Originally Posted by
Less Hair
So how far are we in the whole process?
Have the authorities defined (as in frozen) what has to be changed?
The authorities should never freeze the requirements. Continue to iterate solutions, check for all impacts, re-iterate better solutions, and continue until no solution create new impacts to be tested for safety. Any negative outcome of a solution investigation changes the requirements.
I see this in engineering all the time: "hey stakeholders, just sign that if I fix XYZ, I'm done. (if anything else crops up, not my problem)"
One does wonder if there's some amount of this going on between Boeing and the FAA.