I,m not fishing for compliments, however an "old dog and grumbling grandpa" and even a retired one (also my brain is still working) had this possible chain of events mentioned long ago, fact being with little attention of the younger "modern" pilots. I might have used the incorrect wording though.
One Question being, why they did not rely on automation?
Hi franzl,
Yes, I think yourself, PJ2 and perhaps others mentioned the possibility of somatogravic illusion earlier on and refrenced the GF crash. It had crossed my mind too as I've not been sold on the tail first contact hypotheses, but until Sitting Bull mentioned the info reported by the Alitalia crew there was nothing that particularly pointed in that direction. Now, while hardly the only possibility, there is a "fit" between facts reported by competent observers and the results of a somatogravic illusion response, so I think it's worth pointing that out, particularly in response to suggestions that the cause is rooted in automation or approach flying skill degradation.
Why they didn't rely on automation? If, and it is an "if" somatogravic illusion is the culprit I think that the answers would be both the powerful effect that it can have along with a lack of specific training to identify the potential for it to occur and the best piloting responses if it appears to be occurring.
The question, wether the modern pilot used to max extent of automation is fully capable of taking over the workload of the computers (caused by deliberate act or by malfunction) concerning thinking, planing and handling (like the "old dogs" had to do due to lack of reliable automation) is legal. And nobody asking this question is wishing back the old days, but remembers his own flying skills.
That in itself is a totally valid question. In the end an airplane is an instrument and the proficient pilot needs to know and be capable in all aspects of its operation. It is fair to have concern over possible degradation of hand flying skills without conflating the value of those skills with a perception that safety would be improved by a return to a greater emphasis on hand flying and a reduction in the levels of automation available or commonly used. The two concepts are not corollary and joining the two, in my opinion creates a misperception about what needs improvement and what provides the greater overall benefit to flight safety.
Tschüss!
ELAC