
Boeing Refuses to Cooperate with New Inquiry into Deadly Crash from 2009 - metahost
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/06/business/boeing-737-inquiry.html
======
doggydogs94
Look at the comments in the NYT article. Scroll down to

—-Mike—- I’m a pilot. Can someone tell me what Dutch legislators know about
air crash investigations? Because this crash was investigated by professionals
and a probable cause found. What you at the NYT cited in your “investigation”
is perfectly normal. Essentially you found one guy who felt that his findings
didn’t carry as much weight has he thought they should have, and his former
professor and mentor who agreed.

This is going beyond the point of obsession at this point, guys, it really is.
There are always disagreements within investigations, and sometimes
investigators or entire groups of investigators within an investigation will
disagree so vehemently with the findings that they file a dissent. That didn’t
happen here. Which tells me a lot.

Furthermore, I’m quite familiar with this accident, and the crew was
rightfully blamed. They disregarded a SACROSANCT policy among airline crews by
not initiating a go-around when they hadn’t achieved a stabilized approach by
1,000 feet. And they knew the radar altimeter was malfunctioning. What’s even
worse is that this was a training flight! So they were teaching the new first
officer to ignore standard safety practices! What does that tell you?!

I am so tired of the Times’ quite deliberate, and very diligent, efforts to
misinform the public. I really am! This accident was investigated and blame
apportioned appropriately. Ditch legislators have no business sticking their
noses in here. Let. It. Be!

~~~
kayfox
There's a distinct difference between the coverage of the New York Times and
the Seattle Times. Both a very critical of Boeing, but the NYT seems to have a
weekly quota of Boeing articles whereas the Seattle Times only publishes when
something new has shown up.

I have also noticed quite a few articles from the NYT that only recap what has
happened so far and don't actually have anything new in them. Boeing and the
MAX seems to be a hot story right now, so I guess I don't blame them, but its
tiring to see a new article and think "oh, good, some new info" and then waste
time reading it to find out its just more of the same stuff as last week.

------
salawat
Well...

First thing you should do after discovering a bug in software is think about
where else the methodology that created the big in the first place may have
also been used. This seems a completely valid case to reexamine.

The NTSB going on the defensive would not be something I would have expected.
Even a cursory retreating of well traveled paths can generally be enlightening
as people come and go from an agency.

------
gus_massa
Note that the title only says "Boeing" but the first line of the article says

> _Boeing and American safety officials refused to cooperate_ [...]

~~~
kayfox
Also note they are asking for the CEO of Boeing to come to the Netherlands to
be questioned by them.

"Members of the Dutch parliament wanted to question the Boeing chief
executive, David Calhoun, about the company’s possible influence over the
original Dutch investigation of the accident, which killed nine people on a
Turkish Airlines flight. The National Transportation Safety Board also refused
lawmakers’ request to participate."

------
olliej
Today in things that are completely unsurprising.

------
LorenPechtel
And why are they still allowed to fly there after this?

~~~
kayfox
Well, the King of the Netherlands does fly 737s.

