FAA inspectors say they've been pressured to ignore critical plane problems
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/faa-inspectors-say-theyve-been-pressured-to-ignore-critical-plane-problems/?fbclid=IwAR3XdS0cZxjkXAQShYdlL37niXqTb5Z0dkpJBUy0C288Va1halPQenI13IQ#site-header22
Let’s go back to 17th July 2015. A Spirit Airlines Airbus A319-100 (registration N519NK) was performing flight Number NK708 from Chicago to Boston. A serious fume event occurred in the cockpit and both pilots were almost incapacitated. The Captain died 50 days later.
The FAA claim they were unaware of this fume event and several other fume events at Spirit Airlines which had also led to crew injury and deaths. This event was made public on 4th April 2018 when officially reported by the Aviation Herald:
https://www.avherald.com/h?article=4b6eb830/0006&opt=0
‘It is up to the readers to form a picture of how the FAA conducts oversight over airlines and aircraft operations with respect to contaminated cabin air, what conflicts of interest may exist as regulator (rule and law maker) as well as executive authority (overseeing airlines and operations) as well as operator (e.g. ATC services).’ - Simon Hradecky - Aviation Herald.
We have known since April 2018 of the serious the failures within the FAA, not only their failures - but their arrogance too.
From the Aviation Herald publication above:
‘We raised additional questions: "What does the FAA do with fume events? Are reports about such events all dismissed and thrown away? How many fume events, with or without injuries (please detail) have the FAA investigated in 2015-2017 (detail per year please) and have issued a final rule? How many of these fume reports 2015-2017 (per year) have been reported to the NTSB, how many of those were rated incidents, serious incidents or accidents?"
Lynn Lunsford replied, in reference to the FAA statement sent on May 5th 2018 by Kathleen Bergen: "After considering your additional questions, our previous statement stands. Good luck with your story."
They see themselves as above any law because they are a regulator. They claim to protect passengers and crew by regulating the safety of aircraft, airlines and manufacturers (Boeing), but in reality they are protecting their customers - the airlines and manufacturers.
The fume events continue. The bleed-air system for ventilation in aircraft is a serious design fault known by both Boeing and the FAA for decades.
In 1954 - despite knowing the potential danger of harmful toxic air entering the aircraft cabin Boeing still went ahead with the patent and permission was granted in 1956 for air conditioning via bleed-air/ram air anyway:
‘One difficulty with utilizing the air compressor of a turbojet engine, for example, as the source of pressurized air for the airplane pressure cabin is the danger of air contamination. Lubricant decomposition products of a noxious and even toxic nature can be produced in the operation of these engines which, in the absence of sufficient precaution, may be carried into the pressure cabin with air delivered by the compressor. Suitable deconentirely adequate to meet this situation have not been forthcoming’.
From the full patent application from Boeing:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US2767561
Apart from introducing the 787 bleed-free aircraft, Boeing have done nothing to rectify the problem. This design fault is the know cause of injury to many passengers and crew and the (denied) cause of premature death of many others. Two cases from the past are proof of ill health caused by toxic fumes in aircraft:
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44777304/ns/travel-news/t/boeing-suit-settlement-stirs-jetliner-air-safety-debate/
Boeing settled ‘out of court’ with Terry Williams (former flight attendant) to keep the issue quiet. However, Joanne Turner won her case against the former Eastwest Airlines/Ansett in Australia after 18 years:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/australian-appeal-court-awards-big-compensation-in-toxic-cabin-air-340362/
51 cases against British carriers were lodged in March 2019 in the U.K. These cases have now been delayed until 2021.
The FAA, Boeing and the 737-Max:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/23/ralph-nader-on-737-max-crashes-says-faa-beholden-to-boeing.html
The 737-Max was designed with one sensor on the outside of the aircraft to compensate for the engines being bigger which subsequently needed moving forward under the 737’s wings.
They introduced software to control the pitch of the aircraft due to the weight of the engines - but they failed to inform pilots of any software or how it could be disabled.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/03/29/business/boeing-737-max-8-flaws.html?smid=tw-share
The FAA allowed the certification of this aircraft - to enable Boeing to compete with Airbus’ new Neo aircraft. The 737-Max should have had its own separate certification, which would have meant fully training the pilots in simulators but that would have taken a lot of time and of course extra costs to the customers - the airlines. Instead, they fast-tracked the training with a 1 hour training module on an iPad.
“Boeing and the F.A.A. have had an almost symbiotic relationship. The relationship is too cozy.”
— Michael Dreikorn, an aviation safety expert who previously worked in a safety oversight role at the F.A.A.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/business/boeing-737-crashes.html
It was recently suggested that a bird strike was the cause of the recent Ethiopian crash.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-official-played-down-scenario-that-may-have-doomed-ethiopian-jet-11558439651?mod=hp_lead_pos
Why was there only one sensor for the unknown MCAS system and why wasn’t the scenario of a bird strike to the ‘only’ sensor ever considered? Why were pilots not informed of the MCAS software and how to disable it? More importantly, where were the FAA during the certification process?
(See the 1st news article).
We place our trust in those in positions of power and authority to protect us from harm. Our trust is misplaced. The world has changed drastically over the last few decades.
Industry, revenue and profits (economic growth) now rule this planet - aided by regulators and governments.
The innocent suffer the consequences.