Saturday, January 13, 2024

Downfall: The Case Against Boeing

 I will be the first to admit that my viewing tastes are unusual for a man my age. I enjoy the off-kilter, the unusual, even the bizarre in movie/streaming fare.  And although I never watch television during the day, that still amounts to both wasted, and some well-rewarded, hours. 

Sometimes, my tastes are more down to earth, so to speak, and such was my experience the other night when I watched a riveting documentary recommended by my brother-in-law entitled Downfall: The Case Against Boeing. Although made in 2022 and focussing on the crashes of the 747-Max 8, it sheds incredible light on the current safety issues plaguing Boeing, and in that regard is must-viewing.

Here is a trailer for the film, and I am happy to report the entire documentary can be found for free at Daily Motion. It is also available on Netflix.


How does a company go from one admired worldwide for its sterling safety record to one where two catastrophic crashes occurred within five months of each other? The answer is surprisingly simply: corporate greed. But the real story is how Boeing succumbed to such venality.

It began in 1997, when Boeing and McDonnell Douglas merged. Unfortunately, in that merger, the culture of the latter ultimately supplanted that of the former, whose decisions had been determined largely by engineers, their guiding principles innovation and safety. A comprehensive detailing of the results of this merger can be seen in this Atlantic article.

The film outlines how, in order to wrest sales supremacy from its new rival Airbus, Boeing embarked on an enhancement of its 737s, in operation since the late sixties. Speed, rather than safety, was of the essence. Because the new Max-8 required an alteration in the angle of the engine, the chances of a stall after takeoff, as the craft was ascending, increased. To counteract that possibility, they developed the MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System), a flight stabilizing feature

Because things were being done on the cheap by this time, there were two major problems with the system: there was only one sensor (which could be easily disabled by a bird strike, for example) in the nose of the plane to measure its angle of attack as it ascended, and NO ONE was trained in its use. The big selling point for the Max-8, one that allowed it to regain sales supremacy, was the assurance that no flight simulator training was needed for MCAS. Such training is very costly to airlines, given the time needed to allow pilots to become proficient. This turned out to be a fatal false economy, and like a malevolent ghost in the machine, MCAS sent hundreds of people to their deaths.

The two crashes that ensued within five months of each other, killing a total of 346 people, were entirely avoidable. Why was nothing done after the first crash to remedy the situation? False assurances and bureaucratic inertia are part of the answer.

For the rest, you will have to watch the film. I may, in my next post, write about the ongoing fallout of the merger that now has the FAA threatening on-site oversight because of the latest symptom of laxity, the door-plug blowout much in the news these days.

4 comments:

  1. Corporate greed is certainly a factor but I think there is something more: corporate culture. No matter how noble the goals there is always someone who will cheat. Cheating is simply expedient. It's quick and enables bypassing difficulties.
    Long standing businesses often adopt a "good enough" syndrome. Unfortunately, when it comes to safety, good enough isn't. Remember Ford's Pinto with the exploding gas tanks? Ford bean counters calculated that it would be cheaper to pay lawsuits than to fix the problem. It was a cheat.

    There is a remedy: government oversight. That doesn't always work. There was an elevator at an English coal mine that plummeted to the bottom with a load of miners. The inquest discovered that all the safety mechanisms had been cheated out; easier and faster than fixing them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are quite right about corporate culture, Toby. The other problem is that the regulators are loathe to move against the big boys; that is something that becomes evident in the Boeing film. For example, Boeing calculated that another air catastrophe with its Max-9 was unlikely anytime soon, and they promised a software fix within six weeks of the first disaster. This promise was enough for the National Transportation Safety Board to allow the planes to continue flying until the next crash, which was five months later. It is only now, after the latest near-disaster with the Max-9 door plug blowout ,that they are thinking of requiring federal oversight of production and safety at Boeing.

      Delete
  2. What I meant to put in my post above is that mine elevator that fell had passed inspection. Regulators, politicians and bureaucrats can be bribed.

    The late Jim Fulton, who was MP for Skeena several years ago, complained of the growth of the lobbying industry. He said that he often didn't know who actually wrote reports that crossed his desk.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder if, like Boeing, inspections by employees were permitted, Toby.

      Delete