Boeing Releases Hundreds of Internal Communications on Development of 737 MAX
Bussines News

Boeing Releases Hundreds of Internal Communications on Development of 737 MAX

Boeing Thursday launched hundreds of internal messages that raise severe questions on its development of simulators and the 737 MAX that was grounded in March after two deadly crashes, prompting affront from U.S. legislators.
In an April 2017 exchange of instant messages, two staff expressed complaints about the MAX following references to points with the aircraft’s flight management computer. “This airplane is designed by fools who, in turn, are overseen by monkeys,” one unnamed employee wrote.
In one message dated November 2015, which seems to shed light on lobbying strategies used when facing demands from regulators, a Boeing employee notes regulators had been likely to need simulator training for a selected type of cockpit warning.
The plane manufacturer stated some communications “raise questions” about Boeing’s communications with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in connection with the simulator qualification course.
In releasing redacted versions of what is referred to as “completely unacceptable” conversations, Boeing stated it was committed to clarity with the regulator.
Unredacted versions of the communications had been turned over to the FAA and Congress in December.
House Transportation Committee Chair Peter DeFazio, who has been reviewing the MAX, stated the messages “paint an alarming image of the lengths Boeing was willing to go to so as to avoid scrutiny from regulators, flight teams, and the flying public, at the same time as its own staff had been sounding warnings internally.”
He added: “they display a coordinated effort courting back to the earliest days of the 737 MAX program to hide vital information from regulators and the general public.”
The messages include some from a former Boeing senior technical pilot, Mark Forkner, Boeing executives stated. In October, Boeing revealed other messages from Forkner that said he might have accidentally cheated regulators and raised questions on a crucial safety program in testing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *