3 ms·

No, that reactor had an inherent instability that could not be fixed. The MCAS has an issue with redundant AOA sensors; that specifically needs to be fixed. T

No, that reactor had an inherent instability that could not be fixed. The MCAS has an issue with redundant AOA sensors; that specifically needs to be fixed. The MCAS caused problems on other flights, but the pilots knew to disable it by flipping the circuit breaker. The pilots on the crashed planes did not know to disable it. That is a training issue. Fix the redundant AOA and provide training to disable the MCAS, and it will be fine.

mrtksn 7y ago
>No, that reactor had an inherent instability that could not be fixed. Interesting maybe could have been fixed with software. I am thinking of Reactor Characteristics Augmentation System, or RCAS. Also, Chernobyl exploded because they pressed the halt button at a very bad time. This also sounds like something that can be fixed in software.
- hhas01 7y ago
  Take your damned “Like”, you magnificent bastard.
coolspot 7y ago
> No, that reactor had an inherent instability that could not be fixed. There are many exactly same reactors as was in Chernobyl fixed and running still: > Most of the flaws in the design of RBMK-1000 reactors were corrected after the Chernobyl accident and a dozen reactors have since been operating without any serious incidents for over twenty years. Even Chernobyl itself had 3 remaining reactors working for many years after the disaster, last decommissioned in 2000.
ajross 7y ago
The positive void coefficient problem[1] was intractable (without putting the whole reactor vessel inside a pressurized tank), but it was the combination of that and the control rod design that caused the explosion. The control rods were modified trivially. The reactor is basically safe, though you wouldn't repeat the design choices. [1] An IMHO stupidly obfuscated way of saying that the cooling water around the reactor was an unpressurized pool that would boil if it got hot. Low-density bubbles of steam absorb fewer neutrons than liquid water, so when it boils the core gets hotter, not cooler.

mrtksn 7y ago

>No, that reactor had an inherent instability that could not be fixed. Interesting maybe could have been fixed with software. I am thinking of Reactor Characteristics Augmentation System, or RCAS. Also, Chernobyl exploded because they pressed the halt button at a very bad time. This also sounds like something that can be fixed in software.

hhas01 7y ago
Take your damned “Like”, you magnificent bastard.

coolspot 7y ago

> No, that reactor had an inherent instability that could not be fixed. There are many exactly same reactors as was in Chernobyl fixed and running still: > Most of the flaws in the design of RBMK-1000 reactors were corrected after the Chernobyl accident and a dozen reactors have since been operating without any serious incidents for over twenty years. Even Chernobyl itself had 3 remaining reactors working for many years after the disaster, last decommissioned in 2000.

ajross 7y ago

The positive void coefficient problem[1] was intractable (without putting the whole reactor vessel inside a pressurized tank), but it was the combination of that and the control rod design that caused the explosion. The control rods were modified trivially. The reactor is basically safe, though you wouldn't repeat the design choices. [1] An IMHO stupidly obfuscated way of saying that the cooling water around the reactor was an unpressurized pool that would boil if it got hot. Low-density bubbles of steam absorb fewer neutrons than liquid water, so when it boils the core gets hotter, not cooler.