Hacker News Reader

The manual thing is such a canard.

The directive issued is literally just reminding pilots of a procedure they should already know - reset the trim to stabilize the plane and throw the cutout switch. The issue with MCAS changing how the plane performed was remediated by skills pilots should have irrespective of feature descriptions in a manual.

View on HN

You do know that training manuals are covered by certification procedures, right? It's not a canard, it's a fact.

Yes. That's orthogonal to whether or not the manual defeciency should have stopped pilots from following the checklist they should have down to rote memory.

(Hint: it shouldn't.)

This yet again pushes the issue onto just the pilots. Anything but the planemaker. I agree with the GP, there's far too much apologism for boeing here.

I'm not an apologist for Boeing and that's a mischaracterization of what I'm saying (and I'd argue Walter as well.)

Especially as my field of commercial aerospace was vendor agnostic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com