> One engineer made a preliminary estimate that the chance of another Max crash was more than 13 times greater than FAA risk guidelines allow.
> However, this document was not completed and did not go through managerial review due to lack of detailed flight data
A plane crash is too significant for the FAA not to even disposition the analysis, meaning formally receiving, reviewing, and deciding what to do. Incomplete data would just be part of the decision process, it's not a legitimate excuse for not looking at it. Killing the report like this where no one is on record opposing it is a pretty common tactic to at least buy some time when you know what the result will be.
They were hoping to find a reason not to ground the plane. They didn't find one, so they eventually ground it.
> One engineer made a preliminary estimate that the chance of another Max crash was more than 13 times greater than FAA risk guidelines allow.
> However, this document was not completed and did not go through managerial review due to lack of detailed flight data
A plane crash is too significant for the FAA not to even disposition the analysis, meaning formally receiving, reviewing, and deciding what to do. Incomplete data would just be part of the decision process, it's not a legitimate excuse for not looking at it. Killing the report like this where no one is on record opposing it is a pretty common tactic to at least buy some time when you know what the result will be.
They were hoping to find a reason not to ground the plane. They didn't find one, so they eventually ground it.