3 ms·
The replies do not all boil down to people being shocked that computers help planes fly. That is a willfully distorted charicature. Hundreds of people were kil
by AnthonBerg 7y ago
The replies do not all boil down to people being shocked that computers help planes fly. That is a willfully distorted charicature.
Hundreds of people were killed due to a bad implementation of a deeply irresponsible and insensible approach to make money by skirting flight safety regulation. The bad implementation was in part software, but nobody is confusing that aspect with the whole picture.
The 737 MAX does not need MCAS. Nothing needs MCAS. Boeing executives wanted the money that MCAS made them.
- ethbro 7y agoIs it really? If that were the case, then you'd see people debating the relative merits of SDLC approaches and organizational blinders to letting bugs slip through. In reality, that's only about 20% of any Boeing discussion. 80% is outrage about how Boeing could have released such an "obviously flawed" airplane that required flight computer adjustments. And misunderstanding that Boeing pivoted from a clean sheet design to instead build exactly what the carriers asked them to. Generally, HN comments are pretty good, but the amount of kneejerking in Boeing threads in lieu of informed discussion is terrible. Edit: Although reading through new replies this morning, it's nice to see voting mostly sorted the technical wheat from the chaff.