[Dr. Sivana]

Having issues with altitude is a bad trait for a aircraft. I thought being thousands of feet high was kind of the point.

[Pecos]

The problem is not the altitude. The problem is high altitude + hot day + high humidity + low speed (’cause the plane isn’t at 400 knots yet) when taking off. But the real culprit in my mind is the autopilot “feature” that was supposed to correct for pilot errors - much in the same way that several Airbus planes’ autopilots caused or contributed to crashes.

[Political Junkie Too]

It's about the reduced lift at take-off.

Regular planes have been delayed at Phoenix due to heat reducing the lift during take-off. Now do it in thinner air at 5,000 feet.

-PJ

[pepsi_junkie]

Airbus put on a new, more fuel efficient engine that also happens to be a lot larger than the old ones. It made their planes more attractive because fuel costs are incredibly important to an airline. So Boeing had to compete and tried to put the same engine on their plane. But it wouldnt fit under the wing, they have less ground clearance than Airbus planes do. It would bottom out on the runway during landings. So they had to mount it higher, with some of it protruding above the top of the wing, most of it below. This screwed up the aerodynamics and to compensate they put in all this software to correct for nosedives. Which failed in the worst way possible, obviously.

I have tp assume this is a case where because of the thin air there is less lift when coming in and the engine can still bottom out against the runway under the right conditions. But just guessing. Maybe someday I'll read the article to see if I was right!