I assume 5001 has moved out of the main thread now.
Although we can't see under the wrapping, it appears, at least superficially, to be a very neat cut, following the initial join. I wonder if special care was taken to achieve this. I would hate to think that section joints are the easiest points to break a fuselage!
I remain concerned that the certification process requires a frame which seems to be tailored to a test regime, rather than representative of a production frame.
If it's lighter, assembled differently and missing components like the vertical tail plane, it wouldn't be an unreasonable question to ask "what does it actually prove?" The obvious defence is "the regime has worked up till now".
I can see the fatigue test regime being computerized, which I don't think is unreasonable considering the criteria deemed to be the 'requirement' for the current test regime. In some ways it would be better, when like a flight simulator, unlikely but potentially catastrophic events can be mimicked without risking losing a physical 'bit of kit'.