> Though I can’t help but wonder if this is a very subtle re-framing of the Max accidents to shift blame back towards pilots. How so? The assertion that avera

> Though I can’t help but wonder if this is a very subtle re-framing of the Max accidents to shift blame back towards pilots. How so? The assertion that average pilots must be use implies that average pilots were not being used and that because of this the testing is flawed. I think the point is that an average pilot would have failed tests and exposed a flaw in their training but because they used above average pilots any flaws in their systems were mitigated or avoided by the pilots. I think we'd all agree that if a pilot landed a fully functional plane, that they were certified to fly, without first deploying the landing gear then we'd question that pilot's abilities. The rationale for testing using average pilots is along the same lines. An average pilot can reasonably be expected to have a certain level of knowledge and ability, therefore all testing should be to expose the gaps between what they know and what's needed to pilot a new aircraft. Using a more experienced pilot closes or narrows those gaps.