Posted on 06/26/2019 3:13:21 PM PDT by CondoleezzaProtege
While the crashes remain under investigation, preliminary reports showed that a new stabilization system pushed both planes into steep nosedives from which the pilots could not recover. The issue is known in aviation vernacular as runaway stabilizer trim.
In simulator tests, government pilots discovered that a microprocessor failure could push the nose of the plane toward the ground. It is not known whether the microprocessor played a role in either crash. When testing the potential failure of the microprocessor in the simulators, "it was difficult for the test pilots to recover in a matter of seconds," one of the sources said. "And if you can't recover in a matter of seconds, that's an unreasonable risk."
Boeing engineers are now trying to address the issue, which has led to another delay in recertifying the 737 Max.
"The safety of our airplanes is Boeing's highest priority. We are working closely with the FAA to safely return the MAX to service," Boeing said in a statement. The sources say Boeing engineers are trying to determine if the microprocessor issue can be fixed by reprogramming software or if replacing the physical microprocessors on each 737 Max aircraft may be required.
(Excerpt) Read more at -m.cnn.com ...
Thanks for the ping! Looks like your money is now very safe!
1) They rushed the MAX program to keep up with the Airbus A320 neo series, which caught them flat-footed (with their new 797 design still years away) and took away a lot of potential 737 business.
2) They insisted on making the 737 MAX type-compatible with the previous 737 NG series, so customers wouldn't object to the expense of re-certifying pilots in the new type.
Point 2) led to the development of MCAS, which was probably not tested thoroughly enough due to point 1) - and due to the FAA essentially letting Boeing do the certification themselves.
As to the third issue of pilots from some foreign airlines essentially being trained as computer operators and not airmen, that may have directly contributed to both crashes - which I still contend were unlikely to have happened if US air crews had been operating the planes. But that doesn't exempt Boeing for designing a scenario that required such a high level of pilot skill to overcome.
Airbus doesn't need to sabotage Boeing - since they've become an official arm of the Federal Government they've been doing a pretty good job on their own.
There’s a Bloomberg article floating around claiming Boeing had HCL do some of the coding, using $9 per hour foreign labor.
With luck, HCL will be sued into oblivion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.