[eganist]

Were they? I thought boeing was self certifying elements of the MAX like the door plugs, do you have something showing the FAA inspected the door plugs?

Everything I'm reading says the FAA is moving to divorce the certification process from Boeing to a third party as a consequence of this event where Boeing demonstrated they couldn't even certify the little things. https://www.npr.org/2024/01/12/1224444590/boeing-faa-737-max...

And that's my point about your comment coming across like it's in bad faith. Usually people throw out questions with implied inflammatory answers as a lazy way to incite argument, and then those questions either continue or are seasoned with false information ("the problems were signed off") when someone takes the bait. Then the OP tends to write off the bad faith perception claiming they're trying to engage sincerely. There's a name for it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

---

Given how the FAA responded so far, honestly it could go either way whether they're investigated for it by the DOT OIG. If there is an investigation, it'd likely just be around this self certification process, not necessarily the whole org. And it looks like the FAA is moving quickly to demonstrate that they're not asleep at the wheel.

[ddlsmurf]

You're making a distinction I'm not, whether they signed off on it directly or indirectly, thanks for pointing that out. I don't really see the difference as that important though, in the end it's their procedures that are meant to safeguard against this, and they failed. Believe it or not, I have no motivation to incite an argument or anything of the such, why not simply assume I'm mis-informed but in good faith, and correct me ? Anyway thank you for the details about the DOT etc, that's what I was asking for.

[eganist]

> why not simply assume I'm mis-informed but in good faith, and correct me ?

In the absence of information I would've done just that, but I had a look at your comment history first before I replied. lol

Happy to have been helpful. Cheers mate

[ddlsmurf]

I would dispute that I am trolling or starting arguments here. There's that time I was rude because that article hit a spot I've contended with repeatedly when training juniors (and possibly some alcohol was involved) - but apart from that, I would appreciate any pointers as to why you'd conclude I'm in bad faith. This is very unconducive to interesting conversation and I would like to work on that.