Fighters like relaxed aerodynamic roll stability for roll rate. Now pitch stability issues are troubling. I don't think engineers would purposely relax pitch stability unless they had to.
I guess I'm saying you might want an airplane aerodynamically unstable in roll, but pretty much never in pitch so the fly by wire argument might not be valid here.
Not passenger aircraft. Only military.
They all do this. You have giant engines on the underside of the wing; what else would you expect to happen when you throttle up at low airspeed?
The pitch-power coupling has been problematic on the 737 since Boeing went with GE engines. Thomsonfly almost got a classic to stall in Bournemouth ages ago and flyDubai managed to wreck an NG in Russia a couple years ago. It's possible, but unlikely, the 737 MAX is better behaved in this regard.
If there weren't significant aerodynamic problems with the 737 MAX it would be flying by now. This whole type cert / training thing is a red herring. The cost of slow and shuttering production both in financial and diplomatic terms far outstrips the cost of a separate type. Beyond that Boeing has a captive market. The only 737 MAX alternatives out there are made by Airbus, and Airbus has a healthy backlog for both the A220 and A320. While some airlines may be able to take the range / consumption hit with an NG other airlines, like Norwegian, were counting on the increased range of the MAX for certain routes.
You have two massive sources of thrust below the centre of gravity. If you advance the throttle it will create a nose-up pitching moment.
Correct. An A320 won't pitch up as dramatically as a 737, mostly due to FBW magic.
Ok, glad we agree it'll still pitch up.
Sure, the difference is that a 737 Classic, NG, or MAX with all of the nannies working can be flown into a stall with lots of throttle at low speed whereas the Airbus cannot. The pitch-power coupling on a 737 is far more problematic than on its competitors.
Source: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/the...
Most planes have airframes that are aerodynamically stable in and of itself. The 737 Max requires software assistance to be at the same level of stability.
That, to me, is a fundamental flaw. In a multilayer system each layer needs to be safe in and of itself. The purpose of higher layers is to add functionality not to fix flaws in lower layers.
Given the fundamental flaws in design it was obvious there was a cultural problem at Boeing and the CEO needed to go. "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." -- Einstein.