4 ms·

Not all software is buggy to the point of killing almost four hundred people. Comparing some shit app some interns built for Iowa with avionics software is fran

by mnm1 7y ago

Not all software is buggy to the point of killing almost four hundred people. Comparing some shit app some interns built for Iowa with avionics software is frankly insulting to the people who work hard to make avionics software. The same goes for Tesla. The avionics industry, including Boeing, used to have a great record in this area. Even if the mcas bugs were unavoidable, the fact still is that the design was fatally flawed due to either sensor being a single point of failure. And of course, the main problem that the whole, entire airplane is unstable in the air. How can you still make excuses for Boeing at this point in time? The only reason this bug should be irrelevant is because this plane should never carry another commercial passenger. But I'm sure profits will prevail over lives once again starting this summer or whenever the FAA gives their go ahead.

catalogia 7y ago
> And of course, the main problem that the whole, entire airplane is unstable in the air. That's not really true. The airframe is fine, except it doesn't handle like a 737. MCAS was meant to make the MAX handle like a 737. Mentour Pilot, a 737 instructor with a youtube channel, has covered this fairly extensively: https://youtu.be/TlinocVHpzk?t=951 https://youtu.be/TlinocVHpzk?t=951
- mnm1 7y ago
  Great video. But he says the exact same thing I did. The MCAS is necessary because of the different engine placement. So the airplane cannot recover from a stall without it. That, to me, makes the entire airplane unstable and improper for commercial flights as this is an expected condition at times that the plane should be able to recover from. The airplane cannot function without a deeply flawed software system no one understands and no one knows how to operate. Changing the software doesn't change any of these things.
  - dschuler 7y ago
    It is possible to recover from a stall without MCAS, but the handling characteristics have changed. The requirement is that the force on the yoke increases with the angle of attack, but in the case of the MAX, the stick force becomes lighter at a certain point. As I understand it, Boeing was mainly trying to avoid training pilots for any changes.
  - catalogia 7y ago
    > That, to me, makes the entire airplane unstable That's fine, but know that the way you're choosing to use the word "unstable" doesn't square with how it's actually used in the aviation industry.
    - mnm1 7y ago
      Ok. I should have said completely unsafe for commercial passenger use instead.
m4rtink 7y ago
There is one specific Iowa which (if it was still in service) could become very deadly if it was using a buggy app.

by mnm1 7y ago

catalogia 7y ago

> And of course, the main problem that the whole, entire airplane is unstable in the air. That's not really true. The airframe is fine, except it doesn't handle like a 737. MCAS was meant to make the MAX handle like a 737. Mentour Pilot, a 737 instructor with a youtube channel, has covered this fairly extensively: https://youtu.be/TlinocVHpzk?t=951 https://youtu.be/TlinocVHpzk?t=951

mnm1 7y ago
Great video. But he says the exact same thing I did. The MCAS is necessary because of the different engine placement. So the airplane cannot recover from a stall without it. That, to me, makes the entire airplane unstable and improper for commercial flights as this is an expected condition at times that the plane should be able to recover from. The airplane cannot function without a deeply flawed software system no one understands and no one knows how to operate. Changing the software doesn't change any of these things.
- dschuler 7y ago
  It is possible to recover from a stall without MCAS, but the handling characteristics have changed. The requirement is that the force on the yoke increases with the angle of attack, but in the case of the MAX, the stick force becomes lighter at a certain point. As I understand it, Boeing was mainly trying to avoid training pilots for any changes.
- catalogia 7y ago
  > That, to me, makes the entire airplane unstable That's fine, but know that the way you're choosing to use the word "unstable" doesn't square with how it's actually used in the aviation industry.
  - mnm1 7y ago
    Ok. I should have said completely unsafe for commercial passenger use instead.

m4rtink 7y ago

There is one specific Iowa which (if it was still in service) could become very deadly if it was using a buggy app.