The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is once again letting Boeing consistently issue airworthiness certificates for new 737 MAXs and 787s, years after that was yanked due to production quality issues. This is good news from an efficiency standpoint, but can Boeing be trusted?
In this post:
FAA allows Boeing to issue airworthiness certificates again
Effective immediately, the FAA is once again allowing Boeing to issue its own airworthiness certificates for new 737 MAX and 787 aircraft. This is a major development for Boeing, as the aerospace giant had these privileges yanked in 2019 for the 737 MAX, and in 2022 for the 787.
For some background, Boeing has of course been under incredible regulatory scrutiny in recent years, and for good reason. First there were the two fatal 737 MAX crashes in 2018 and 2019 (Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines), and then we’ve seen all kinds of additional quality control issues with both the 737 MAX and 787.
As part of the increased oversight, Boeing’s ability to self-certify the airworthiness of new aircraft was taken away. In other words, Boeing couldn’t just say that its planes were safe, but it had to actually prove it to regulators, before they’d sign off on that.
The concept of self-certifying planes is possible through the FAA’s Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) program, which allows authorized organizations to perform certification functions on behalf of the FAA, such as issuing airworthiness and production certifications for aircraft. So the FAA is now once again delegating this to Boeing, so Boeing can decide if an aircraft is safe to operate.
Getting to this point has been a process. As of late September 2025, the FAA started to allow Boeing to issue its own airworthiness certificates, but only on alternating weeks. The idea was then to see if there was any difference in production quality for the planes certified directly by Boeing, rather than by the FAA. The FAA claimed that there was no difference in quality.
The FAA claims that it’s confident in Boeing’s quality
The FAA claims that safety drives everything that the organization does, and the FAA is only allowing this step because it’s confident that it can be done safely. This decision follows a thorough review of Boeing’s ongoing production quality, and will reportedly allow FAA inspectors to focus additional surveillance on the production process.
For example, there will be more FAA inspectors observing critical assembly stages, examining trends, ensuring Boeing mechanics are performing work to approved type design and engineering requirements, and assessing all activities for Boeing’s continuous improvement of its Safety Management System (SMS). Inspectors will also observe Boeing’s safety culture, ensuring that Boeing employees can report safety issues without fear of retribution.
Here’s what FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford had to say about this development:
“Safety drives everything we do, and this step forward is only possible because we are confident it can be done safely. Our inspectors will continue rigorous oversight of Boeing’s production while focusing more of their time where it has the greatest impact—identifying and addressing potential risks earlier in the manufacturing process.”
I’m sure people will have conflicting takes on this, with many thinking it reflects the current administration’s anti-regulation attitude. I don’t have a terribly strong take on this, though this is definitely positive news in terms of Boeing being able to deliver planes more efficiently, which has been a massive issue for the company in recent years.
Can Boeing be trusted to self-certify planes in this way, given its track record? I mean, I don’t think any for-profit, publicly traded company can be “trusted.” However, I do believe that the top executives at Boeing now finally have the mandate to focus on quality and long term sustainability over short term profits, so in that sense, I do think progress has been made.
Hopefully this represents Boeing turning a corner in a positive way, though only time will tell.
Bottom line
Boeing has regained the ability to consistently issue airworthiness certificates for new planes. These are privileges that were taken away in 2019 for the 737 MAX, and in 2022 for the 787. As of late 2025, we saw Boeing regain the ability to issue airworthiness certificates on alternating weeks, and now it can do so consistently.
The FAA claims that it’s confident in Boeing’s quality improvements, and that resources would better be put into oversight of Boeing in other areas. We’ll see how this plays out, but it should be good news in terms of the pace at which planes are delivered.
What do you make of Boeing regaining the ability to self-certify its aircraft?
That's going to go well. So the FAA has learned nothing from its past mistake and it is acceptable for the general public to bear the risk? It is proven that Boeing cannot be trusted, I hope this will be legally challenged.
How many $$$ did Trump get for this? Everything's for sale.
*sigh* add it to the pile...
