|
|
|
|
|
by mantap
2384 days ago
|
|
I don't think I'm perpetuating an urban myth. My understanding is that MCAS was necessary to correct a deficiency in the controls - that's the controls violated an FAA rule that the pitch up should not be superlinear relative to the control input (which clearly increases the risk of stall). And indeed after testing they had to increase the strength of MCAS because the tendency to pitch up was worse than previously anticipated. The desire for a common type rating is an explanation for why the FAA rule was violated without MCAS. |
|
The origin of this noise is sensationalist news coverage and misinterpretation of FAA rules. I expect a higher standard on HN than perpetuating myths. You guys are like the flat earthers of aviation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuvering_Characteristics_Au...
As Juan points out in either that or another video, the 767 has a stronger pitch-up characteristic and yet doesn't have MCAS and doesn't fall out of the sky from stalls.
Another myth and piece of sensationalist news bullshit is that Boeing made a safety feature that would have prevented the accidents optional. The safety feature in question was AOE Disagree Indicator. The reason it was optional is because AOA doesn't mean anything to civilian pilots and the option only made sense for airlines who hire ex-militaray pilots who can actually read the AOA indicator and make sense of it.