3 ms·

Regarding #6...Boeing charged $80k to unlock the software feature to gather data from more than 1 angle of attack sensor.

by fma 8y ago

outworlder 8y ago
> Regarding #6...Boeing charged $80k to unlock the software feature to gather data from more than 1 angle of attack sensor. 80k for a _light_ in the panel, not to have MCAS take the two sensors into account - which it couldn't do anyway. With two sensors, how do you know which one is right and which one is faulty?
- kortilla 8y ago
  Well you can’t get quorum but you can certainly shut off when you detect a conflict.
  - ReGenGen 8y ago
    you can't shut MCAS off AND also NOT train the pilots on the system and MAX flight characteristics. Conflicting system goals.
    - bm98 8y ago
      To me this is the crux of the issue. And it's non uncommon in software development: The developer fails to check for an error condition or raise an exception because doing so would add too much complexity to the system. So instead it is assumed (or hoped) that it simply can't or won't happen. Problem solved... (Edit: Or that the user will just have to reboot if it happens.)
      - ReGenGen 8y ago
        Yes. Not checking for errors is the feature of the MCAT "solution" which hides the system from pilot's training AND involvement with other 727 system/team engineers. A bureaucratic solution to a marketing problem. I wonder how many programers they had to go though to find it.
ncmncm 8y ago
In court that will cost them dearly: it demonstrates they were aware using two sensors would be safer. Probably AA or SWA demanded it, and Boeing compromised by charging for it. But... #6 was about paying attention to the other computer, not the other sensor. That would involve some big and expensive changes to the flight computer software, which they probably should have done long before the MAX project started. More management failure.
- cjbprime 8y ago
  It's nonsense. There was no paid option that affected the use of the second sensor.
cjbprime 8y ago
The amount of misinformation on this point is astounding. That's not true in any way.
aerospace133 8y ago
That's 100 false. There are people below you correcting this and you still haven't changed this. The paid option to display AoA information was supposed to be used by military pilots who are familar with how to interpret information from AoA sensors.

Regarding #6...Boeing charged $80k to unlock the software feature to gather data from more than 1 angle of attack sensor.

by fma 8y ago

Regarding #6...Boeing charged $80k to unlock the software feature to gather data from more than 1 angle of attack sensor.

outworlder 8y ago

> Regarding #6...Boeing charged $80k to unlock the software feature to gather data from more than 1 angle of attack sensor. 80k for a _light_ in the panel, not to have MCAS take the two sensors into account - which it couldn't do anyway. With two sensors, how do you know which one is right and which one is faulty?

kortilla 8y ago
Well you can’t get quorum but you can certainly shut off when you detect a conflict.
- ReGenGen 8y ago
  you can't shut MCAS off AND also NOT train the pilots on the system and MAX flight characteristics. Conflicting system goals.
  - bm98 8y ago
    To me this is the crux of the issue. And it's non uncommon in software development: The developer fails to check for an error condition or raise an exception because doing so would add too much complexity to the system. So instead it is assumed (or hoped) that it simply can't or won't happen. Problem solved... (Edit: Or that the user will just have to reboot if it happens.)
    - ReGenGen 8y ago
      Yes. Not checking for errors is the feature of the MCAT "solution" which hides the system from pilot's training AND involvement with other 727 system/team engineers. A bureaucratic solution to a marketing problem. I wonder how many programers they had to go though to find it.

ncmncm 8y ago

In court that will cost them dearly: it demonstrates they were aware using two sensors would be safer. Probably AA or SWA demanded it, and Boeing compromised by charging for it. But... #6 was about paying attention to the other computer, not the other sensor. That would involve some big and expensive changes to the flight computer software, which they probably should have done long before the MAX project started. More management failure.

cjbprime 8y ago
It's nonsense. There was no paid option that affected the use of the second sensor.

cjbprime 8y ago

The amount of misinformation on this point is astounding. That's not true in any way.

aerospace133 8y ago

That's 100 false. There are people below you correcting this and you still haven't changed this. The paid option to display AoA information was supposed to be used by military pilots who are familar with how to interpret information from AoA sensors.