MAX’s Return Delayed by FAA Reevaluation of 737 Safety Procedures

[OldnGrounded]

Originally Posted by LowObservable

A report from this week's Seattle meeting:

https://davidlearmount.com/?fbclid=I...Lvn6uXj0OFxC0w

Thanks.

From the linked report:

But why is MCAS – which is unique to the Max – required at all? Boeing insists it was not fitted as an anti-stall system, because the aircraft already has stall warnings and stick-shakers.The purpose of fitting MCAS, [test pilot and V.P. Ops] Bomben explained, was to compensate for a slight change in the low-airspeed aerodynamics of the 737 Max compared with the NG.MCAS was only designed to trigger in an unlikely (but obviously possible) combination of circumstances that can cause the aircraft’s centre of lift to move slightly further forward, altering the weight-balance equation. It only happens when the Max is at low airspeed with the flaps up, and is being flown manually. At low airspeed (200kt or thereabouts) – and flapless – the aircraft would be at a high angle of attack and close to the stall.

But . . . that describes the case for the first revised version of MCAS (rapid movement of stab up to 2.5 units), not the situation the system was initially designed to address (allegedly, stick force gradient in wind-up turns).

Maybe Mr. Bomben forgot.