Originally Posted by
FiveGirlKit
What a strange recommendation. Leaving aside the fact that this aircraft flew multiple sectors with similar defects and whether this should have resulted in diversions or not, how can any pilot make a proper decision to continue on a flight based on this guidance? As the flight crew cannot measure 'airworthiness', then any mechanical, electrical or structural condition on the aircraft will lead to a diversion. Genny tripped off? => divert; lightning strike? => divert; UAS? => divert
Surely that is what the QRH is for - if it tells the crew to 'land as soon as possible' then Boeing consider the airworthiness is at stake. If the QRH leads to the condition being manageable, then why question the airworthiness?
I don't want to be that guy that said "that would never happen to me", I just hope I would be able to handle the problem. As a flight crew you should be trained/have experience to "measure airworthiness" in cases where there is no direct guidance from the QRH. Lightning strike but all electronics remained online and all systems still work: continue, Gen tripped off but I have 2 or 3 more: continue, or only one remaining for night flight without close diversion airport: divert, UAS with stick shaker and un-commanded trim inputs: DIVERT. Just last week I heard a B737 declare an emergency due to airspeed disagree, and divert back, luckily there was nothing in the news so I can assume they landed without problems, but to continue with the stick shaker going of IMHO isn't good (yes, that crew did a great job saving the plane, but I do feel they made it harder for the next crew by not grounding the airplane and continuing).