I wrote:
> And who's in charge of the FAA? The Toddler, presumably in order to
> sidestep Senate confirmation, has declined to appoint an FAA
> Administrator, and instead appointed a buddy, Daniel K. Elwell, to be
> FAA Deputy Administrator and then Acting Administrator. He's best
> known for having been head of the airline industry lobby [...].
The Toddler's lackey Mr. Elwell is a friendly guy!
https://www.propublica.org/article/dan-elwell-current-faa-chief-coordinated-with-ex-lobbyist-colleagues-on-policy
“Happy to Do It”: Emails Show Current FAA Chief Coordinated With
Ex-Lobbyist Colleagues on Policy
by Derek Kravitz for ProPublica and Jack Gillum, ProPublica March 27,
1:12 p.m. EDT
[lots of examples of cozy shmoozing snipped]
Political appointees typically aren’t allowed to participate in
issues that involve their former employer or clients they have worked
for, as part of President Donald Trump’s ethics rules. But the rules did
not apply to Elwell during his first few months at the FAA when he
worked on the deregulatory team.
He had been classified as a kind of government consultant — a
“special-government employee” — who isn’t bound by the ethics rules.
That's one way to deal with ethics problems: Define ethics to be
inapplicable.
Elwell’s designation as a special-government employee also allowed
him to continue his private consulting business even as he worked for
the government.
[...]
What is clear is that Elwell continued strategizing with his former
lobbyist colleagues even after he was no longer a special-government
employee and rose up to the top ranks of the agency.
Elwell was named the FAA’s deputy administrator in June 2017. A month
later, Pinkerton emailed Elwell, asking him to “weigh in on directly” on
compliance issues contained in the FAA’s five-year funding bill.
Elwell wrote back that he would be “Happy to do it,” and he asked a
subordinate to help “set it up.”
Who's paying Elwell's rent?
Elwell’s federal financial disclosure list his earnings at his
consulting firm as $282,500 in 2016 and 2017 combined. It’s not clear
who paid him. His federal financial disclosure forms do not identify
individual clients, though doing so is required by law.
You're not cleared for that information, Friend Citizen.
After Elwell arrived back at the FAA under Trump, his wide-ranging
email discussions with industry players included a push by lobbyists to
intervene in government research.
What could possibly go wrong?
Meantime, Boeing has good news that will certainly reassure everyone:
There's basically nothing wrong! See, it was all a bad dream.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/27/global-aviation-industry-converges-renton-wash-boeing-details-max-software-fix/
Today, Boeing VP of Engineering Mike Sinnett, chief project engineer for
the 737 program, briefed industry industy insiders and observers at a
Boeing office near the Renton, WA assembly plant. He says all that's
needed is additional training for 737 MAX pilots (to consist of an
additional 15-minute computer-based course), adding the previously
detailed 'disagree light', patching the firmware, and restoring the
norm that applied for the previous 50 years of 737 operation where doing
a 'yoke jerk' -- where a hard pull on the controls always disabled all
automated assists. The 'yoke jerk' functionality was quietly disabled
with the 737 MAX introduction in 2017, but pilots weren't informed of
this fact (a key fact in the two crashes, with their 346 deaths).
At present, disabling the 'Maneuver Characteristics Augmentation System'
that has so far killed two airplanes full of people requires:
1. Knowing the goddamned thing exists in the first place.
2. Flipping off the Autopilot Trim Cutout switch on the centre console,
to turn off MCAS.
3. Flipping off the Stabilizer Trim Cutout switch on the centre console,
to suppress power to the trim motor.
4. Only then can the crew adjust vertical trim using the stabilizer
trim wheel.
By implication, the crucial bit of safety gear ordered by _some_
airlines such as American Airlines at an undisclosed but probably
premium price, the 'angle of attack indicator' to display readings
of the two AoA sensors, will remain a high-priced optional extra.
'We are going to do everything we can to make sure that accidents like
this never happen again', said Mr. Sinnett, so I guess retrofitting
the AoA indicator for everyone immediately at company expense must be
somehow impossible, eh? ;->
Mr. Sinnett indignantly rejected the notion of there being any need to
overhaul the company's aircraft development process: 'The process that
we follow with our regulators has continued to lead to safer and safer
airplanes and safer and safer operations over time.'
(Perhaps Mr. Sinnett is having difficulty determining which direction is
up.)