I really don't understand this automation debate... look up the accident statistics. ~ 70% of all aviation accidents in RPT resulting in death or serious injury are caused by operator error (pilots) and not by automation flaws. There is no evil autopilot that flys you into the mountainside. Unless you told it to do so.
Thousands of hours of single pilot IFR have taught me a few lessons. One of them is to always rely on, and crosscheck, the instruments. I've had a few spectacular instrument failures in IMC that could easily have resulted in my demise (hence categorised as spectacular), but never did all of the instruments cheat on me. So, before pushing on the stick like mad you might want to take a glance at that PFD... then at the standby cluster if the data you see still doesn't make sense. Then make an informed choice, and fly out of it. I'm not too familiar with MCC, but isn't the idea that the PNF monitors instruments and takes care of comms? I would hope that at least one of the two doesn't fall for somatographic illusion, and can snap the other one out of it. Unless, of course:
- they busted MDA knowingly, and not by just a few feet.
- frightened themselves when the TCAS RA went off (what did that tell them to do, possibly: Don't climb? Maintain vertical speed?)
- they now know that they will get caught busting the minimum.
- initiated the G/A
- were so low below the minimum that a piloting error resulted in the photographic evidence we have all seen.
It would be really useful if they published a decent subset of DFDR parameters to the public so we can make a more educated assessment of what was going on.