Originally Posted by
Lost in Saigon
There are many systems on an aircraft where one failure can cause entry to a "dangerous state".
MCAS was designed to be easily disabled by simply trimming the aircraft. There is no prompt action required. All that is need is for the pilot to FLY THE AIRCRAFT just as they were taught in their very first lesson.
ATTITUDES and MOVEMENTS
Pilots are taught to always control the aircraft and to TRIM the aircraft to maintain that control. If the aircraft is not doing what you want it to, it is up to the pilot to MAKE it happen.
The MCAS "problem" is just a form of un-commanded or un-wanted trim. In addition to being a memory item, it is also just common sense to disable a system that is not performing correctly. In this case MCAS was causing nose down trim. If repeated nose up trim did not stop the unwanted nose down trim, turn off the electric trim.
Problem solved.
You can't really blame Boeing any more than you can blame Airbus for not predicting that the AF447 crew would forget that you need to lower the nose to unstall an aircraft, or that Airbus had designed the side sticks so that they cancel each other out.
It may be interesting to note that what appears to be the vast majority of people who are responsible for designing, developing and delivering safety critical systems for a living (I am another example - high software content military life critical systems amongst other things) who have commented find the Boeing approach at best questionable, and for my part very concerning (as a very regular pax). I had expected better from the aviation regulation process.
Equally concerning are the folk that fly these machines who also appear to feel that this type of potentially inadequate (and demonstrably dangerous) systems design is acceptable, it may be the norm, and it may be what you are used to . . . but I'm surprised . . .
Edit : A wise man in the military safety community once told me that if I wasn't personally prepared to trust my life to the system I designed I shouldn't be in the industry . . . I wonder whether that ethos has been diluted in aviation . . . I hope not . . .
Fd