A common thread here is that many hate Boeing or distrust them. I don't ever hear the same about Airbus who had massive problems in the early days of "fly by wire" that were always blamed on pilot error.
If you don't trust Boeing why do you fly them? Because you have no choice?
Boeing inspectors will have more insight into what they are inspecting and thus I would trust them more than any FAA inspector.
Get the 777-X certified NOW.
"Boeing inspectors will have more insight into what they are inspecting and thus I would trust them more than any FAA inspector."
Tell that to the 300++ dead people from Lion Air and Ethiopian.
Airbus has nothing to do here. Boeing has proven they cannot be trusted. "Boeing Inspectors" had a lot of "insight" on MCAS and did nothing.
The whole concept of "self-certification" is, was, and forever will be incredibly stupid. It's not just a Boeing issue and it's not just an aircraft industry issue. When there is a profit motive involved, people will always take shortcuts if allowed to do so. A government inspection agency ceding its authority to a manufacturer is beyond ridiculous. It calls into question the entire nature of what the word "certification" means--it essentially renders it meaningless. If...
The whole concept of "self-certification" is, was, and forever will be incredibly stupid. It's not just a Boeing issue and it's not just an aircraft industry issue. When there is a profit motive involved, people will always take shortcuts if allowed to do so. A government inspection agency ceding its authority to a manufacturer is beyond ridiculous. It calls into question the entire nature of what the word "certification" means--it essentially renders it meaningless. If manufacturers can self-certify, why can't your doctor self-license? Who needs medical boards or standards anymore? How far are we going to take the idea of deregulation?
Can/does Airbus certify their own planes or is this just a Boeing thing?
Of course just corrupt USA Boeing
Looks like Boeing’s sponsorship of Sean Duffy’s road trip across America is starting to pay dividends.
Boy who knew all these company donations to the govt would be the best investment ever. And with most investments. There is a loser in order to produce a winner. In this case, the tax payers are the giant losers to all these great fortune 500 benefits......oh I guess that's why my 4 pears cost $9.
The quasi religious professions of the deregulation, free market prophets aside, that worked so well last time, I’m not surprised the US goes right back to making the same mistake again . Kinda like voting for Trump twice, oh, wait…
And the icing on the cake is Boeing being allowed to increase its production rate. A double whammy ! What could possibly go wrong ?
No, absolutely not. Are we waiting for another MAX crash for the FAA to say enough is enough?
And here come the horde of Airpus fanboys predicting doom, death, and destruction for something that's entirely normal. What a surprise.
Um, what are you babbling about?
It is not "entirely normal" in almost any industry, for a supplier+producer to self-certify WHEN there's already a regulatory body specifically designated for that purpose.
Two words: meat processing. And why should I listen to you? You're the second-biggest Delta fanboy on this site.
Yes, I guess it is "entirely normal" in the US to trust a company with a proven criminal record to be trusted with the well being of the general public.
A company run by people that don't know what they are doing. Nothing but MBA's managing aircraft.
I worked for them for many years and left a few months ago for ongoing issues in quality and following regulations on the in-service side and have tried to avoid production because their production system is so broken and mismanaged and only gets worse each program/project.
Yep , and it moved management to Chicago , far away from Seattle .
wrong.
Boeing's HDQ is in Arlington VA
That only happened in 2022 after 20+ years in Chicago and doesn’t change the point that management is far away from the manufacturing and engineering.
Horrific idea.
I don’t want to hear any pontificating when CAAC allows COMAC to self-certify
If all elevators have safety inspection certificates posted , so can all airplanes .
they do. It's called an Airworthiness Certificate, is issued by the FAA and is required to be displayed in the cabin or cockpit of all aircraft and be shown to a passenger or FAA inspector on request.
Boeing spent 15-20 years in a tailspin that cost them dearly including by failing to think through the MCAS system on the MAX. The FAA has bent over backwards to help rehabilitate Boeing and Boeing is doing its job. They are a huge asset to the USA and need to function well.
The FAA does not need to micromanage Boeing any more than the FDA needs inspectors in every food production plant or OSHA...
