The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Investment Analysis Clubs / Macro Economic Trends and Risks


Subject:  Re: Boeing Engineering Date:  3/17/2019  5:08 PM
Author:  notehound Number:  555095 of 571854

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...
* Economic problem. Boeing sells an option package that includes an extra AoA vane, and an AoA disagree light, which lets pilots know that this problem was happening. Both 737MAXes that crashed were delivered without this option. No 737MAX with this option has ever crashed.

Assuming the above information is accurate, I expect some litigants may assert that the proximate cause of both the Lion Air and the Ethiopia crashes can be traced back to Boeing's decisions not to add some redundant sensors and/or to include the extra AoA vane and AoA disagree light as standard features - not as options.

I'm not an engineer, but I suspect that a prudent engineer might have recommend incorporating redundancy and/or AoA fail-safe mechanisms such as those left off the planes involved in the crashes.

What's possible, what's feasible, and what's profitable all must be weighed together against what's safe for the flying public - and Boeing may have weighed incorrectly in regard to this particular model plane.

Bad judgment call, there, IMNSHO.
Copyright 1996-2019 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us