Originally Posted by
meleagertoo
Which rather vindicates Boeing's position on this; they reacted exactly as Boeing intended by identifying it as an STS runaway (which most assuredly is a runaway trim event) and dealt with it by using the correct pre-existing technique.
And as such, why is it really so necessary to inform pilots of this system? There is no specific control over it, just the generic runaway trim procedure. Surely telling people about systems they have no specific influence over is merely muddying the waters? If it presents itself as failure event X which is dealt with by checklist Y does anyone need to know that it could be system A or A.1 at fault, when both are addressed by the same checklist, show effectively the same symptoms and actually are components of the same system?
That, I am sure, was Boeing's rationale and though I'm not 100% comfortable with it I'm certainly not condemning it in the absolute and fundamental way some others are.
Except it was the
jumpseater that identified the issue
NOT the crew and it seems that neither the crew or the jumpseater understood what the issue was. No mention of stab trim runaway was made in the writeup as I recall.