Originally Posted by
GlobalNav
Is it accurate to say that MCAS is AoA stall prevention at all? How would it prevent a stall at all, in normal, non-malfunctioning conditions? It adds nose down trim, yes, while the A/P is off, but it doesn't really prevent stall, at best it gives the pilot a better trim condition for high AoA, which might enable the pilot to prevent a stall. Just asking. MCAS does not make the 737 impossible to stall.
Of course not, but the functionality seems very “similar” but performance poor. As far as I understand, either Alpha Prot is not legally stall prevention system...
Originally Posted by
42...
MCAS, again, is not a stall prevention device, it is a handling modifier. It makes the nose feel heavier to the pilot. Catastrophically so if activated improperly.
It is or claimed to be needed by Boeing flight engineers to prevent a lighter than desired stick force at higher AOA's.
Boeing has right to call their system as they like. I have been involved in naming game couple of times where the aim has been to avoid potential legal, but highly unlikely responsibilities(, with with really bad worst case scenarios).
But, if you look “the publicly known”, and couple of time proofed functionality, you can decide your self...
The presumption is that the main feedback measurement in AoA (it at least had been said so and speed defines mostly the gain?) => MACS is control law of AoA => stall depends mostly on AoA => it is some kind of stall related control system.
It is true that trimming nose down increases stick force but it is just a side effect. What you measure that is what you control. As simple as that. Of course, you might have complicated soft sensoringing capabilities, but in this case seemingly not, because the stick forces went out of the hands.