lead to those crashes.

  • by dsq on 10/15/21, 6:34 AM

    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 wolves while management goes "we don't know about that technical stuff".

    Not to detract in any way from what he is culpable for.

  • by broknbottle on 10/15/21, 1:24 AM

    I knew this whole Boeing disaster was the work a rogue chief technical pilot.

  • by AllThatJazz on 10/15/21, 12:47 PM

    Earlier this year, the feds signed an agreement that let Boeing executives off the hook for the 737 MAX catastrophes, which killed 346 people.

    The lead prosecutor, Erin Nealy Cox, then took a job with the firm that leads Boeing's criminal defense.

  • by defaultprimate on 10/15/21, 3:25 AM

    Rather than acknowledge and address the massive issues caused by instances of regulatory capture, such as this, or realizing the dangers that result from systemic issues with Boeing's incentive structure for management, facilitated by regulatory capture, the Federal Government and Boeing execs are just gonna scapegoat this guy. Nice.

    He was still incredibly stupid and made horrible choices, but the environment he was in only facilitates and encourages behavior like this.

  • by bmitc on 10/15/21, 3:30 AM

    Always seems like some person in the middle of these companies and regulators that always gets hit and not someone deeper in the companies or regulators. Not denying or affirming this person’s role, but it seems to be a pattern, whether it’s financial institutions, corporations, defense contractors, etc. and their associated regulatory bodies.

  • by ameminator on 10/15/21, 3:00 AM

    Very dissatisfactory result - the buck should not have stopped with only him. This failure was on multiple people, from both Boeing and the FAA. The FAA was grossly negligent and has proven itself unreliable by this whole debacle. A national embarrassment.

  • by PedroBatista on 10/15/21, 2:36 AM

    At the end of the day we need some dummy to be hanged at the town square. So we can all lie to ourselves justice was served and everything works as should.

    There are entire generations of people inside that company that should at least sit their asses in court.

  • by elisbce on 10/15/21, 2:19 AM

    This is so much bigger than just a rogue guy. So basically this is saying that the FAA just makes judgement and decisions based on documents and information coming from a chief pilot, without verifying or inspecting the codebase. This whole FAA process is flawed to the core.

  • by ProAm on 10/15/21, 12:30 AM

    The US is going after aircraft employees and yet no one went to jail for the great financial meltdown/crisis in 2007/2008?

  • by markus_zhang on 10/14/21, 11:53 PM

    Well let's hope that some C-Suite got punished.

  • by m0zg on 10/15/21, 1:39 AM

    FWIW, I thought they'd indict the unpaid intern in janitorial department. That's how such things usually go.

  • by slownews45 on 10/15/21, 12:16 AM

    Boeing were idiots selling this new model into the markets they did right out the gate. It was greed and bit them hard.

    Poor maintenance. Pilot skills in hand flying and unusual flying and recovery so different (overseas they don't always come through a normal US style GA background).

    If they would have looked more closely at the US, they would have found that this system was triggered (and resolved) I suspect pretty frequently by US pilots - ie, the pilots in the loop compensated for the design weaknesses which was the boeing thinking historically. US pilots have played that role on many planes, usually mfg then fixes the issues as well.

    If they are going to continue to sell internationally in the markets they want to they actually need to think about doing more automation and flight protection stuff - more computers - not less.

    This may never have been the major issue it became if they had focused on a major carrier like Southwest (very experienced crews).

    The whole MCAS thing was garbage, interesting they are pinning it on this guy. He does say internally he lied to FAA (unknowingly) as they weren't fully familiar with MCAS modes and edge

    Edit: Appears I was wrong - good maintenance in US seems to have been key saving thing.

    "Following the recent events in Indonesia and Ethiopia, U.S. flight data was analyzed to understand whether indicators may have existed that could have been addressed, and potentially preempted the accidents. The data showed zero incidents of runaway trim on Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft in the U.S. system,” says the report from the special committee.

    Good job A&P folks!

  • by tibbydudeza on 10/15/21, 6:31 AM

    FAA outsourced it responsibility to Boeing - basically just a rubberstamp - no wonder the European and Chinese air safety folks wanted to do their own testing.

    Never happened before as the FAA used to be the gold standard for safety - looks they have been gutted by the govt.

  • by mberning on 10/15/21, 3:08 AM

    Man he is taking one for the team. Hopefully there will be more indictments. I highly doubt there is a singular guilty party on this one.

  • by supportlocal4h on 10/15/21, 10:05 AM

    It is human nature to detest regulation in general but insist upon it after the fact of some failure. This can be easily illustrated with automobile speed limits. Almost everyone would be outraged if they were ticketed for driving 2 k/mph over the posted limit. It is a widely held belief that drivers traveling at or just below the maximum limit pose a safety risk because they are too slow. An officer who rigorously enforced posted speed limits would get run out of town. But who's to blame when the officer looks the other way and it results in a crash?

  • by anonygler on 10/15/21, 5:04 AM

    Wow. They didn’t go after an executive? Just a pilot? So blatantly corrupt.

  • by matchedLoad on 10/15/21, 12:35 AM

  • by agent327 on 10/15/21, 9:49 AM

    ...one man? Out of the whole company, the massive number of people that must have been involved, only one man gets the blame? And not even an executive at that?

  • by diebeforei485 on 10/15/21, 5:31 PM

    What sort of role is "Chief Technical Pilot"?

    I feel like they should be going after Boeing Co and not after individuals, except individuals at the top of the scheme.

  • by willcipriano on 10/15/21, 11:28 AM

    "They expect one of us in the wreckage brother"

  • by fransje on 10/15/21, 3:00 PM

    Haha. For fraud. Nice one. Should have been for manslaughter.

  • by therealbilly on 10/16/21, 1:09 AM

    I don't know. This has sort of a scapegoat feel to it

  • by Goety on 10/15/21, 7:32 AM

    Is it possible to tamper with MACS remotely?