4 ms·

Very well could end up being a “Toyota unintended acceleration” type event. Being that it is a newer model operator error is just as plausible as a design or me

Very well could end up being a “Toyota unintended acceleration” type event. Being that it is a newer model operator error is just as plausible as a design or mechanical flaw.

ceejayoz 8y ago
https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=130402 https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=1... > For the past several months and in the aftermath of Lion Air Flight 610, Boeing has been developing a flight control software enhancement for the 737 MAX, designed to make an already safe aircraft even safer. This includes updates to the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) flight control law, pilot displays, operation manuals and crew training. The enhanced flight control law incorporates angle of attack (AOA) inputs, limits stabilizer trim commands in response to an erroneous angle of attack reading, and provides a limit to the stabilizer command in order to retain elevator authority. That they're pushing a software patch for this would seem to indicate there's something in the actual plane worth fixing.
- rootusrootus 8y ago
  It could also be interpreted as changing the plane because the pilot is harder to fix. Sometimes you have to accept that the user is going to do things their way, and adjust the software to match that expectation.
vvillena 8y ago
The issue is that Boeing added a software layer to make the plane behave like the old 737, so pilots would be able to fly it without any extra training or additional certifications. If it turns out that the pilots actually need some training to reliably fly the 737 MAX, there could be some nasty consequences for Boeing.
CydeWeys 8y ago
They purposely minimized the differences so it wouldn't require a new type certification, which saves airlines money and thus makes the plane a more appealing proposition. It does seem to be partly operator error, and that operator error is Boeing's fault because they did things in a way that maximized the chance of it occurring.
- mberning 8y ago
  My understanding is that the MCAS was required by the FAA for certification.

Very well could end up being a “Toyota unintended acceleration” type event. Being that it is a newer model operator error is just as plausible as a design or mechanical flaw.

ceejayoz 8y ago

https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=130402 https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=1... > For the past several months and in the aftermath of Lion Air Flight 610, Boeing has been developing a flight control software enhancement for the 737 MAX, designed to make an already safe aircraft even safer. This includes updates to the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) flight control law, pilot displays, operation manuals and crew training. The enhanced flight control law incorporates angle of attack (AOA) inputs, limits stabilizer trim commands in response to an erroneous angle of attack reading, and provides a limit to the stabilizer command in order to retain elevator authority. That they're pushing a software patch for this would seem to indicate there's something in the actual plane worth fixing.

rootusrootus 8y ago
It could also be interpreted as changing the plane because the pilot is harder to fix. Sometimes you have to accept that the user is going to do things their way, and adjust the software to match that expectation.

vvillena 8y ago

The issue is that Boeing added a software layer to make the plane behave like the old 737, so pilots would be able to fly it without any extra training or additional certifications. If it turns out that the pilots actually need some training to reliably fly the 737 MAX, there could be some nasty consequences for Boeing.

CydeWeys 8y ago

They purposely minimized the differences so it wouldn't require a new type certification, which saves airlines money and thus makes the plane a more appealing proposition. It does seem to be partly operator error, and that operator error is Boeing's fault because they did things in a way that maximized the chance of it occurring.

mberning 8y ago
My understanding is that the MCAS was required by the FAA for certification.