VB; the point on JT610 is still being missed. I reiterate...
For JT610, the data shows the following: AOA IS NOT FAULTY.
IT IS INSTALLED INCORRECTLY. There is a constant offset between L & R, that is not a fault of the sensor, that is an install error. The outcome is the same, an erroneous triggering occurs, but the root cause of the system architecture is a maintenance error, not a sensor error. Now, the system still sucks, and the pilot knowledge was missing info for the first case, but not for the ET302 case, training is definitely needed as it stood.
Hope that clears up that issue a little. It is not a trivial matter, hardening the system from errors needs to recognise what has actually happened, otherwise the effort is flawed. From a litigation viewpoint, it alters where some of the questions get directed.
Whether the error stems from faulty install instead of mechanical fault within the sensor itself, the data it gives is erroneous all the same (and your distinction is surely small comfort to the victims' families). This does not reduce the need for that error to be trapped and dealt with gracefully by the receiving system.