Originally Posted by
Tomaski
A few random thoughts, in no particular order:
1. It is worthwhile to read the entire exchange and not just the posted excerpts. This was obviously a casual conversation between co-workers that neither party thought would see the light of day. Besides the exchange on MCAS, I thought the most interesting aspect were the comments indicating the pressure they were under to get the work done.
2. Context is extremely important in evaluating this conversation, and unfortunately we do not have all the context necessary. As has been mentioned before, Forkner, as a technical pilot, is not acting as a test pilot. In this example, it appears that he is trying to confirm that the sim behavior conforms to the known aircraft (including MCAS software) behavior. Aggressive activation of either the Speed Trim or the MCAS does not seem to be appropriate at the stated conditions (230 KIAS, 4000' level flight), so this could have very well been either a Flight Control Computer or a sim programming issue they had stumbled on.
3. What is really needed to evaluate this conversation, and what we don't have right now, is what happened next. Did Forkner communicate his findings up the chain? If so, what was the result of that communication? Were changes made to any software?
Waiting for the next shoe to drop......
If I recall correctly the pressure was compared to an airline and not from a Third World.