4 ms·
It is incredible: the airframe has been designed to reuse the certification of 737. A flaw that could be fixed in a proper way, instead has been worked around u
by reacweb 8y ago
It is incredible: the airframe has been designed to reuse the certification of 737. A flaw that could be fixed in a proper way, instead has been worked around using unreliable subterfuges.
The aim of the certification process is to ensure the safety (and reliability) of aircraft. The required mindset shall be that the certification process helps to highlight defects in order to build a better aircraft. Here, the mindset was that the certification process is a burden with arbitrary constraints that have to be fulfilled even if this means a worse aircraft.
IMHO, the people (managers) with the wrong mindset shall be replaced and the faulty airframe of 737 shall be killed.
- greeneggs 8y agoThis is unfair. If done appropriately, making a plane behave the way pilots expect should also make it safer. A "worse aircraft" with a better UI can actually be a safer aircraft.
- rtkwe 8y agoOnly so far as we can assume the UI never breaks and the sensors are always correct. The issue is pilots need to be trained to understand where the UI hides the underlying performance of the plane because when it breaks it can go wrong incredibly quickly. MCAS altered the way to aircraft reacted and also would restart it's changes unless completely cut out. Pilots didn't receive enough training to recognize the issue as being the MCAS system adjusting the trim fast enough to prevent the crashes during takeoff and ultimately the whole point of the MCAS was to avoid having to retrain and maintain the common type rating.