Thank you, Detent. You have opened the door we had here long ago.
You have described the basis of the problem most folks have RE: FBW
to get higher AoA
+ more elevator is needed, achieved by
+ greater stick displacement, for which
+ still increasing force needs to be overcome.
The end result is a fixed correlation between AoA and force on the stick. For a commanded maneuver, the requirement for the A/C to resist a push towards the envelope's edge ever more aggressively is well satisfied.
The situation 25 years ago with the ;bus ( most widely used FBW plane by many carriers, and at least two variants), was much more than a simple electric voltage or syncrho angle from a control stick to a servo that moved the elevator or aileron or rudder.
I do not have the tech manual for the 'bus stick, but I do not beleive the 'bus stick had any force feedback nor any change in the gradient for gee command dependent upon AoA or even Q. In short, it was like an old Atari game. You got used to the gee command that your stick movement made after pulling on the stick a few times.
The MCAS requirement was as you described. Higher AoA should required more aft stick. That requirement was based upon decades of conventional aircraft designs and control systems. The Airbus 320 and on changed all that.
Many very educated and experienced pilots and engineers are here from the AF447 threads. They will talk at length about the issuues. I prolly screwed up a few assertions about FBW related to current planes, but I can come back and elucidate at length. Unless we have a Concorde pilot here, or an original Viper pilot, I shall continue to pull rank RE: FBW
RE: for the veterna here of all the commercial planes I have ridden in for 60 years, I shall bow to their experience and knowledge and we can discuss. Many of them have flown the same high performance planes that I flew. Some may even been students of mine.
Gotta go now.