Kylekent59:



Altitude matters too, like flying 33,000 feet, the plane will balance and fly safely.

One a plane pitches up and has not attain a safe altitude, if it mistakenly turns, it's a problem.

The fear in today's plane is taking off, and reaching a safe altitude.


This was the same thing that happened to a Brazil airflight from saó Paulo, immediately it took off, it hadn't even reached safe altitude, the plane began to turn by itself, the two pilot struggled, it came to balance,it started again, this time they tried their best.

The plane landed and all were dead.



The control system was faulty and the negligence of the service engineers caused it + power loss.


Nose down is not caused by a pilot, but control system had been tampered with.

youngest85:
And I was in that plane o, how I manage to survive is what I can't explain.....praise God

Satan66:


Afonjas never surprise me with their stupidity

SarkinYarki:
It's clear this accident was caused by the auto trimming software MCAS , we have seen auto trimming softwares work aerodynamically unstable military planes like the B2 and F117 who wouldn't be able to even fly without such softwares working overtime to create input aerodynamics and stabilization but bringing such software into commercial aircraft to augment poor aerodynamics should be discouraged , commercial aircraft must depend on traditional aerodynamics as it's foundation and only use trimming software as minimally as possible ..The 737 max problem started from the moment the Boeing design team decided to ignore traditional aerodynamics in a bid to force in the CFM Leap turbofan engine into their aircraft to beat time and protect it's market from the encroaching Airbus A330 Neo the CFM engines were larger than what the low fuselage of the 737 could handle so the opted to move the engine further out the wings to create suitable clearance from the ground , this change will greatly change the aerodynamics of the 737 causing it to tend to pitch up during a flight which if unchecked could lead to a stall , so BOEing introduces MCAS which they have used on various military flying wing prototypes to come in and automatically pitch the planes nose down any time it's notices on over pitch upwards , the problem is that MCAS must work in tandem with a couple of sensors most important which is the Angle of Attack swivel sensor and if these sensors sends any faulty info to MCAS the software is also bound to overreact like what we saw on both crashes where the softwares thought the plane was going into a stall and attempts to recover the plane by pitching down and increasing engine power ( pilots would understand this ) but the problem here is that the plane was not stalling like the software thought but only climbing during the take off phase .


Way out for Boeing now .

I am a die hard fan of the 737 family and I consider it the safest commercial plane ever made and the most successful but in the wake of the recen crashes of the the Max series this what I think Boeing can do .

1 .shop for a smaller engine with the same performance spec as the CFM 1B leap.
OR
2.Re design the 737 so it can accommodate the CFM Leap engine .
OR

3 . Make MCAS to be redundant during the take off and landing phase of every flight and only active at cruise altitude .

SarkinYarki:
It's clear this accident was caused by the auto trimming software MCAS , we have seen auto trimming softwares work aerodynamically unstable military planes like the B2 and F117 who wouldn't be able to even fly without such softwares working overtime to create input aerodynamics and stabilization but bringing such software into commercial aircraft to augment poor aerodynamics should be discouraged , commercial aircraft must depend on traditional aerodynamics as it's foundation and only use trimming software as minimally as possible ..The 737 max problem started from the moment the Boeing design team decided to ignore traditional aerodynamics in a bid to force in the CFM Leap turbofan engine into their aircraft to beat time and protect it's market from the encroaching Airbus A330 Neo the CFM engines were larger than what the low fuselage of the 737 could handle so the opted to move the engine further out the wings to create suitable

Neoteny:


Exactly

Boeing would do anything to save its best selling plane. Sadly it took a crash for them to release a software patch.

A lot of people do not know that modern jetliners are almost completely flown by software.

specter:



But will this solve the entire problem? Nice write up.

SarkinYarki:


The best and most cost effective solution will be to shop for smaller engines for the the Max 8 and 9 while redesigning the upcoming max 10 or Max X to accomadate the reality on ground , also all pending orders on the Max 8 and 9 should be upgraded to the Max 10 As soon a possible , as long as that big CAM engine is on the Max 8 and 9 the plane will need the software to assist the aerodynamics .

IgbosAreOsus:

What's wrong with you OSU ipob jew?

loveth360:
what is wrong with you yoruba muslims.

Gracealone:
Americans and their media have since been looking for ways to paint Ethiopian Airlines and their personnel as negligent and untrained in order to absolve Boeing of any blame.

