3 ms·
> This took any consideration of differences in design philosophy in a whole new (and much darker) direction. Personally I consider the whole MCAS debacle a sy
by avianlyric 2y ago
> This took any consideration of differences in design philosophy in a whole new (and much darker) direction.
Personally I consider the whole MCAS debacle a symptom of Boeings failure as an engineering organisation, and the prioritisation of commercial concerns above engineering concerns, rather than a change in philosophy. I still have the view that Boeing philosophy still deliberately leans towards putting the pilot in as close a link with physical plane as possible.
Ultimately I don’t really have a view on which approach is “better”, but I do think Airbus and Boeing have very different philosophies regarding aircraft controls. Even if Boeing has become incapable of expressing its engineering philosophies competently. I think it’s still useful to compare and contrast the two approaches, and there’s still things to be learned from how each approach succeeds and fails in different scenarios.
- mannykannot 2y ago> I think it’s still useful to compare and contrast the two approaches, and there’s still things to be learned from how each approach succeeds and fails in different scenarios. That's a sound approach, though one should be wary of selectively dismissing evidence on the grounds that it does not fit with either one's own or commonly-held preconceived notions.