Aircraft Cockpit Automation - Good or Bad

optomist1

A Sea of Statistics
Trusted
#53
Once the magnifying glasses are deployed...invariably other "challenges" will be identified. I know this will draw some ire from those in the aero field, but I must ask....both of the major issues identified thus far, 1) the initial MCAS Challenge and 2) the most recent MCAS issue apparently related to the results of a micro failure..would these not vetted out or identified and controlled as a result of a DFMEA?

This is an fair question...no attmept to be a polemic on my part, more of a quest for knowledge from non-automotive arena.
 

Randy

Super Moderator
#54
Its this issue of basically Boeing had it certified for one thing then changed the design and reported no significant change and it was just passed off so it seems :uhoh:
Boeing didn't certify it, the FAA and other agencies certified it.... "During the certification process, FAA experts including chief scientists, engineers and flight test pilots, conducted in-flight testing of the flight control system, including the MCAS."

Airworthiness Certification
 

mattador78

Involved In Discussions
#55
Boeing didn't certify it, the FAA and other agencies certified it.... "During the certification process, FAA experts including chief scientists, engineers and flight test pilots, conducted in-flight testing of the flight control system, including the MCAS."

Airworthiness Certification
What I had read is that yes they passed it off through cert bodies then changed the design then informed it was no significant change and everybody said ok. That's my laymans understanding from the reports ive read, as far as I understand the USAF tankers with it fitted have the original system but the commercial planes have the downgraded system which has caused the accidents. Either way whoever is responsible they have seriously dropped the ball, whether its Boeing the FAA or some other agency somebody has approved the change of the design which has allegedly caused this issue.
 

Randy

Super Moderator
#56
What I had read is that yes they passed it off through cert bodies then changed the design then informed it was no significant change and everybody said ok. That's my laymans understanding from the reports ive read, as far as I understand the USAF tankers with it fitted have the original system but the commercial planes have the downgraded system which has caused the accidents. Either way whoever is responsible they have seriously dropped the ball, whether its Boeing the FAA or some other agency somebody has approved the change of the design which has allegedly caused this issue.
40 years after entering into wide use the Bell 204/205 series aircraft was still popping up with design flaws. The Sikorsky UH-60 bought by the Army after lengthy testing and evaluation killed people after it entered use because of design flaws, as did the V-22, as did the L-1011 and so on if we look back at aviation history. Can we talk the Pinto, Corvair, a couple different tire brands, aluminum electrical wiring in homes? Oh yeah, Apollo 13, Challenger, Columbia....oops!

I'm not making excuses but crap slips thru the cracks and doesn't crop up until problems occur. Should it happen? Of course not. Will it continue? Yep
 

optomist1

A Sea of Statistics
Trusted
#57
40 years after entering into wide use the Bell 204/205 series aircraft was still popping up with design flaws. The Sikorsky UH-60 bought by the Army after lengthy testing and evaluation killed people after it entered use because of design flaws, as did the V-22, as did the L-1011 and so on if we look back at aviation history. Can we talk the Pinto, Corvair, a couple different tire brands, aluminum electrical wiring in homes? Oh yeah, Apollo 13, Challenger, Columbia....oops!

I'm not making excuses but crap slips thru the cracks and doesn't crop up until problems occur. Should it happen? Of course not. Will it continue? Yep
Well said....Sorry you left out the ever popular Explorer!! Agreed there is no perfect product nor error/defect free device or system...yet me, you all must endeavor to take all steps to ensure due diligence...again, once removed, it would appear as though, due diligence suffered somewhere along the process to vet this system prior to launch, or introduction, regardless of where it occurred..FAA or Boeing. Your thoughts?
 

Randy

Super Moderator
#58
Well said....Sorry you left out the ever popular Explorer!! Agreed there is no perfect product nor error/defect free device or system...yet me, you all must endeavor to take all steps to ensure due diligence...again, once removed, it would appear as though, due diligence suffered somewhere along the process to vet this system prior to launch, or introduction, regardless of where it occurred..FAA or Boeing. Your thoughts?
One would hope, but one of my favorite movies (I use that media quite a bit as life examples), one of my favorite movies is a little appreciated Jimmy Stewart one called "No Highway in the Sky".....You've gotta run the right test under the right conditions

No Highway (1951) - IMDb

 

mattador78

Involved In Discussions
#59
40 years after entering into wide use the Bell 204/205 series aircraft was still popping up with design flaws. The Sikorsky UH-60 bought by the Army after lengthy testing and evaluation killed people after it entered use because of design flaws, as did the V-22, as did the L-1011 and so on if we look back at aviation history. Can we talk the Pinto, Corvair, a couple different tire brands, aluminum electrical wiring in homes? Oh yeah, Apollo 13, Challenger, Columbia....oops!

I'm not making excuses but crap slips thru the cracks and doesn't crop up until problems occur. Should it happen? Of course not. Will it continue? Yep
I'm not disagreeing with you at all, its if somebody changed a feature needed for safety in the name of profit making that's where the issue arises. Here in the UK we had the Grenfell tower fire where the fireproof cladding was changed to a different type from the original designated for that type of building, as far as can be seen so far it was allegedly for cost cutting purposes
 
Last edited:

Top Bottom