Boeing Unveils 737 Max Software Fixes (cnbc.com)

hcs_$reboot shares a report from CNBC: Boeing previewed its software fix, cockpit alerts and additional pilot training for its 737 Max planes on Wednesday, saying the changes improve the safety of the aircraft which has been involved in two deadly crashes since October. By the end of this week, Boeing plans to send the software updates and plan for enhanced pilot training to the FAA for certification approval. After the FAA approves the fix, Boeing said it will send the software update to customers. Among the notable changes to the MAX flight controls:

• The plane's Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System, or MCAS, automated flight control system, will now receive data from both "angle of attack" sensors, instead of just one.
• If those disagree by more than 5.5 degrees, the MCAS system will be disabled and will not push the nose of the plane lower.
• Boeing will be adding an indicator to the flight control display so pilots are aware of when the angle of attack sensors disagree.
• There will also be enhanced training required for all 737 pilots so they are more fully aware of how the MCAS system works and how to disable it if they encounter an issue.

Comments

Re:Sensors are physical objects

[Darinbob]

Just your industry standard screwup. A better design is expensive, more testing is expensive, any delay is expensive. To the product managers will push and push and push for you to ship the product. The plan was not designed from scratch, it's an incremental modification of the 737 line and this feature was essentially a patch that was less expensive than a redesign.

A software fix could have used both sensors?

[PhotoGuy]

The depressing (or incriminating?) part here is that the fix didn't require any hardware modifications, as I would have expected. I assumed that there was some cost/weight issue to having the MCAS have access to the left and right sensors. But nope, it could have compared both.
If it can be fixed with a software fix, then it could have been done right from the start without any extra hardware costs of production.
Very damning.
I get so tired of the reports calling clear software/algorithm bugs "computer glitches."
It's akin to blaming every pilot error situation on the plane.
Just as with hardware design flaws, software design flaws should have repercussions for the manufacturer, and not written off as "oh, one of those computer glitches!" If your computers are glitchy, don't put them on my plane, thanks.