True. But the hazard analysis reported in the Seattle Times showed Boeing listed it a hazardous failure item. Ignoring that it should have been classified as “catastrophic” because of its ability to cause a loss of aircraft, even at the “hazardous” level their procedures made a redundant element required.

Required, not optional if the customer pays enough.

Actually I wonder how having two sensors is a good idea, anyways. There is no quorum of two, if one of the sensors is off, what's the actual angle of attack?

I dont understand much of redundancy of sensors, yet '3' would allow to ignore the 'bogus' reading.

It seems such a weird thing to cut corners on.

The main new feature in a plane solving a problem that they knew was potentially dangerous which is why they had to install the auto-nose-down system in the first place.

How expensive could a couple of extra sensors even be compared to a whole plane?

Maybe the extra sensors added significant drag?

> Actually I wonder how having two sensors is a good idea, anyways. There is no quorum of two, if one of the sensors is off, what's the actual angle of attack?

Not knowing the angle of attack is miles better than not knowing that you don't know the angle of attack.

There’s usually guidelines based on the criticality of the equipment and the required reliability.

"dlc"? What does that mean

Downloadable content, a reference to large game studios' reputations for nickel-and-diming players on what should be core gameplay features of a video game.

They made it an optional extra that you had to pay more for.

This would be fine if we're talking about carpeting on the flight deck, but the AOC sensor is a critical feature.

They made it an optional feature you have to pay more for.