There's no "ignoring the basic aerodynamic problem of the plane’s 'quick and dirty' engine position/fuselage mismatch," he wrote, and "human factors and the unstable aerodynamics of the 737 MAX have made it inherently unsafe."
I’ll say it again: In the 737 Max, the engine nacelles themselves can, at high angles of attack, work as a wing and produce lift. And the lift they produce is well ahead of the wing’s center of lift, meaning the nacelles will cause the 737 Max at a high angle of attack to go to a higher angle of attack. This is aerodynamic malpractice of the worst kind作者: not4weak 时间: 2020-12-10 17:20
So Boeing produced a dynamically unstable airframe, the 737 Max. That is big strike No. 1. Boeing then tried to mask the 737’s dynamic instability with a software system. Big strike No. 2. Finally, the software relied on systems known for their propensity to fail (angle-of-attack indicators) and did not appear to include even rudimentary provisions to cross-check the outputs of the angle-of-attack sensor against other sensors, or even the other angle-of-attack sensor. Big strike No. 3.作者: not4weak 时间: 2020-12-11 11:59
