Appreciate the informative chat from TP on the phone (my AB AND social advisor
). Back to banging my 'drum' about 'training', except here I see more a mindset than a training issue.
We have an aeroplane that 'cannot stall' - not even the doorman can do it. It did and it appears the crew were taken unawares. At 45:12, ?stalled? we see a classic input of left stick on a stalled wing (Ab initio Stalling I exercise) producing the expected roll to the right (struggling with the FDR trace here on aileron position, incidentally - stick left, aileron left (red) up??). ?Is it possible for the FBW to reverse the aileron response or is the trace wrongly annotated - or was there an 'override'??
The danger, as we progress further into FBW and software is that we will lose the basic skills of handling. The system is fantastic - in normal use - but has apparent serious flaws in the abnormal.
Now, back to the CAS query from my post (currently 907). I believe Lemurian replied assuring me that those readings were false and due to 'unusual manoeuvres. His reply has been lost in the body count. I SUSPECT I probably have more experience of 'unusual manoueuvres' in swept wing a/c than he, and have NEVER seen that size of CAS fluctuation, not even with a wing mounted pitot and certainly not with a c/l set. Also I see only an increasing pitch (admittedly 'extreme') and changes in in roll. I am becoming convinced that several bits of the system were not telling the truth here, which renders the 'Titanic' principle worthless. Anyone else expect to see 3x200kt speed excursions in 10 seconds in those manoevres?
EDITED to say I've realised I misread the aileron traces -doh!