Originally Posted by
canadiancow
Does that mean the fix has been deployed on that aircraft?
Unable to say, but FTPs are being performed.
Originally Posted by
CZAMFlyer
Thanks Fiordland. I was just surprised that Boeing might install an unapproved (as yet) solution in a non Boeing-owned airframe, and would instead conduct such demonstrations in their own aircraft. Perhaps it's logistically easier to use the local aircraft in each of the jurisdictions Boeing reps visit on their travelling road (air) show.
TCCA is responsible for certification Canadian registered operators, and since this 737-8 issue has resulted in mass hysteria of the plebs, this has gone from a minor safety issue to a major political issue. As such, TCCA is being sure to appear to be in the lead for Canadian related certification activities, as various news outlets are filing FOIA requests on a regular basis.
Originally Posted by
expert7700
No fix yet, been following airliners.net and Boeing has gone silent after saying they will address the list that needs done (dual inputs, both computers active, etc).
Rumored to take 2-3 months after fix is formally submitted to FAA for them to sign off. Plus who knows how long for other regulators. I'd say Q1 or Q2 2020.
"No fix yet" is a pretty bold assertion to make by someone not working for Boeing. Just because another useless web forum filled with misinformation - written by people who do not even know what it is they do not know - does not mean work is not actively being performed. There is a lot of being done on this issue, and Boeing is under no obligation to satisfy the idle curiosity of a few plebs that think they are more knowledgeable about a topic than they actually are.
The only people Boeing need to communicate with at this point in time are the various regulatory agencies and various operators, and quite frankly, the less that is disclosed publicly at this point, the better. There are far too many ignorant vulturous media personnel ready to print exaggerative & sensationalist drivel just to get a few more eyeballs.
Originally Posted by
canopus27
Did they actually skip that test before? Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Boeing, nor am I disputing you ... but my read was just that the new variation here was not that the "bit flipped" test was new for the MAX, but rather that this time they had specifically selected bits to flip based on the new understanding of the MCAS. Which, obviously, they didn't realize before was going to be a problem.
Bit flipping (as well as fuzzing) tests are extensively performed, however humans can only anticipate so many scenarios, now that a new scenario has been identified, a specific bit flipping series of tests has been designed to address the previously unidentified scenario.
Originally Posted by
canopus27
Yes, I read the same. Which is, I think, as it should be -- you test to more extreme conditions that you ever expect to see in real life.
I don't believe that extreme turbulence actually rips the wings off planes, either .... but they still test wings to the point of failure.
No, wings are tested 150% of maximum load, if the wings do not break at 155% of maximum load, people get fired (I unfortunately heard the screaming sessions by VPs as people were being stripped alive and summarily escorted out of the building) and the wings get redesigned such that they break at 150% of maximum load.