How could an accurate simulation be created of unknown situations unless the AB test pilots intentionally put the aircraft into those situations, which, in my opinion, might lead to vacancies in the test pilot ranks?
Well I tried to convey this notion - you can't just go into a "fancier" simulator and do better - it's electronics and software, all the way down, not a molecule of air to be had... It's good, but it's not an airplane.
Wind-tunnels work well I am informed but have their limitations as well, as I am similarly informed. In short, there are no magic bullets in this kind of research/experimentation, just hard work slugging through a lot of data, with few true insights.
In pondering this over the past few days while staying away and discussing this with others we were wondering if an initial stall entry, perhaps through vertical/lateral gusts sufficient to take one wing further into the stall than the other, leading to a developing partially-stalled spiral - some forward motion, very high vertical motion, slight nose down, possibly hobbled by reduced/no hydraulics due to high incidence of airlfow over the inlets and the RAT, but really, who knows? We know it was at 350 and that later it hit the ocean. The rest of the conjecture has filled the thread.