Hacker News Reader

> Well, then we just disagree on the term.

When you're talking aeronautics, you should use the definition used by aeronautical engineers.

The author in the NYT is a pilot.

"Unfortunately, in the case of the 737 Max, it seems that Boeing has built a plane with a fundamental aeronautical issue that it thought would be resolved by adding a new automated system. "

Mr. Wise is indeed a pilot, but not one for jetliners. Flying a high altitude jetliner is very different from flying a Cessna. Mr. Wise does not have a degree in aeronautical engineering, nor in engineering of any sort.

http://jeffwise.net/about-the-author/

Note that he doesn't use the term "stable" incorrectly. He points out an issue (that would indeed preclude the 737 Max from being certified without MCAS, as I understand it).

> that would indeed preclude the 737 Max from being certified without MCAS

It would not prevent certification. It would require pilots to be separately rated for the MAX.

That's not my understanding. I understand (and PuffinBlue concurs, if I'm not mistaken) that the 737 Max would not be certifiable without MCAS.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com