12-12-2020, 11:28 AM
(12-12-2020, 12:15 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:(12-11-2020, 10:23 PM)tomh009 Wrote: See Exhibit A: FAA certification of the Boeing 737 MAX. The process was neither well-designed nor evidence-based. As a result, hundreds of people died.
The grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence.
The FAA certification of the 737 MAX was flawed. Those flaws have been studied, and are working to be corrected. Hundreds of people died, or, approximately the same number of people who died as a result of cars in the past 2-3 hours. Even if we just look at Canada, you're looking at the last month or two of road deaths.
This is the kind of exception which proves the rule, yes, our systems are failable, but some of our systems are actually working reasonably well, and improving, while others are a complete failure (although I won't argue that road safety isn't improving in *some* places).
I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. The 737 MAX saga, which laid bare the regulatory capture of the FAA, somehow demonstrates that the system is working as intended and improving?
It seems to me that it clearly demonstrates that the system was not working as intended and it was only with immense public scrutiny and basically the entire world disregarding the FAA's leadership on the matter and taking steps to ground the 737MAX that the FAA finally took steps to correct the situation with the 737MAX. That's not how the system is supposed to work. Furthermore, it's not clear to me that the US government has actually corrected the core problems at the FAA that lead to this situation. It's not remarkable that a person or agency will act well when under public scrutiny, it's quite another thing for them to act well as a matter of course.