Originally Posted by
climber314
That would be the logical thing to do. Recognizing that repeated uncommanded trim movements occurring in a regular pattern are indeed "continuous" would be another. Both actions would require logical thinking and what we used to call "flying by the seat of one's pants." Reading this thread it appears these concepts have died in favor of computers and checklists.
Is "it wasn't done because there's no checklist for it" a valid defense strategy? It appears Boeing's "Legal Eagles" are chomping at the bit to test that line in court with a long line of expert witnesses. First in that line will be the surviving Lion Air crew that took the appropriate action on the previous flight(s). The depositions would make compelling reading and something we are unlikely to ever see if the case even gets that far.
Once cockpit control is ceded to the realm of 1's and 0's, pilots become obsolete. Be careful what you wish (advocate) for.
What would have happened if the previous crew took the appropriate actions as per FAA/Boeing AD but ventured into the MCAS flight envelope, now unprotected by MCAS and with only the manual trimwheel to help the elevator keep up with whatever aerodynamic pitch up the engines were giving. Would we be wondering why they did not recover from the stall? What is the MCAS envelope and why would the emergency AD not warn to not go there. Unless it's an envelope that would not be normally encountered in day to days ops and Boeing just added the system to keep the FAA and part 25 happy and so we could do our steep turns in the simulator without going "WTF". But if I was flying the bird I would like reassurance that if I lost MCAS I could still go to min clean hold speed and make a 30 degree bank turn, or not.