Boeing spent 15-20 years in a tailspin that cost them dearly including by failing to think through the MCAS system on the MAX. The FAA has bent over backwards to help rehabilitate Boeing and Boeing is doing its job. They are a huge asset to the USA and need to function well.
The FAA does not need to micromanage Boeing any more than the FDA needs inspectors in every food production plant or OSHA inspectors on every construction site; management of companies is supposed to know what to do including telling the government when they have screwed up. Spot inspections keep business honest.
The other side of this is that the FAA has already said that Boeing is very close to satisfying the requirements to certify the MAX 7 and 10; the FAA would most certainly prefer to let Boeing certify those models than have the FAA submit all of the final paperwork - as a clear departure from how Boeing and the FAA has worked.
Getting the MAX 7 and 10 certified allows Boeing to shift focus to the 777X - which no US airline (or in the western hemisphere, IIRC) has ordered and then to a replacement for the 737 which should have been done 15 years ago.
Kudos to the FAA for working w/ Boeing to rehabilitate the culture that made Boeing great and will make it even greater in the future.
Tim ...( second paragraph ) : the government does need food handling inspections in every food production plant , airline catering , and restaurants . Purpose that food handlers wash their hands with soap and hot water , including hotels and airlines . Also , inspectors ought to be on every construction site to guarantee nothing defective . This is "zero defects" ,and need to function well .
no, there is not a need for continuous inspections of American business. There are enough economic and regulatory safeguards in place to allow businesses to police themselves and to pay a high price if they don't.
Boeing's failures with MCAS on the MAX cost it dearly and the FAA did step in to revoke their ability to self-certify as a result.
and the bigger point that big government people like you miss is that private...
no, there is not a need for continuous inspections of American business. There are enough economic and regulatory safeguards in place to allow businesses to police themselves and to pay a high price if they don't.
Boeing's failures with MCAS on the MAX cost it dearly and the FAA did step in to revoke their ability to self-certify as a result.
and the bigger point that big government people like you miss is that private industry usually knows more about their products than the government could ever know.
call your senator and congress critter if you think Boeing should not be allowed to return to its previous ability to self-certify.
I personally applaud Boeing's turnaround and am certain that they won't do something as stupid as MCAS again.
Spoken like true boeing managment! make sure to get you enabelon entries in to make your number look good for that bonus.
Timbits: FDA doesn't require inspectors on site in food manufacturing plants. But USDA does for places making meat and poultry items. I should know this. I was one.
thank you for proving my point.
Regulations exist where it most matters including on-site government inspection in some cases and self-policing in others.
You clearly spent plenty of time outside of ORD if you were in food manufacturing plants; aren't many of those at ORD.
thanks for keeping our food supply safe. I am sure you can verify that there are more food product recalls initiated by companies that do not have on-site government inspectors...
thank you for proving my point.
Regulations exist where it most matters including on-site government inspection in some cases and self-policing in others.
You clearly spent plenty of time outside of ORD if you were in food manufacturing plants; aren't many of those at ORD.
thanks for keeping our food supply safe. I am sure you can verify that there are more food product recalls initiated by companies that do not have on-site government inspectors than there are recalls for perishable products where inspectors are present; it is precisely because perishable products can become so deadly if things are not right as they are supposed to be.
Airplanes are not perishable products; if something is wrong in the design, it will still be wrong for inspectors to see later.
"The FAA does not need to micromanage Boeing any more than the FDA needs inspectors in every food production plant or OSHA inspectors on every construction site"
Probably not the best analogy, at a time when the power-sh!ts are sweeping the country, thanks to food-borne illness.
Thanks Tim for valid and interesting response as opposed to the ranting of the "I hate Boeing" crowd.
Comparing a food inspector to an aircraft inspector is rather silly.
Airplane makers and airlines ought to pay the government to Not self-regulate anything . Let's see : airlines ought to pay for all ATC and airport runways ; airplane makers ought to pay for all government testing . In return , government ought to cut fares and fees by 90 % , and bring back female flight attendants with mini-skirts ..
