Originally Posted by
Takwis
Agreed. I much prefer the "iron" philosophy to the FBW one, but if you are going to go FBW, you need the redundancy, triple checking, and etc. that go with it. The mix in the MAX is obviously deadly.
Yep, that is the core of the problem - grafting bits of FBW onto a platform that was never designed for it and doesn't have (or really need) the level of redundancy to provide reliable data for FBW. It's not even as if Boeing doesn't
know this - they are (or used to be) perfectly capable of building a proper FBW aircraft, they just decided to create a Frankenstein instead.
Only the second mention of LAM that I have seen in all these discussions (the first being mine)...there's another obvious kludge to fix a design error.
Not sure I would bet against it all hanging off of one Rad Alt either...
Interestingly there was a thread on tech-log about LAM around a year ago, started with the now very spooky line:
Consider the following to be some of the interesting stuff that Boeing just does not tell you about much....
Now, you might want to get out your numerology books and probability tables, or your lucky rabbit's foot, before you look at the username that started that thread, a year ago: