doubleu-ankler, I think you've got the wrong end of the stick on this one.
This was an acceptance flight NOT a test flight.
A test flight is as you point out, is conducted by test pilots to test an aircraft flight envelope. These aircraft are often undergoing test flying in order to obtain an type certificate as they are first of type.
This was an acceptance flight, just like a test drive of a car. In acceptance flying, you are not taking the aircraft outside the already established flight envelope. Your checking that everything works as advertised. Simulated asymmetric is not usually included in acceptance flying, theres no point to it.
Certain maintenance procedures require a flight check before revenue flying is carried out. And those procedures come from the manufacturer of the aircraft.
Having done an acceptance flight for a first entry of type aircraft (NZ register), we never planned to or did take the aircraft outside the limits set in the flight manual nor was any asymmetric planned. The aircraft had not flown for a year after undergoing a major refit of avionics and interior. Things as simple as galley drawers may work smoothly on the ground, but airborne and pressurized, you may find they no longer work and need attention. Far better to find that out in the a test flight than a revenue flight with pax onboard.
It's just as well we did our acceptance flight because we found an unacceptable autopilot problem that was rapidly remedied by disconnecting and hand flying the aircraft. This fault was not evident on the ground, but only with airloads did the problem manifest itself.
I would hardly call that flying unnecessary. And your not going to find those problems in a simulator.
Did I feel there was a higher risk with this flight I did? Yes, but we took precautions such as additional experienced crew, a flight engineer and a independent GMU and GPS nav system. We were fresh out of the simulator and briefed well on the ground before flight.
As such I believe that our ill-fated colleagues would have been as equally well prepared.
I believe you should check your facts. The DC8 accident you refer to was a training accident as was the RAAF B707 accident. These flights were conducted for a completely different purpose, not for aircraft acceptance testing and yes, can be conducted in a simulator and often are. If you read those accident reports, you would have seen that a large contributing factor in those accidents was a overzealous training captain.
Last edited by Cypher; 1st Dec 2008 at 09:31.