Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I thought the planes would be fine if Boeing just dropped the idea that they could be flown by pilots only trained to fly the 737.

Is the plane not safe to fly in general AND it needs pilots trained to fly it specifically?



IIRC, on a high AoA the lift generated by the larger engines moves the center of lift ahead of the center of gravity, making the plane unstable. This is what MCAS was arguably designed to prevent, forcing the plane behave like a 737 with smaller engines.

Without MCAS, this would be a crappy experience for the pilots, but, with proper training, they'd be able to fly it just like you and me can safely drive cars like a Reliant Robin (just never think about hitting the brakes in a curve). If you feel the plane wanting to point up a bit too enthusiastically, you can push the stick forward (or adjust the trim) and make it more cooperative.

It just turns out that, with MCAS, little training, and a defective AoA sensor, the experience was lethally crappy.


> Without MCAS, this would be a crappy experience for the pilots, but, with proper training, they'd be able to fly it just like you and me can safely drive cars like a Reliant Robin (just never think about hitting the brakes in a curve). If you feel the plane wanting to point up a bit too enthusiastically, you can push the stick forward (or adjust the trim) and make it more cooperative.

That's the worst part of this, the plane is perfectly flyable without MCAS but they applied it anyways because it would have required recertifying pilots because that difference is enough that it might have required a new type certificate for pilots to fly. So all this trouble and the deaths are because Boeing couldn't make an appealing aircraft with the old 737 body and handling so they took a shortcut to make few 100M more.


>lift generated by the larger engines moves the center of lift ahead of the center of gravity

Do you have a reliable source for the center of lift behind CoG shift? I've not seen that claim before.


This doesn't mention CoG, but it mentions "dynamic instability":

https://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/aviation/how-the-boeing-...

In the 737 Max, the engine nacelles themselves can, at high angles of attack, work as a wing and produce lift. And the lift they produce is well ahead of the wing’s center of lift, meaning the nacelles will cause the 737 Max at a high angle of attack to go to a higher angle of attack. This is aerodynamic malpractice of the worst kind.


Yes, that doesn't claim that the center of lift shifts ahead of the CoG. Nor is it a reliable source.


Not op and on mobile, but I have seen the CoG shift mentioned in threads and articles before on this topic.

Would love a source to confirm my memory though.


That's just the with it feeling wrong near stall at high angle-of-attacks.

Theoretically yes, you can train pilots to deal with it. Hell, it would have been safer to just ignore the issue and not train pilots than the clusterfuck of the original MCAS implementation.

But it's not that it doesn't just feel wrong compared to the 737-NG. It feels wrong compared to every single certified aircraft.

The FAA has strict rules on how all aircraft must feel when approaching stall. You can't certify an aircraft without meeting this feel requirement. So the 737-MAX simply can't be certified without MCAS or some other fix.


There are sort of 3 classes of issues here.

a) The initial issue found, the MCAS system, which might be fixable by what you suggest. Except that would break the regulatory workaround for b.

b) A bunch of issues where the plane violates modern standards but has been allowed by abusing grandfather clauses.

c) New issues that have been found since the discovery of issue a that are not grandfathered.

The wiring issue being discussed is category c.


The actual problem is Boeing made more changes from the 737 base and the checks for this changes were nod done properly because FAA didn't do it's job. Now if FAA and other international agencies check everything from scratch you will find all this hidden problems.

Now imagine you are hired to check the plane systems, would you sign on subsystem X because it worked fine in the old 737 or use your brain and experience andcx flag all potential issues you see.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: