Originally Posted by
oggers
Ok so will you clarify if you believe the Boeing fix will be safe or not? If safe, what is the point of your list:
...that adds cost and the potential to introduce new and unforeseen malfunctions, by comparison with the fix Boeing have come up with. Nor do I think there is any chance Boeing could get all those things done in the time the MAX will be grounded, which is an assumption your point is based on.
If I may reply:
It is difficult to say whether Boeing's solution is safe, there are many dependences. It may as well be, especially in scenarios we can foresee. However, moving the stabiliser in order to produce the right feel is potentially very dangerous - you are creating huge aerodynamic forces and if _anything_ in the logic driving it fails for whatever reason, you can be in deep trouble. Even if indeed all the possible failure paths are correctly handled (a BIG if, can we be 100% sure that all possible scenarios have been properly evaluated in such a complex system?), this is a very fragile solution and any future changes can bite you badly.
A solution for fixing the feel that actually does not change the aerodynamics is inherently much safer - if there is a wrongly handled failure somewhere, you might get a wrong feel, but not a plunging plane.