Which CFIT accidents are you referring to, alex, which involved the A320 stalling?
I can think of A320 CFITs, certainly, but none where the aircraft was stalled, or where departure was even a contributory factor.
Maybe some of those 'tricks' were involved? What would they be? I can think of ways to stall the A320, but they all involve switch selections and operations so far outside the sensible SOP envelope it would be akin to shutting down a serviceable engine.
When I did my first Airbus Type Rating, many years ago in a Boeing-dominated airline, one of the first powerpoint slides we were shown was titled:
"Crew Room Airbus Perceptions". Very apt, subsequent experience with a superb aircraft demonstrated!
The transcript I have of the report into the famous crash at Mulhouse concludes:
"The Commission believes that the accident resulted from the combination of the following conditions: 1) very low flyover height, lower than surrounding obstacles; 2) speed very slow and reducing to reach maximum possible angle of attack; 3) engine speed at flight idle; 4) late application of go-around power. This combination led to impact of the aircraft with the trees. The Commission believes that if the descent below 100 feet was not deliberate, it may have resulted from failure to take proper account of the visual and aural information intended to give the height of the aircraft."
My first TRI went on to point out that "yes, you can crash the A320, but it won't be stalled when it crashes!"
Last edited by Gary Lager; 27th Oct 2006 at 18:48.