Huck;
No, the automation flew the aircraft into the ground, while they watched.
The crew looked bad ... but the automation looked worse.
What about this: - the "automation" isn't as involved or sophisticated as an A320 - (just a comment, not a comparison), and in this accident it is just a simple auto-throttle back-driving couple of moving levers.
We can imagine the scenario - upon failure of the #1 RA, both throttles would have come back to idle and they stayed there, (pushed up once, but returned again, if I recall), while the autopilot kept the airplane on the glideslope during which the speed bled off, for over a minute, by 40kts.
None of the three in the cockpit did anything until the stall warnings went off at around 400ft if I recall.
I don't think it's an autoflight accident. I would have to say that the automation did exactly as designed
and certified. I think we can all agree that a radio altimeter failure is, or should be, a complete non-event. In fact, they would even have known about the RA from the previous log snags one expects.
Perpignan, Sao Paulo, Strasbourg, Madras, Sochi, (but not Bahrain) may have had elements of automation accidents but I don't think AMS was.
regards,
PJ2