Daily Press (Sunday)

Senate investigat­ors fault FAA over Boeing jet, safety

- By David Koenig

Boeing improperly influenced a test designed to see how quickly pilots could respond to malfunctio­ns on the Boeing 737 Max, and Federal Aviation Administra­tion officials may have obstructed a review of two deadly crashes involving the plane, Senate investigat­ors say.

In a report released Friday, the Senate Commerce Committee also said the FAA continues to retaliate against whistleblo­wers. The FAA’s parent agency, the Transporta­tion Department, has also hindered investigat­ors by failing to turn over documents, it said.

The report follows a similarly scathing review of the FAA by a House panel this year. Both grew out of concern about the agency’s approval of the Boeing Max.

In a statement, the FAA said the report “contains a number of unsubstant­iated allegation­s” and defended its review of the Max, calling it thorough and deliberate.

“We are confident that the safety issues that played a role in the tragic accidents involving Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopian

Airlines Flight 302 have been addressed through the design changes required and independen­tly approved by the FAA and its partners,” the agency said.

Boeing didn’t comment on specific allegation­s.

All Max planes were grounded worldwide after crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia killed 346 people. Following a lengthy review of Boeing changes, the FAA last month approved the plane to fly again if airlines update a key flight-control system and make other changes.

The Senate report, however, criticized a key part of the FAA review. It said that Boeing “inappropri­ately influenced” FAA testing of pilot-reaction time to a nose-down pitch of the plane.

According to a whistleblo­wer who was an FAA safety inspector, Boeing representa­tives watched and gave advice to help test pilots in a flight simulator respond to the problem in a few seconds. The reaction of three flight crews was still slower than Boeing had assumed, according to the report. Each time the plane would have been thrown into a nose-down pitch, although recovery would have been possible, the investigat­ors said.

In the two Max crashes, a failure of the key flight system, called MCAS, pushed the nose down repeatedly, sending the planes into fatal dives.

The FAA countered that it was an FAA pilot who discovered a separate computer issue in the plane, a flaw that took Boeing additional months to fix.

Investigat­ors also said an FAA division manager was first invited, then excluded from a review of the Max crashes even though his position normally would call for him to participat­e in the review. The official said he believes he was excluded to shield FAA from criticism.

The committee chairman, Roger Wicker, R-Miss., called the investigat­ors’ findings troubling.

“The report details a number of significan­t examples of lapses in aviation safety oversight and failed leadership in the FAA,” Wicker said in a statement. “It is clear that the agency requires consistent oversight to ensure their work to protect the flying public is executed fully and correctly.”

 ?? TED S. WARREN/AP 2019 ?? The Federal Aviation Administra­tion defended its review of the Boeing 737 Max, calling it thorough and deliberate. Above, a Boeing 737 Max airplane.
TED S. WARREN/AP 2019 The Federal Aviation Administra­tion defended its review of the Boeing 737 Max, calling it thorough and deliberate. Above, a Boeing 737 Max airplane.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States