[dhx]

The Boeing program wanted Level B training only[1] which excludes flight simulator training, hence Forkner was trying to achieve that requirement by avoiding the need for pilots to undergo simulator training.

Even if you were to remove Forkner entirely from the decision making process, pilots would have been asked to fly an aircraft with a 'catastrophic' hazard only reduced to 'hazardous' by training pilots to respond to a very rare event within ~4 seconds of a failure event that the pilots weren't even notified of because the AoA sensor disagreement warning feature was an optional paid addon[2]. If a pilot were to take 10 seconds to respond... too late, the aircraft would likely have been lost[3].

Even with the best training in the world, is it reasonable to just expect pilots, within seconds, to be able to work around 100's of crap engineering and human machine interaction design decisions? As [3] notes, the lack of consideration of the pilot (as a human not a robot or computer) in the engineering design of the aircraft is glaring. Corporate Boeing wanted an aircraft that pilots didn't need to be retrained in, and thanks to unrealistic schedule expectations, they seemingly also didn't want to spend the time needed to remove all the HMI pain points that are inflicted on pilots.

[1] https://transportation.house.gov/imo/media/doc/Compressed%20...

[2] https://edition.cnn.com/2019/04/30/politics/boeing-sensor-73...

[3] https://www.incose.org/docs/default-source/enchantment/21031...