We’ve seen what happens when Boeing ‘self-regulates’… door plugs ejecting mid-air and pilots wrestling to their graves with software they weren’t even told existed. I fear for the wellbeing of the future whistleblowers and passengers alike. Claim ‘TDS’ all you want, but it is actually this administration to blame for letting Boeing off the hook here and for giving them a pass on their criminal negligence with the MAX.
How could I forgot: Tots congrats to the execs and shareholders; such a yuuuge win for your short-term profit at the expense of all else… /s
I want a huge win for short-short miniskirts on female flight attendants , a la former Southwest .
Boeing self certified 777 planes since 1995 (up until 777-X which will not be self certifying until it’s established.) I’d rather have government inspectors focus on critical processes along the production line than spending time on this paperwork drill at the end. Pretending that suddenly self certification is some crazy idea when it was done on all 777’s for literally decades shows TDS or just plain ignorance.
Booby, you’re a putz. Boeing was an engineering-first firm when they developed the original 777, instead of a profits-only company controlled by stockholders today.
Well this will be interesting. Hopefully there’s not a Lufthansa 777 crash as that is the best airline in the world
The last time the FAA did this, Boeing responded by taking a few hundred lives. Any reason why they will do better this time?
Nope. Greed, willful ignorance, preventable death, zero accountability. Rinse and repeat.
Well now , the FAA was able to offload a huge responsibility and headache. Boeing on the other hand, has great incentive to get it right. Wish I had a crystal ball
I'd be avoiding these planes as much as possible as a passenger.
Avoid all 777’s then.
I do. Lucky I can easily avoid Boeing planes where I live.
You should never trust a company that is lying and cheating in a way, that not even the 1000‘s of life’s matter that they have caused to end early and then try to lie about the real and investigated facts on the cause that led to fatalities. It was always, BOEING!
I would never fly 787-MAX, 787-8 and in general avoid any BOEING plane whenever possible, maybe you should too, unless your life is...
You should never trust a company that is lying and cheating in a way, that not even the 1000‘s of life’s matter that they have caused to end early and then try to lie about the real and investigated facts on the cause that led to fatalities. It was always, BOEING!
I would never fly 787-MAX, 787-8 and in general avoid any BOEING plane whenever possible, maybe you should too, unless your life is not worth that much to you.
Just a few examples i remember offhand right now and investigation were tried to hide the truth of just simply errors in manufacturing supposedly safe and certified aircraft, but the truth was not really what a company was trying to make you believe! Thankfully some international courts and those who did NOT believe any statement from BOEING given and fight for the truth, but for those who paid with there life‘s it was too late. BOEING, should cont. building military planes but should stay away from being allowed to build passenger aircrafts, unless they really got what it takes to produce and manufacture as well as certify aircraft in a proper way.
Just a few examples:
Laudaair (NG004, 1991)
both 737-MAX crashes (2018 & 2019)
United Airlines (UA811, 1989)
Western Pacific Airways (WP314, 1978)
Alaska Airlines (AS1282, 2024)
… and on those accidents it was proofen, that these flights could have all had a safe landing for all of these passengers, simply of BOEING would have worked in a way as a trusted aircraft manufacturer should be, but instead tried to hide the bare truth and instead tried to lie in the most shameful way. A company i lost all my trust in, …. and you should too, if your life and a safe flight from A-B is something meaningful to you.
This decision on the FAA, another big error in US aviation, again!
It‘s like saying you trust Trump or Putin blindly if they say, they want freedom for the world, . . . see, it‘s the same with BOEING, those who lie once, you should never trust, simple as that.
737-MAX of course, not 787-MAX … BOEING should not ever be so lucky to design such an aircraft! ;-)
Fox guarding the hen house. This will last until the next crash.
I don't trust Boeing and what little trust I had in the FAA just evaporated.
hey who cares why that fence was built, probably no reason - let's tear it down and build faster!
Yeah! Who needs these 100-year-flood levies; we haven’t had floods in at least 110 years… Tear them all down. /s
Vaccines? Psh. We haven’t had measles in generations. Needles are scary. Stop the shots… /s
(I have many more of these, ready.)