By Donald V. Watkins ©Copyrighted and Republished with additional commentary by Claire Larson on October 20, 2019
Donald Watkins initially wrote about the Boeing 737 Max disaster in the April 16, 2019 article reprinted below. Thankfully, this aircraft model is still grounded. However, additional details that were revealed over the weekend show that Boeing was complicit in an attempt to cover up just how early they knew there was a problem with their blockbuster airplane. Back in 2016, Mark Forkner, the Max's chief technical pilot, in a conversation with colleague, Patrik Gustavsson, admitted there were issues with the jet’s MCAS system and that, "I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly)." Forkner may have unknowingly lied to the regulators but it appears Boeing actually DID lie to regulators when they initially withheld this information. Boeing’s management sat on this information for four months before turning it over to the FAA. Watkins states, “There was no excuse for Boeing's failure to turn over these text messages. This amounts to obstruction of justice in an agency and Congressional probe. Any ordinary citizen who pulled this stunt would be indicted for obstruction of justice.”
There appears to be some extreme irregularities in relation to the government agency’s approval of this aircraft. Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg was removed as chairman of the board last week. The question is how far up the chain of the command does the buck stop? Where was the government oversight?
There is No “Fix” for 737 MAX Airplanes
By Donald V. Watkins ©Copyrighted and Published on April 16, 2019
Despite the Boeing Company’s crisis management spin in the aftermath of a Lion Air 737 MAX airplane crash in Indonesia in October 2018 and an Ethiopian Air 737 MAX crash in March 2019 that killed a total of 346 passengers and crew members, it has become painfully obvious to the flying public that there is no “fix” for this $120 million airplane. An excellent six-minute educational video from Vox.com explains why the 737 MAX has engineering flaws that are far beyond the software “fix” promised by Boeing.
No amount of PR spin, political lobbying, or endorsements from the "big dogs" in Washington can transform a flying death trap into an airworthy commercial jetliner. Boeing needs to abandon this dangerous airplane and properly redesign another model from scratch. During the aircraft redesign and manufacturing process, the Washington “Swamp” creatures need to stop "whoring" long enough for the Federal Aviation Administration do its job of properly assessing the flight safety of the new aircraft before it is put into commercial service (and not after one of them has crashed).
It would be nice if the members of Congress who led the push to deregulate the FAA’s flight safety protocols would participate as “dummy” passengers in the flight testing phase for the 737 MAX airplanes Boeing is trying to “fix” with a software update before they are returned to public service. Because they participated in creating this flying death trap, these politicians ought to become part of the solution in “fixing” the airplane (if this is even remotely possible).
If they truly believe in Boeing and the 737 MAX aircraft, these Washington politicians need to put their lives at risk before subjecting members of the flying public to the perils of the “fixed” 737 MAX. Of course, they will never do this because they have already traded the safety of the flying public for a slap on the back and hefty campaign contributions from PACs controlled by Boeing, its major vendors, and the airlines that by Boeing's products.
Meanwhile, the public should avoid flying on the 737 MAX death trap, including the so-called “fixed” ones. Unfortunately, deregulation of the airplane manufacturing industry compromised flight safety instead of strengthening it. Every time this occurs, unsuspecting and innocent passengers and crew members are at risk of dying on a massive scale.
To date, it appears that it is cheaper for Boeing to pay PR firms, industry lobbyists, Washington "Swamp" creatures, civil and criminal lawyers, and death-claims relating to crashed 737 MAX airplanes than it is to redesign and properly certify a new aircraft to replace the 737 MAX.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the website owner. Assumptions made in the analysis are not reflective of the position of any entity other than the author – and, since we are critically-thinking human beings, these views are always subject to change, revision, and rethinking at any time.