If you don’t mind I’ll ask some dumb questions since you seem to know this stuff.
Re-googling the reporting seems to say the optional software was related to displaying the two readings and an indicator that the two disagreed, but that MCAS only used one input.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/21/business/boeing-safety-features-charge.html]
Boeing’s optional safety features, in part, could have helped the pilots detect any erroneous readings. One of the optional upgrades, the angle of attack indicator, displays the readings of the two sensors. The other, called a disagree light, is activated if those sensors are at odds with one another.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/04/30/politics/boeing-sensor-737-max-faa/index.html]
Since the initial crash last October, Boeing has been updating the MCAS software on the 737 Max to use data from the plane's two AOA sensors, rather than relying on one sensor. Critics question why the airplane's system wasn't originally designed that way
Does the reporting sound correct? The part about MCAS only using one sensor is one of the things that bothers me.
Later last night I thought that comparing two readings shouldn’t be computationally difficult, but doubling the number of sensor reads could be expensive (or getting the data from a different processor) in terms if processor time.
I don’t know if the displays and MCAS ryns on the same processors. If they do there shouldn’t have to more IO like reads so my guess is shot to hell again.
There were also reports earlier that one of the adjustments to MCAS during the original flight tests was to allow a greater range of corrections. If true that’s probably a better explanation for the slow behavior in the original article than my bs guess.
Thanks for any clarification. I realize my speculation doesn’t really help anyone but getting corrected helps me learn.
= new reply since forum marked as read