plane that may not be aerodynamically stable violates regulations. there s another issue which is the forthrightness of boeing during this inquiry. on monday the day they announced the firing of their former ceo dennis muilenburg, they handed over documents to the house committee investigating this. what are you hearing are included in those? these instant messages between the pilots part of the test program are frankly shock. and in handing them over, boeing admitted this is not reflective of good safety cull her. safety sculture is a ground up type of thing. and if you allow that, basically a lot of little decisions can lead to people dying. that s what you see here. tiny little decisions which in and of themselves seems like it s going to be okay get stacked up on top of one another. and you end up with this culture which leads you in complex systems to truly a lack of safety. and i think that s what we re
accounting guy, a business guy. maybe it s time to put engineers at the top. mary, you were the ig far long time. is this also in addition to an engineering problem a regulation problem? yes, it is. it s a huge regulation problem. because federal aviation regulations among other things say the plane has to be aerodynamically stable and this is not without the mcas system in boeing s words. of course they re tweaking it but that isn t going to help this. and you have another problem in federal aviation regulations requiring a redundancy. you cannot have a system that takes data from only one angle of attack indicator. just like you have to have not only double systems in some cases but trip toll resolve the issues. so by relying on one and it s even the patents, i ve read the patent documents. even that s a little fuzzy. but relying on one and having a
many things with the plane on a very old certification. but this goes far beyond a pr problem. it almost makes you think that the people doing these surveys and planning this actually never consulted with a real airline flight department. it is impossible. you can t hand out cards telling them, oh, this is why this plane crashed before and this is why it s better. it ll never work. i think if that s the first thing i d heard from a pilot when i got on a plane, i wouldn t be filled with confidence. but miles, let me stick on this one question. boeing was legendary for its engineering prowess, for a culture of quality. what changed? well, the world changed in the sense that there is a lot more competition and pressure. and there was a tremendous push at boeing over the years to outsource a lot of their work. i mean, building an airliner has always been a collaboration of a lot of companies. it s not all done on one factory floor. but there s been a tremendous push by the corporation
so by boeing blaming the pilots and blaming everything except the plane at this point and of course no one trusts the regulators now either. they said the plane was safe. you can t trust the mayor. you can t trust the sheriff in this town of jaws. so at this point they are literally going to have to go back to the engineering and prove to the federal aviation administration and others that the plane truly is safe, under regulation laws of physics. i think in the long run, they ll rename the program and take the plane through the witness protection program and give it a new identity. that s just my guess. i have no facts on this. it s a reasonable guess as well as a vivid example. mary, miles, thank you so much for joining us. all right, john. from a royal baby to game of thrones and everything in between, which stories were biggest on social media this year? we bring you the top trending stories of 2019. music
say the least. and the company has to gain the confidence of the pilots themselves before they hand out these cards explaining the apparent safety of the 737 max. i think it s the cart is a little bit before the horse here for boeing. they need to address some much more fundamental issues before they start thinking about pr. mary, you know, they have been really doing polls and focus groups to see if people would be willing to fly on these airlines. and the numbers aren t gotten considerably better over the last several months. is this the right strategy to put the facts as they see it forward? or is there a deeper cultural problem that boeing needs to take more seriously? oh, yes. and there s a deeper engineering problem. i always say the only laws you can t break are the laws of physics. i mean, this plane when it had so many problems and in the process it was called the franken-plane. because they hung so many changes on it and tried to do so