While it's probably true that they fixed the software to never again produce this kind of error, I don't like the idea of software being used to correct the fundamental physics that the airframe is dynamically unstable. While the software probably does a good job of correcting it under a wide range of normal operating conditions, can it deal with evolving or abnormal operating conditions? Will the software still be able to compensate if the pitch-up moment is artificially increased by, e.g. the roof turning into a scoop, or flaps jamming, or a small piece of wing trim breaking? Would Aloha Airlines Flight 243 still have landed safely after the roof came off, becoming a scoop, if it were instead a 737Max?
While it's probably true that they fixed the software to never again produce this kind of error, I don't like the idea of software being used to correct the fundamental physics that the airframe is dynamically unstable. While the software probably does a good job of correcting it under a wide range of normal operating conditions, can it deal with evolving or abnormal operating conditions? Will the software still be able to compensate if the pitch-up moment is artificially increased by, e.g. the roof turning into a scoop, or flaps jamming, or a small piece of wing trim breaking? Would Aloha Airlines Flight 243 still have landed safely after the roof came off, becoming a scoop, if it were instead a 737Max?