Anybody who fully trust MCC's analyses of the real time readings from their onboard maintenace computer probably live in an unreal world!
Read this from another thread :
A few years ago, a colleague of mine had a small fuel leak ( which went undetected by even the sophiscated, high tech real time maintenance monitoring ) decided to go against the company's decision to continue to destination as their maintenance control reckoned the skipper was wrong in assessing a small anomaly as a fuel leak. When he insisted on diverting, they demanded he returned to base. However with the prevailing tailwinds, a 180 degrees return to base entails a 7 hour diversion whereas an enroute diversion would have been only a 2.5 hours; seeing the stupidity of the operations control/maintenance control, he countermanded the company's decision, wrested a grudging approval to divert to a suitable enroute airport where he was proven right that there was indeed an engine fuel leak. Technically, operationally and safety wise, he was vindicated. But the company put him through hell, grounded him for several weeks, trying every trick in the book to trip him during the various enquiries. He maintained technical and professional integrity throughout; he was finally released back on line with " no comment " on the incident. When he enquired further, he was quietly pulled aside and told that in the interest of his future contract ( it was a commuting contract ), he should " let go ". Of course he took the advice under protest. This was taken unkindly and true enough some time later he found himself " failed " a sim check under dubious circumstances. THE MESSAGE WAS CLEAR.
Having said that there was no reason compelling reason for the crew to make an ATB to SVO. However I am confident the crew would have consulted MCC and Dispatch for all the relevant information and would have in their heads plans B, C and D in case something really went wrong. Multiple status messages are real cause for concern but no need for immediate crew action. However the crew had better brush up on their systems information/knowledge to be prepared to deal with highly possible inflight failures associated with those status messages. To just pay little attention them just because no pilot actions were required for status messages would be plain foolish.