undefined | Better HN

0 pointscatalogia6y ago0 comments

> 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

0 comments

4 comments · 1 top-level

mnm16y ago· 3 in thread

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.

dschuler6y 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.

catalogiaOP6y 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.

mnm16y ago

Ok. I should have said completely unsafe for commercial passenger use instead.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse