Author suggests the 737 is fly by wire, by saying there's no direct feedback in the control stick forces as it relates to control surface forces, but are rather

Author suggests the 737 is fly by wire, by saying there's no direct feedback in the control stick forces as it relates to control surface forces, but are rather artificially presented by computer. That's simply not true. Even in the case of MCAS, the side effect of stabilizer nose down trim is to make elevator backpressure on the yoke more forceful. It is not a simulation. That's presumably its design goal is, and why it was so simple without any safeguards for overcorrection or a failed sensor. I also don't like the suggestion the plane is longitudinally unstable due to the engines. That is simply not consistent with FAR 25.173 (a). A central feature of this stability requirement is the plane will recover from a stall merely be releasing back pressure. Not all airplanes do this because not all airplanes are designed that way nor are they required to, but FAR 23 (normal category) and FAR 25 (air transport category) aircraft are required to exhibit this kind of stability as well as lateral static stability. Yet people keep saying the airplane isn't stable and MCAS makes it stable. You can't have a damn switch that instantly makes the airplane unairworthy, with a damn airworthiness directive that tells pilots to solve one problem (runaway trim, or MCAS upset) by making the airplane unairworthy. If MCAS is there to make the plane airworthy, turning off autotrim makes the plane unairworthy. That's why I don't buy any claim that MCAS is there to make the plane airworthy, until there's a preponderance of evidence from reputable sources that includes an explanation how in the world such a thing is not a violation of FAR 25. The sensible explanation is it's a stick force moderator, in order to ensure the FAA didn't require a type certification for this make/model derivative. A plane with a type certificate triggers a requirement in FAR 61 for the pilot to obtain a type rating to fly planes with that particular type certification. I do find the suggestion of conspiracy plausible, among Boeing, the FAA, and airlines, to avoid 737 MAX type certification different from prior 737s. Consistent with that, is this week's ass covering by an FAA board saying they see no reason for additional 737 simulator training for pilots to fly 737 MAX, i.e. paving the way for a software update only solution for the current problem.