Jump to content

Talk:Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2603:6080:5a07:c24c:ec6b:e4ab:67dd:ba38 (talk) at 23:57, 14 February 2024. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Major Updates Needed

This article is a mess and a majority of the listed sources are sensational articles from right after the crashes. In 2024 we know for a fact that:

- There were procedural failures on the part of the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines pilots. - Ethiopian Airlines did not properly distribute Boeing notices regarding MCAS. - The angle of attack sensor on the Lion Air 737 was miscalibrated by Xtra Aerospace, during a repair for Lion Air. - During recertification testing after the crashes, test pilots flew 737 MAXs with and without MCAS and said they had no issues with stability whatsoever. - The information regarding the size and location of the engines affecting the stability of the plane is incorrect.

It does a disservice to thousands of readers when articles are editorialized like this. People deserve the facts and most up-to-date information so they can make informed decisions. Injecting emotions and opinions into informational articles is inappropriate.


DailyBeast not being Aviation

@Marc Lacoste:: If you are rejecting a citation based solely on the domain name and not the content, I hardly find the recent revert convincing.

It's not a WP:cite, it's a WP:EL.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 20:14, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MCAS INPUT

Current costly aircrafts have MULTIPLE Systems of Sensors to determine their speed, position and attitude. The original MCAS used ONLY ONE AoA sensor input. This FAIL-SURE logic could only be developed and approved by Retards (in rank and file and also in power/top jobs) 123.201.65.73 (talk) 04:09, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTFORUM. Your opinion does not matter here.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 12:45, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

EASA

This article repeatedly uses the acronym EASA without anywhere defining what it means. Similarly, although the Federal Aviation Administration is mentioned by name in the second paragraph, the acronym FAA is used throughout also without definition. 130.246.57.110 (talk) 11:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See my diff 1 and diff 2. Thank you for drawing that to our attention. Dolphin (t) 11:54, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Link 145 is sort of broken it no longer points to the referenced document as the FAA document system was revised. I noticed this while looking for info to supplement a documentary on the 737 MAX I was watching.I do not know how to properly add a citation. Here is the link

https://drs.faa.gov/browse/excelExternalWindow/FB91ABC41EF06432862586260051E5DF.0001 Bruce A. WIlliamson (talk) 14:45, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]