[labcomputer]

> It's not the same as designing a system based around a single sensor that is known to fail

Right, they designed the their system with two sensors, and if they disagree, the system gives misleading indications to the pilots! That’s so much better!

[celsoazevedo]

My understanding is that the Airbus equivalent (they don't really have the same thing) uses 3 pitot tubes/angle of attack sensors, not 2. More importantly, Airbus pilots know about the system, while Boeing only told airliners about MCAS after the Lion Air crash.

I'm not a pilot and I don't know that much about planes, but I've read/watched enough about crashes to know that these sensors fail way too often. To rely on only one already sounds like a bad idea, but it's irresponsible not to tell pilots and train them on how to deal with the new "feature".

[SR2Z]

Airbus aircraft are normally fly-by-wire and a system like MCAS would just be folded into the envelope protection that Airbus does. It's already very easy to cross-train from once Airbus to the next because FBW is used to give them all similar handling characteristics.

That wasn't possible in the 737 MAX because the airplane is an older design with hydraulically connected control services, so a separate system had to be added to force the nose down using the trim.