I don’t need to know how it works.”
What a damming statement reflecting an attitude to safety. This taints all of us.
Unfortunately this attitude exists in other forms; “don’t tell us that, we will only be examined on it”. Quoted from a ground school of the initial cadre of instructor pilots, because the overseas manufacturer was deemed unsuitable to instruct line pilots. Perhaps that says something about regulation, but in this instant probably reflects unionised bias clouding the priority safety aspects.
Recognising that there might be systems or instances where working knowledge is not required, there is still always need of information when the system fails. There is as yet no specific drill, but when one is formally agreed, (even the interim one), then working system knowledge will be required to aid interpreting and applying the abnormal drill. e.g. how does the pilot interpret ‘un-commanded’ trim movement; MACS could appear to be doing that in normal operation; the difference between normal and failed might only be determined after 10sec of trim operation, - fly the aircraft, check for other combinations / confirming / confusing alerts.