software update Boeing did not hide 737 pilots a robot flight program
| Reading time: 2 minutes
An unknown flight software could have contributed to the downfall of a low-cost Lion Air carrier. Brisant: Pilots in the cockpit of the new Boeing 737-800-MAX apparently had no knowledge of how the program works in an emergency.
DThe biggest plane crash this year could have been avoided. Just over two weeks after the crash of the low-cost Lion Air Boeing 737-800 MAX, with 189 dead, details now come up that have caused harsh criticism of the aircraft manufacturer. After that, special flight software was installed on the modern MAX model, for which Boeing was not supposed to catch the attention of the pilots. In addition, the pilot's instructions for correct behavior in emergency situations were lacking.
The most up-to-date version of the best-selling Boeing 737 with the additional designation MAX has been commissioned so far nearly 4800 copies worldwide and delivered to about 220 models – especially for American airlines and Asia. On October 29, a model of MAX fell from low altitude, 13 minutes at sea, in the Indonesian capital Jakarta. After four days, the flight recorder was retrieved. Still looking for the voice recorder, which could contribute significantly to the Enlightenment.
Both Boeing and US Air Traffic Control issued specific instructions on how pilots were to respond to erroneous Angle of Attack (AOA) data after the crash. The sensor sent data to the flight computer, which then repeatedly started a "nose-down" maneuver.
This has now led to criticism among the US Pilot Unions. Boeing has in the model, a special software called MCAS (Maneuvering Feature Boosting System) played without informing about it, is the load. Several news agencies cite US pilots, claiming they have not heard of the program so far.
Industry individuals point out that no flight software change can be made without regulatory approval. Perhaps Boeing did not share the changes with the airlines compared to its predecessor, so the pilots did not train accordingly.
Who is to blame for misfortune?
Behind the discussion of the software are not just the insurance issues. For example, who is to blame for the misfortune. So, there were technical problems with the JT-610 crash model before. However, the cheap airline sent the practically fully occupied aircraft back into the air and did not conduct a test flight after the repair.
In pilot circles, the case is also seen as a prime example in the human / computer interface. On the one hand, there are numerous developments on the way to a person's cockpit or even for fully automatic flights, which are expected first in cargo planes. On the other hand, experienced and well-trained pilots have repeatedly avoided an accident in the event of technology failure.