4 ms·
"Fehrm said Boeing must have added this system on the MAX because when the angle of attack is high this model is less stable compared to prior 737 variants. Tha
by kraig 8y ago
"Fehrm said Boeing must have added this system on the MAX because when the angle of attack is high this model is less stable compared to prior 737 variants. That’s because the MAX has bigger, heavier engines that are also cantilevered further forward on the wing to provide more ground clearance. That changes the center of gravity."
Fehrm, a former jet-fighter pilot and an aeronautical engineer: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-evaluates-a-potential-design-flaw-on-boeings-737-max-after-lion-air-crash/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-e...
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- VBprogrammer 8y agoIt seems like you think that contradicts what I said. The system by design adds a little trim in very specific circumstances. That's not the same as being needed because the aircraft is aerodynamically unstable. That is a term which has an actual definition. That said there are airliners out there which are unstable in the longitudinal axis and require a yaw damper to prevent Dutch roll.