Originally Posted by
Joejosh999
I’d be interested to know of the QA plan, most obviously failure modes, and how it was executed and signed off.
Likewise, great comment. Pax/Ex-IT QA engr here. With all the discussion around MCAS being somewhat of a kludge to overcome an unbalanced design introduced by the heavier more forward mounted engines on the MAX, I have thought since start of this thread about necessity for a robust test script with particular emphasis on wringing out all possible failure types. Big no-no if this is engineer driven, they are notoriously focused on making stuff WORK. Proper test plan would of course pass/fail all feature/functionality stuff, but should primarily focus on making things BREAK, anticipating every possible adverse situation engineers might deem next to impossible, or so minor or rare as to be "insignificant". Testing impact of bad control inputs to MCAS seems rather a no-brainer, no?