Randy
Super Moderator
Funny that this stuff wasn't found out before certification
Aircraft Cockpit Automation - Good or Bad
- Thread starter optomist1
- Start date
mattador78
Quite Involved in Discussions
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
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.
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
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."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
Airworthiness Certification
mattador78
Quite Involved in Discussions
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
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
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
Quite Involved in Discussions
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:
Good Point...in the automotive...errr I mean the mobility field, called different things by various OEMs...but an FR or Forever Requirement mandates, that any change no matter how insigificant must be formally communicated PRIOR TO the change being implemented. The point...whether OEM, Tier 1...etc, changes must be communicated and fully vetted/evaluated by all stake holders
