Boeing 737 Max grounding - how Civil Aviation Authority responded

Grounded Boeing 737 Max planes crowd a parking area adjacent to Boeing Field in Seattle. Photo / AP

Correspondence to the Civil Aviation Authority from another government body indicates increasing concern about inaction on Boeing 737 Max aircraft as regulators in other countries were grounding the plane, which remains idle around the world.

Documents released to the Herald under the Official Information Act also show confusion about which airlines operate the aircraft in this region, as alarm about the plane escalated in the days after a second crash within six months.

In response to a request for correspondence with other agencies and airlines about the suspension of the plane, the CAA released 174 pages of documentation, with more than a third (67) of those fully redacted and 21 partly redacted.

The crash of Lion Air and Ethiopian Airways Boeing Max planes claimed 346 victims, and questions about the aircraft make it one of the biggest ever safety issues for civil aviation. Close to 390 of the planes have been grounded by 59 operators around the world since March.

Problems with the 7373 Max have also fuelled concern about what has been revealed to be a cosy relationship between manufacturer Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration, the United States regulator which has traditionally been the gold standard in safety.

It's been revealed that on the Max, the FAA handed nearly complete control to Boeing, leaving some key agency officials in the dark about important systems such as the flight control system which led to the two crashes.

Following the second Boeing 737 Max crash in Ethiopia on March 10 (a Sunday), China's Civil Aviation Administration was quick off the mark, suspending use of the planes in its airspace on the next day and citing "zero tolerance" for safety hazards.

Ethiopia and Indonesia did the same that day and the move to ground the planes spread on Tuesday, with action in Australia, Singapore, Britain, France, Germany and by the European Aviation Safety Agency.

New Zealand's CAA waited until lunchtime on Wednesday, March 13, saying it was using the time between infrequent 737 Max flights here by Fiji Airways to thoroughly assess information.

In response to Herald inquiries on March 12, CAA spokesman Mike Richards said: "The CAA is not planning any action at this time to restrict the operation of Boeing 737 Max aircraft to New Zealand."

But the OIA correspondence shows this stance prompted Ministry of Transport curiosity about what action the authority was taking.

Early on March 13, the ministry's manager, international connections, Tom Forster, wrote to an authority deputy director, Mark Hughes, pointing out that he had seen media reports that the CAA was not following the action of most nations and suspending flights.
"Is that still the case or is the CAA reviewing its position?" he asked.

Forster also asked whether "media lines" had been prepared for the minister (Transport Minister Phil Twyford).

"If there's anything we need to know or that we can do, please let us know."
Hughes responded, saying a meeting was planned first thing in the morning.

An unidentified industry participant, Steve — who said his business wasn't directly affected as nearby industry colleagues were — also asked an authority manager whether it would be following the lead of European and Australian safety bodies.

Rescuers work at the scene of an Ethiopian Airlines flight crash near Bishoftu in March. Photo / AP

In response to Herald inquiries early on March 13, spokesman Richards said: "we are constantly reviewing all available information and will be talking with the US aviation regulator (FAA) today."

The information released also showed the CAA wasn't certain which airlines were operating the aircraft here.

Fiji Airways was the only airline flying the planes here, but the authority initially thought Qantas had the Max (it has never ordered the aircraft although Virgin Australia has) and had to seek clarification on that point.

When the CAA did suspend operations, its director Graeme Harris said because of the very low use of this type of aircraft on flights into and out of New Zealand, the authority had had ample time to "thoroughly" review concerns about the B737 Max.

Asked about reliance on the FAA, spokesman Richards said in the past week that CAA had sought opinions "quite widely", including from European and Australian regulators.

"The CAA also engaged directly with the FAA, as State of Design for the aircraft, to gain as much information as possible which ultimately led to NZ making its own evidence-based decision."

Asked about the substantial redaction of information he said: "The disclosure of communication with the government of any other country or any agency of such a government could prejudice the entrusting of future information by these entities, which would have a negative impact on the CAA's ability to make well-informed decisions in the public interest."

The Herald has made repeated requests to speak to CAA managers about the OIA release.

Fiji Airways has had to charter a plane after its 737-8 Max aircraft were grounded. Image / Supplied

The former president of the NZ Air Line Pilots Association, Tim Robinson, has expressed concerns about the FAA's performance.

"I think my underlying view is I do have some concerns about how they've handled the Max issues. I just wonder if things had got a little bit cosy. I think it's been a wakeup call," he said earlier this year.

Aviation commentator Irene King said that in the case of the Boeing Max, many regulators believed the FAA was too cautious in not promptly grounding the aircraft.

She points out that regulators' stance on the Boeing Max contrasted with that taken last month in regard to a small plane used for sightseeing and skydiving, the Gippsland GA8 Airvan.

Within six days of one accident in Sweden, Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and the CAA grounded 84 of the planes. The suspension was lifted six days later.
"New Zealand, I would argue, did have a choice as the information from Sweden was extremely patchy and there was no evidence that similar problems existed here in NZ.

Simply because there is an accident in one jurisdiction doesn't mean all aircraft of that type need to be automatically grounded," she said.

"If we had that situation there would be quite a number of aircraft types sitting on the ground at anyone time."