[ad_1]
MEMPHIS, Tennessee: After being grounded in March 2019 following two fatal accidents, the Boeing 737 MAX is expected to be certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to fly again later this fall.
The investigations pointed to a problem with the aircraft’s maneuvering characteristics augmentation system, or MCAS.
This automated control system was designed to stabilize the aircraft and compensate for the more powerful engines used in the 737 MAX compared to previous versions.
The FAA certification of the plane has been criticized because manufacturers can speed up the process by having only improvements to a pre-approved aircraft reviewed and certified.
READ: SilkAir was affected by grounding of 737 MAX aircraft even as SIA Group records higher profits
LISTEN: Rethinking the Role of Domestic Airlines and Saving Singapore Airlines
WHY MANUFACTURERS REQUEST AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING CERTIFICATIONS INSTEAD OF A NEW CERTIFICATE
The certification process for a transport category aircraft is a very complicated and expensive process.
Aircraft manufacturers who follow this path must commit to spending hundreds of millions of dollars.
It begins with an initial design, and the aircraft that is produced then undergoes dynamic flight tests to comply with all Federal Aviation Administration regulations.
Once the aircraft meets all those requirements, the FAA issues it an original type certificate. The aircraft manufacturer can then produce airplanes and sell them.
As time passes, technology advances and the manufacturer identifies ways to improve on that original design.
FILE PHOTO: A Boeing 737 MAX aircraft lands after a test flight at Boeing Field in Seattle, Washington, USA on June 29, 2020. REUTERS / Karen Ducey
So the manufacturer goes back to the FAA and says, “We want to take this initial design that we have and modify it because we made some changes.”
At this point, the aircraft manufacturer submits what is called an application for a modified type certificate for an aircraft derived from the reference aircraft.
For example, the original type certificate for the first 737 design was sent to the FAA in 1967.
That original design has had multiple FAA-approved derivative aircraft, with the 737 MAX being the thirteenth version.
READ: Comment: The Boeing 737 MAX 8 panic sweeping the world needs a cure
READ: CAAS will lift Boeing 737 MAX suspension only when safety concerns have been ‘properly addressed’
In the modified type certification process, the regulatory authority focuses only on what has changed.
REVIEWS CANNOT BE PERFORMED BY THE FAA
Another thing to keep in mind is that the FAA simply does not have the manpower to oversee all the tests that go with an amended type certificate approval.
Therefore, the FAA reviews most critical safety-related changes and delegates non-critical changes for review to manufacturers, in this case to a body at Boeing that consists essentially of Boeing employees.
And that’s what happened here. MCAS was not necessarily presented as a design change that affects flight control.
Michael Stumo, father of Samya Stumo, who was killed when a Boeing 737 Max 8 crashed while flying Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, speaks at a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, USA. June 17, 2020 Graeme Jennings / Pool via REUTERS
As a result, MCAS was not a priority for the FAA in the approval process for the amended certificate.
The capabilities of the MCAS and what it was supposed to control were never fully disclosed.
That is really where the problem started. It was with the narrative that was being submitted to the FAA and the lack of oversight in the modified type certificate process.
The result was that the MCAS system that was initially submitted to the FAA at the beginning of the amended type certificate process was not the same system that ended up on the aircraft.
READ: Comment: Do you want to travel again? You don’t have to worry about sitting on an airplane
The FAA has had to backtrack and give the MCAS system the intense level of scrutiny it deserved.
The FAA has required the manufacturer to go back and make significant adjustments to the software, in addition to changes to the operator’s manual, which is what pilots would see.
IMPROVEMENT OF THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS
I see two ways to go. First, for a transport category aircraft, the regulations are changed so that the manufacturer can receive amended type certificates for only 20 years after the FAA has issued the original type certificate.
Here’s how it would work: An aircraft manufacturer designs an aircraft for certification in the transport category and applies for the original type certificate in 2020.
Once original type certification is granted in, say, 2025, the manufacturer should be 20 years old.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Chief Steve Dickson walks around a Boeing 737 MAX aircraft during a preflight check prior to an evaluation flight from Boeing Field in Seattle, Washington, USA September 30, 2020 Mike Siegel / Pool via REUTERS.
That means the manufacturer would have until 2045 to seek an amendment to that original type certificate.
Beginning in 2046, if the aircraft manufacturer wishes to make further design changes, they must start over and obtain a new original type certificate.
The second component to solving this problem would be to step in and review what areas the FAA can delegate supervisory authority for system changes in a review of the amended aircraft certification application.
OBSTACLES TO CHANGE
One would be money. The FAA has a budget and these are very expensive measures because the FAA will need more engineers and administrators.
READ: Comment: Flights to Nowhere Raise Bigger Questions About the Future of Singapore Airlines
READ: How COVID-19 is changing the way we will fly
And for that to happen, Congress has to be prepared to spend the money to make that happen by increasing the FAA budget.
There will also be a cost to the industry. Implementing the proposal of a 20-year limit on the validity of this original type certificate will impose a higher financial cost on aircraft manufacturers in the transportation category.
A scathing congressional report blamed two fatal Boeing 737 MAX crashes on the aircraft manufacturer and Federal Aviation Administration regulators AFP / Jim WATSON
They won’t have that long to get a return on their investment on the planes they produce.
So the plane is going to end up costing more, which means that airlines will end up paying more for those planes.
And that cost will be filtered out to the public traveling in those seats.
Ronnie R Gipson Jr. is a visiting assistant professor of law at the University of Memphis. This comment first appeared on The Conversation.
