I politely disagree. Loss of control of the aircraft (due to an electrical fault no less) is second only to the aircraft actually crashing IMHO.
The crew were extremely lucky they were able to re-gain control, eventually.
ECAM Actions,
Locked Door is right. These loose and overly sensationalistic descriptions create false impressions of what occurred that aren't supported when you read the actual incident report.
Your response is a perfect example. Nowhere is it stated that the crew lost control of the aircraft or believed they had lost control of the aircraft. They certainly encountered difficulties with control, but those difficulties were not so severe that the captain felt a need to declare a Mayday and at its worst the bank angle was only 10 degrees. So, no "loss of control second only to the aircraft crashing" and no "re-gain control, eventually."
A likely guess is that the judders experienced were a function of the incremental movement of the rudder trim with each of the multiple FAC resets. The left wing low condition then coming about from the trim position as a result of the sum of those movements. Nobody's going to suggest that either condition should occur or is acceptable, but while disconcerting neither posed a serious problem to maintaining aircraft control.
While the reflex reaction is to bang the drum about those darned electronic airplanes, it is worth noting as some others already have, that many steam driven types have suffered far more severe unexpected control problems with far more deadly consequences. So, perhaps we should keep the scale of the event in perspective.
Personally, I'm more curious about how a GEN #1 fault could provoke a loss of both CM1 & CM2 primary instrument displays.
Regards,
ELAC