AstraMike, your ‘aerodynamics lesson’ {post 3197} showed how a modern large aircraft might enter a spin, but not with any relationship to the A330, nor why you focus on a flat spin in preference over a more common type. Similarly, where stall precedes a spin, you provide little supporting evidence, unless you agree with some of the previous ideas – then why ‘pick and choose’ evidence to suit your case.
Also the choice of spin mode appears back driven from the scant evidence of the wreckage, for which the conditions in many other scenarios might account for the damage.
If an aircraft has a tendency to drop a wing during a stall then the resultant downward attitude/motion could just as likely provide the necessary increase in airspeed to un-stall the wings – thence a spiral dive and not a spin.
All that the current evidence points too is the loss of airspeed information, procedural flight on standby horizon and power setting, and in atmospheric, procedural, and WAT conditions conducive to low speed loss of control (stall).
Noting some interesting observations on trim operation, how the loss of airspeed procedure might be adhered to in the absence of stall identification, and generalities about crew training performance, there are still many unknowns.
Should we expect the airspeed display to be regained as the aircraft descended clear of icing conditions?
If there was a loss of control and instruments were recovered, why wasn’t stable control wasn’t regained?
Please no wild speculations about locked in spins – first show that this aircraft type could, or would experience a stall, an incipient spin, then a ‘spin’, and then why ‘flat’’.