PJ2 -
Thank you for your comments.
My answer to Desertia concerning his post related to his comments:
....."I remain of the opinion that, irrespective of the causes of this accident, I would still rather an experienced pilot have a piece of wire or hydraulics controlling the various surfaces under unusual conditions than having one or more computers trying to work it out."
and....."Artificial intelligence still does not - and probably will not for decades to come, unless there is a magnificent leap in technology - mirror the ability of the human brain to eschew logic and do what thousands of hours of flying, and experience of abnormal circumstances allow, which is, for want of a better word, THINK."
Neither one of you fly the Airbus or even know the first thing about its systems or how it's built yet you're willing to condemn the airplane based on the flimsiest notions of someone who isn't even in aviation.
Quite true. But, I have read enough from those that HAVE flown these types to know that I'm glad I never had to. It is utterly amazing to read the differences expressed by those that fly these things as to how various systems operate. There are disagreements everywhere. The manuals are simply too full of information that not even a computer scientist could possibly remember/recall in the time of need. Who ever heard of an aircraft having THREE different flight control laws?!
Whatever happend to AF447, apparently happend so fast, the crew had no chance to sort out all the warnings being displayed on their panel. They probably had no chance to simply FLY their aircraft.
Like it or not, his (Desertia) reference to having a "...piece of wire or hydraulics controlling..." says alot, along with those of us, yourself included, who learned how to "fly" airplanes and not manipulate a computer to do it for us.
But, we digress.....