The Best Analysis Of What Really Happened To The Boeing 737 Max From A Pilot & Software Engineer
by Tyler Durden
ZeroHedge.com
Sun, 03/17/2019
The following tweets from Trevor Sumner, CEO of Perch Experience, of what really happened to the Boeing 737 Max, may be one of the best summaries of the events that led to the two recent airplane crashes, and also why Boeing’s “software upgrade” response is a farce.
https://twitter.com/trevorsumner/status/1106934362531155974?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1106934362531155974&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fnews%2F2019-03-17%2Fbest-analysis-what-really-happened-boeing-737-max-pilot-software-engineer
Some people are calling the 737MAX tragedies a #software failure. Here's my response: It's not a software problem. It was an
* Economic problem that the 737 engines used too much fuel, so they decided to install more efficient engines with bigger fans and make the 737MAX.
— Trevor Sumner (@trevorsumner) March 16, 2019
This led to an
* Airframe problem. They wanted to use the 737 airframe for economic reasons, but needed more ground clearance with bigger engines.The 737 design can't be practically modified to have taller main landing gear. The solution was to mount them higher & more forward.
— Trevor Sumner (@trevorsumner) March 16, 2019
This led to an
* Aerodynamic problem. The airframe with the engines mounted differently did not have adequately stable handling at high AoA to be certifiable. Boeing decided to create the MCAS system to electronically correct for the aircraft's handling deficiencies.
— Trevor Sumner (@trevorsumner) March 16, 2019
During the course of developing the MCAS, there was a
* Systems engineering problem. Boeing wanted the simplest possible fix that fit their existing systems architecture, so that it required minimal engineering rework, and minimal new training for pilots and maintenance crews.
— Trevor Sumner (@trevorsumner) March 16, 2019
The easiest way to do this was to add some features to the existing Elevator Feel Shift system. Like the #EFS system, the #MCAS relies on non-redundant sensors to decide how much trim to add. Unlike the EFS system, MCAS can make huge nose down trim changes.
— Trevor Sumner (@trevorsumner) March 16, 2019