This is ridiculous.

youngest85:
And I was in that plane o, how I manage to survive is what I can't explain.....praise God

SarkinYarki:
It's clear this accident was caused by the auto trimming software MCAS , we have seen auto trimming softwares work aerodynamically unstable military planes like the B2 and F117 who wouldn't be able to even fly without such softwares working overtime to create input aerodynamics and stabilization but bringing such software into commercial aircraft to augment poor aerodynamics should be discouraged , commercial aircraft must depend on traditional aerodynamics as it's foundation and only use trimming software as minimally as possible ..The 737 max problem started from the moment the Boeing design team decided to ignore traditional aerodynamics in a bid to force in the CFM Leap turbofan engine into their aircraft to beat time and protect it's market from the encroaching Airbus A330 Neo the CFM engines were larger than what the low fuselage of the 737 could handle so the opted to move the engine further out the wings to create suitable clearance from the ground , this change will greatly change the aerodynamics of the 737 causing it to tend to pitch up during a flight which if unchecked could lead to a stall , so BOEing introduces MCAS which they have used on various military flying wing prototypes to come in and automatically pitch the planes nose down any time it's notices on over pitch upwards , the problem is that MCAS must work in tandem with a couple of sensors most important which is the Angle of Attack swivel sensor and if these sensors sends any faulty info to MCAS the software is also bound to overreact like what we saw on both crashes where the softwares thought the plane was going into a stall and attempts to recover the plane by pitching down and increasing engine power ( pilots would understand this ) but the problem here is that the plane was not stalling like the software thought but only climbing during the take off phase .


Way out for Boeing now .

I am a die hard fan of the 737 family and I consider it the safest commercial plane ever made and the most successful but in the wake of the recen crashes of the the Max series this what I think Boeing can do .

1 .shop for a smaller engine with the same performance spec as the CFM 1B leap.
OR
2.Re design the 737 so it can accommodate the CFM Leap engine .
OR

3 . Make MCAS to be redundant during the take off and landing phase of every flight and only active at cruise altitude .

youngest85:
And I was in that plane o, how I manage to survive is what I can't explain.....praise God

specter:



Now I am bordered. My knowledge of software is that it could malfunction at any time does your host of factors.
If your position is accurate, what happens when ther is a software crash during transit and what is the possibility of this being hacked ?

Neoteny:


Such specific-purpose software rarely crash because it's subjected to serious bug hunting. Airplanes remain the safest form of traveling and almost all modern commercial planes are largely flown by computer anyway, and this has been happening for a while now, with great safety records.

As for being hacked, it's not that easy as the internal communications is of the Controlled Area Network type where ECUs (electronic control unit) talk to each other rather than a server, and there are multiple such ECUs and busses (the conduits that carry signals around) so if one fails another steps in. It's not easy to hack the CAN from the ground, and even in the plane it's not as easy.

Your car's engine is controlled by an ECU within a CAN in a closed system, so you can hardly imagine a hacker breaching the systems between your brain box and your nozzles.

Planes are inherently safe, so it doesn't help to worry too much. It's their safety that makes the occasional crash a serious issue (not all crashes are fatal). Does anyone care much if the news stories were about car crashes?

youngest85:
And I was in that plane o, how I manage to survive is what I can't explain.....praise God

SarkinYarki:
It's clear this accident was caused by the auto trimming software MCAS , we have seen auto trimming softwares work aerodynamically unstable military planes like the B2 and F117 who wouldn't be able to even fly without such softwares working overtime to create input aerodynamics and stabilization but bringing such software into commercial aircraft to augment poor aerodynamics should be discouraged , commercial aircraft must depend on traditional aerodynamics as it's foundation and only use trimming software as minimally as possible ..The 737 max problem started from the moment the Boeing design team decided to ignore traditional aerodynamics in a bid to force in the CFM Leap turbofan engine into their aircraft to beat time and protect it's market from the encroaching Airbus A330 Neo the CFM engines were larger than what the low fuselage of the 737 could handle so the opted to move the engine further out the wings to create suitable clearance from the ground , this change will greatly change the aerodynamics of the 737 causing it to tend to pitch up during a flight which if unchecked could lead to a stall , so BOEing introduces MCAS which they have used on various military flying wing prototypes to come in and automatically pitch the planes nose down any time it's notices on over pitch upwards , the problem is that MCAS must work in tandem with a couple of sensors most important which is the Angle of Attack swivel sensor and if these sensors sends any faulty info to MCAS the software is also bound to overreact like what we saw on both crashes where the softwares thought the plane was going into a stall and attempts to recover the plane by pitching down and increasing engine power ( pilots would understand this ) but the problem here is that the plane was not stalling like the software thought but only climbing during the take off phase .


Way out for Boeing now .

I am a die hard fan of the 737 family and I consider it the safest commercial plane ever made and the most successful but in the wake of the recen crashes of the the Max series this what I think Boeing can do .

1 .shop for a smaller engine with the same performance spec as the CFM 1B leap.
OR
2.Re design the 737 so it can accommodate the CFM Leap engine .
OR

3 . Make MCAS to be redundant during the take off and landing phase of every flight and only active at cruise altitude .

loveth360:
what is wrong with you yoruba muslims.