3 ms·

Briefly: It could be, but that would mean reclassifying the airplane. Maybe think about it like anti-lock brakes. Cars without ABS can be driven safely in many

by csours 7y ago

Briefly: It could be, but that would mean reclassifying the airplane. Maybe think about it like anti-lock brakes. Cars without ABS can be driven safely in many/most circumstances, but most drivers are accustomed to ABS. (This is necessarily a limited analogy) Also, there are government requirements per aircraft type, and removing this system would change the aircraft type, triggering a significant amount of required re-training. --- Not directly related to your question, but I think [pure speculation/psychological theory] one thing that went badly wrong here was engineers thinking about this as a convenience system. Because it was thought of as a convenience system, they didn't fully consider the safety aspect of it.

kayfox 7y ago
It cant, the forces have to linearly increase per FARs, so MCAS has to be a thing, same type certificate or not.
- csours 7y ago
  Ah, that's the first time I've heard that. I'm certainly not an expert, I've just read/watched a number of reports.
  - kayfox 7y ago
    The problem with reporting around this issue is that its emotionally driven and done often by people who have little experience with how the aviation industry works. So while the exact details are accurately reported in aviation industry news, the mainstream news keeps parroting things that are false and confirmation bias keeps people from picking up when those things are false. The departure from reality in this case is pretty severe: 1. There were severe issues with pilot's performance on both flights. 2. Airline maintenance is culpable in the Lion Air flight. 3. MCAS is required irregardless of what type certificate is used. 4. Boeing's "new problems with the 737" are not as much a result of faults previously ignored, but new issues created by reassessing the risk factors related to those systems. 5. The 737 MAX is not aerodynamically unstable. 6. The 737 MAX issue has brought to light severe issues in the aviation industry that may require retraining many pilots in the industry or being way more aggressive with refresh training (also see the Atlas Air crash recently).

by csours 7y ago

kayfox 7y ago

It cant, the forces have to linearly increase per FARs, so MCAS has to be a thing, same type certificate or not.

csours 7y ago
Ah, that's the first time I've heard that. I'm certainly not an expert, I've just read/watched a number of reports.
- kayfox 7y ago
  The problem with reporting around this issue is that its emotionally driven and done often by people who have little experience with how the aviation industry works. So while the exact details are accurately reported in aviation industry news, the mainstream news keeps parroting things that are false and confirmation bias keeps people from picking up when those things are false. The departure from reality in this case is pretty severe: 1. There were severe issues with pilot's performance on both flights. 2. Airline maintenance is culpable in the Lion Air flight. 3. MCAS is required irregardless of what type certificate is used. 4. Boeing's "new problems with the 737" are not as much a result of faults previously ignored, but new issues created by reassessing the risk factors related to those systems. 5. The 737 MAX is not aerodynamically unstable. 6. The 737 MAX issue has brought to light severe issues in the aviation industry that may require retraining many pilots in the industry or being way more aggressive with refresh training (also see the Atlas Air crash recently).