vilas,
While it’s obvious to me what they should have done in that situation, I don’t believe that blaming the pilots is the answer. The logic behind the captain’s decision to continue the T/O after the first power reduction, was that he was more concerned with the damage that might be done to the aircraft if the nose was slammed onto the runway. Obviously he did not consider the dangers of flying with a CG well aft of the design limit.
There is protection against ignorance and stupidity. Its the regulators and airlines responsibility to ensure that only qualified and well trained crews are allowed into the cockpit. But since those protections are under pressure from economical interests, those protections are sometimes out of order….
Another question for joe and others in the know about the Airbus FCS.
Will the fact that the aircraft changes control laws give the pilots better or worse control response/control effectiveness in the pitch axis (in this situation), thereby increasing their chances of successfully avoiding a stall due to aft CG?