History of MCAS Development

Do you have a link that doesn't require pausing adblock? I'm getting well over 100 blocks....

Don't know if this is anay better. … (www.seattletimes.com)

That's the one with the problem, where the article is...The Seattle times is pay for view, you have to either subscribe or endure the onslaught of hundreds of ad's and wholesale distribution of cookies...I refuse to pay to read what appears to be a biased article written by some Boeing hater...

The original link worked for me, with no ad problems once I clicked on the "Reader View" icon in Safari on a Mac. I just checked, and Reader View is also available in Firefox on the Mac. I have no idea if such a function exists on non-Apple computers.

I did read the entire article, and it seemed quite factual to me... That some of those facts are disturbing ($$$ overriding engineering?) does not, in my view, make it biased.

Thanks.

Apparently, some people have a problem with the concept of an honest engineer telling the truth.

I also found it telling and I believe everything the article said.

Those engines should have never been attached to the aircraft without some redesign to accommodate their size and thrust.

"The CFM Leap-1B promised to be more efficient than the older CFM56-7B, which was on the 737NG. And indeed it is more efficient. However, it is also much bigger. It weighs more and it is bigger in size.

Because of its bigger size, Boeing had to change the mounting point of the engine. In short, they put them further forward and much higher on the wings. But the different mounting point made the Boeing 737 MAX prone to a stall. The engine positions on the wings forced the nose of the aircraft to go up."

Two things stand out:

1 - A plane that needs sensors to tell it how to fly by overruling the pilots has basic design flaws that can never be overcome by adding solid state sensors.

2 - As long as this CEO has the last word at Boeing and can never acknowledge his flawed strategy of trying to keep an old model in service by adding computerized trinkets instead of doing a top to bottom redesign, means they can never ever solve this issue until and unless a new CEO comes in, admits the error, scraps the stupid sensors and lets the piots fly the planes, which is the only possible way to save the entire fleet of aircraft now.

What happened here is nothing short of catastrophic and the blame lies entirely at the feet of the CEO who is obviously intent on compounding his errors by staying in denial.

It's shameful that such a great name as Boeing with such a great record can be so destroyed by one man's petty ego, unable to accept that in the name of greed he made a major mistake and he personally should be held accountable for all the flawed decisions and for every life lost.

There are many many people in denial about the difficulty of getting machines to make split second decisions in complex situations, both in this instance and also in the one of self driving cars, to which this instance is closely related, as it is asking a programmed component that is fixed in a solid state mode and that can in no way comprehend the complexities of every possible situation and which situations cannot possibly be foreseen by a group of engineers who are isolated from the realities of actually flying a plane.

That is made clear in the article in which it's stated that many pilots voiced concerns as soon as they flew with the system.

Shamefully it's obvious now it would have been better and safer to rip the sensors off the planes and let the pilots correct the design flaws by flying with the seat of their pants, but of course the CEO and Boeing will never ever admit to that now, unless the CEO is forced out for such a catastrophic decision.

Shamefully he continues in denial while Boeing loses it's once great and impeccable name.

This adds nothing to the previous articles about the plane's problems. It said little to nothing about what was discovered in the two crashes. I was able to read it, but the high content of adds made the response very slow. I must need an add blocker (or a better one). How do I find out what I have and upgrade? I am using Google Chrome.

You added NOTHING to this conversation, which is titled, " History of MCAS Development."

Let me repeat that for you, "History of MCAS Development."

Take your sour grapes somewhere else.

I blocked one ad. Not bad.

I found the fact that the FAA made the assumption that there would be no problem with the MCAS because pilots would respond properly within 3 seconds to be preposterous.

That's a fine assumption for a flight simulator, but not with real lives.

Read this article

I'd say a refund is in order.