Just imagine what Boeing 737 max airplane system developers going through right now !!

When an error in the system can actually claims ppl Life.

Who want to be responsible for testing and approving such system. !!

I didn't bother researching more than watching this video, where a pilot explains the difference between 737NG and 737MAX: https://youtu.be/TlinocVHpzk

So the blame is not on the developers but the architects and perhaps more importantly the training system

737 Max Explanation by a Software Engineer
https://twitter.com/trevorsumner/...

@itsundef true that..

The plane's design is so different, Boeing thought getting trained pilots would be difficult so they automated using sensors, software and automated control of wings. My knowledge is very limited but I read that the external sensors attached to the plane (something related to angle of ascent and to prevent stalling of plane) was continuously sending wrong data using which software was trying to correct (to make it less inclined) which in reality was nosediving the plane. The manual had no mention of it as the pilots had to authority to override it. So, the issue is somewhere much higher up in design and conceptualization.

I agree that the software acted based on the input .. so technically it's not software issues.
Yet . Am saying testing and approving those softwares must be hell. Somon has to say this software is safe to use... And that's not an easy thing to say

@human06 Something is amiss in aviation industry. Self driving cars are taking years to try / test and getting regulation but in case of Boeing, such self-flight correcting system was released so swiftly, without any mention in the pilot manual. The regulators seems to be incapable of monitoring and approving such complex machines.

I read the tweet that @itsundef shared. He is right. It is not software fault. Bad sensors equal bad data eqaul bad results.

Cheap ass companies trying to save money did this. Offering the extra redundant sensor as an optional package is bullshit.

However we look at this it is the fault of companies that are being cheap and also fault of environmentalists pushing for more economic designs..

Maybe not so much the second group.. But i always gotta take a dump on them 😂

@ajit555 true that ..! However . I think self driven cars had more attention since there is too many cars in street. Traffic light ..etc. and generally the public payed more attention to it since it's more tangible to the consumer.
Airplanes on the other hand. Most of the consumers have zero idea how it operates. So there was no much coverage of its technology.

But I agree the regulation seems outdated for both technology.

Im okay with that

It looks like there's a whole lot more wrong. Not only with Boeing, but also with the FAA. The impact of the system was understated, the safety level categorisation was wrong, and then no redundancy, no on ground error detection, nothing. And the FAA pushed a whole lot just off to Boeing.

No wonder that Ethiopia doesn't trust the US to examine this properly and wants to have that done in Europe.

@SecFreak true . It could have been overwrite.. however from my lil understanding.. it required different processes to overwrite it . Not as the normal 737 . And Boing claimed pilot can fly their max version with no special training if they used to other 737.

More over .. some pilot didn't know such system exist .

@SecFreak As per this twitter feed shared above by an aviation expert...

https://twitter.com/trevorsumner/...
Boeing sells an option package that includes an extra AoA vane, and an AoA disagree light, which lets pilots know that this problem was happening. Both 737MAXes that crashed were delivered without this option. No 737MAX with this option has ever crashed.

that means Boeing has two version of the planes, one expensive with alerts and one cheaper without alert..what a shame!

@Fast-Nop as per one news report, an ex-FAA employee tells that FAA is dependent on Boeing for technical expertise. So, how can they certify Boeing?

@ajit555 they can demand anything from Boeing. Plans, explanations, analysis, documents. But they didn't.

@SecFreak yeah, letting Boeing certify their airplanes themselves.. that's how we have two aircraft crashed. And that's why not only Boeing's image is under fire, but also the FAA's.

If things are that much in decline that commercial IP protection in the US is more important than aircraft safety, then Boeing is in deep shit because nobody wants to buy aircraft from a manufacturer who doesn't give a fuck about safety and certified by a lame authority who isn't even able to give a fuck.

@SecFreak they can and must know that a DAL B system (which should have been DAL A anyway) is not allowed to depend on a single sensor without any redundancy. That's airworthiness 101.