Originally Posted by
SPA83
Can pilots be asked to perfectly control a trajectory without speed indications with a non-compliant airplane with the regulations of the certification basis (no static longitudinal stability and no low speed protection)?
Hi. Presumably you meant to say
"... an airplane non-compliant with the basic certification regulations (no static longitudinal stability and no low-speed protection)." ?
Am not conversant with the contemporary certification requirements affecting the A330-200 but, as far as I know, the A330 does enjoy static longitudinal stability. As for low-speed protection, that had become ineffective or spurious on AF447 only due to a significant system failure, so I don't see in what way the aircraft type could be considered non-compliant.
Regarding the PF's task - in the sudden absence of reliable airspeed indications - of maintaining straight-and-level flight, together with a suitable thrust setting: that matter has been discussed at considerable length in the pages of this thread and its predecessors.
EDIT
Further to the issue of longitudinal stability (see above) and the handling qualities available to the PF after the effective loss of airspeed indications, some readers may not be aware that the FBW had downgraded from Normal Law to Alternate Law in pitch, with Direct Law in roll. Although several pitch-related protections were lost, the feel and handling of the aircraft in pitch, known as C*, would have been identical to that in Normal Law. (The same cannot be said of the handling in roll.).
The aircraft's aerodynamic longitudinal stability would only be a relevant issue if the FBW had downgraded further to Direct Law in pitch. It did not.