We don't even know the real problem, how can we make speculation like this. Every article seems to cite "faulty sensor data", but is this really true? Would making the sensor more reliable or having an additional backup sensor have prevented the issue? Is it possible for the software to even detect when the sensor is faulty? Maybe the sensor worked fine, and the MCAS worked fine, but the plane itself has faulty aerodynamics.
At this point, it seems clear that MCAS had something to do with the crashes, but it's far too early to point to the root cause.
> Would making the sensor more reliable or having an additional backup sensor have prevented the issue? Is it possible for the software to even detect when the sensor is faulty? Maybe the sensor worked fine, and the MCAS worked fine, but the plane itself has faulty aerodynamics.
The sensor on the Lion Air flight was 20 degrees off. While it wouldn't have "prevented the issue", a simple disagree light in the cockpit would have told the pilots that the AOA sensor was "wrong" while they were still on the runway. Simply put, the plane was unfit to fly and had this light been installed on that plane, the flight would have never left the ground and the crash wouldn't have happened.
Boeing charged extra for this light.
Since this has come to light, Boeing have announced that the disagree light will now come as standard on all 737MAX's at no additional cost.
There is no AOA on the ground. it requires airflow. You would not have seen an AOA disagree until the aircraft was in the air or at least moving at a pretty good speed down the runway.
I read that in another heavily upvoted comment on here in an earlier discussion a week or so ago. I really shouldn't assume that randoms on the internet know what they're talking about.
At this point, it seems clear that MCAS had something to do with the crashes, but it's far too early to point to the root cause.