Originally Posted by
tdracer
But my point is they did all that without a major change to the avionic architecture - had the MCAS hazard category been properly identified during the original development, they could have fixed it within the existing avionic architecture.
Yes, I think, you are 100% right about that.
The issue is, why did this happen ? Were the engineers "just dumb", or were the engineers creating the spec just not allow to "discuss" these items with the ones asking for the spec ? Given the way Boeing did compartmentalize the engineers into their own small area of attention, all communication between the areas going through "management", it just kills the human ingenuity to find out "something is missing". In this case, the implicit transition to a higher hazard category was missed / prevented to spread out further.
We do have the Forkner chat messages, which in itself not only give factual information, though also reveal a huge amount of personal frustration. Frustration, that, to my judgement, is highly related to the lack of opportunities he has to "report" issues and when reported, nothing is done with it, he is ignored (and sent on a mission towards customers to lie further about these items).
Originally Posted by
tdracer
My understanding is that the third AoA is a hard agreement with EASA - so Boeing needs to come up with something if they expect to keep delivering MAX aircraft in the EASA world. Congress has already approved an extension for the MAX-10, so I'm pretty sure that program will stay intact.
Yep, the MAX-10 certification period extension is active and then "officially" the synthetic AoA is to be implemented.
However, whenever possible, Boeing will quite likely try to wiggle out of that. It costs money to create, they don't consider it necessary (try raising a teenager), etc. with their revised mission, finding the (US) airlines on their side, since the third/synthetic AoA will change the cockpit GUI and as such, will require training across the board (with the additional risk, the B737 family commonality might be degraded/influenced).
Originally Posted by
tdracer
As for China, with the current state of relations between the US and China, I think Boeing has pretty much given up on future China deliveries of the MAX (my understanding is that China still hasn't approved the MCAS fix and lifted the MAX grounding).
The resurrection of the B737 MAX in China seems to have started, just a few days ago:
Reuters: Boeing says 11 Chinese airlines have resumed operating B737 MAX.
Though one Taiwan "mishap" and China may miraculously find something else to ground the B737 MAX again. In the end, it's a dictatorial state, where these instruments are being used to steer their international geopolitics. (Anybody did read the ridiculous Lula statements around Ukraine ? Guess how he would proclaim, when Argentina would capture just one square mile of the Brazilian territory, with an argument like "it would be better for the local population" .....).