4 ms·
If you haven't been following closely, then do a modicum of your own research first before you ask for citations. The MCAS is exactly the cause of the issues a
by ping_pong 7y ago
If you haven't been following closely, then do a modicum of your own research first before you ask for citations.
The MCAS is exactly the cause of the issues and was the software that caused the crashes because it behaved unexpectedly to the pilots. The whole reason why Boeing leaned on software was because their sales pitch was that this new plane was essentially the same as a 737 so it didn't need any extra training. But this was false. They needed this MCAS because the mechanics of flying the plane were vastly different, I think because of the location of the engines, etc. That's the whole issue, where Boeing lied to the FAA and sold the 737MAX as a drop-in replacement for the 737 when it really wasn't. So if you don't even know this then you need to start from scratch and do your own research.
- function_seven 7y agoEverything you wrote it true, but doesn't support the statement: > These planes cannot fly without a computer adjusting them to keep the balance. I haven't seen anything suggesting that. If MCAS was completely ripped out of the computers, these planes still can be flown, right? The pilots would need to be trained on the differing characteristics, but it isn't inherently unstable like some military jets are.
- sokoloff 7y agoThe planes would still physically fly without MCAS. (They are not unstable.) The planes could not legally fly without MCAS, because they fail a required stick force linearity certification requirement. (FAR 25.173)
- rootusrootus 7y ago> the mechanics of flying the plane were vastly different I suggest you need to continue doing your own research on when MCAS comes into play and why. Especially if you're going to condescend to others.