I don't see how MCAS obviates a positive static stability requirement, because it can be disabled. But I admit I'm not familiar with FAA requirements in this area.
If the airplane has substantially different pitch behavior, that usually means there'd be a type rating requirement on the pilot, not a lack of airworthiness certification for the airplane. So I'm not really clear on what behavioral requirement MCAS is mitigating. And further I'm not clear how something that can be disabled can help with either aircraft certification or a obviate a separate pilot type rating.
e.g. fly by wire airplanes have various layers of safeguards in place, and pilots type rated for a particular airplane (or models in that same type) are required to understand those safeguards and how the airplane behaves when they aren't in place.
In the 737 MAX case, it's very weird to me that MCAS is somehow a requirement on the one hand, but then it can be disabled without pilots understanding the alternate behavior on the other hand.
If the airplane has substantially different pitch behavior, that usually means there'd be a type rating requirement on the pilot, not a lack of airworthiness certification for the airplane. So I'm not really clear on what behavioral requirement MCAS is mitigating. And further I'm not clear how something that can be disabled can help with either aircraft certification or a obviate a separate pilot type rating.
e.g. fly by wire airplanes have various layers of safeguards in place, and pilots type rated for a particular airplane (or models in that same type) are required to understand those safeguards and how the airplane behaves when they aren't in place.
In the 737 MAX case, it's very weird to me that MCAS is somehow a requirement on the one hand, but then it can be disabled without pilots understanding the alternate behavior on the other hand.