Hi,
No question, these guys are very competent designers, but the more complex the design , the more chance something unexpected and/or foreseen will eventually present, sooner or later.
The “testability issue” in complex designs is a big, complex and crescent challenge.
The flight envelope protection systems are reliable as long as the numerous sensors send the accurate and real information and also that this information is processed as designed by the different computers ...
"Accurate and real information" : Again a testability issue
"processed as designed" : The loss of IR1,2 and 3. Could a system like this one be designed to afford faults of this type? Or was a "black swan" like event, for EADS evolution?
But exactly the same thing can be said about the human way of processing informations. Our brain is far more "complex" than computers at analysing those informations transmitted by our senses, and our senses can be abused exactly the same way by any false/distorded information.
But our brain can “invent a new algorithm” and immediately apply it when required. And succeed, despite CRM issues during "extreme" situations.
The only false idea is if one will claim that we could make flying an aircraft "100% safe" in every possible situations. Automatisms would make them "safer" in most situations... but not extreme ones.
"but not extreme ones": Mostly if your design is highly optimized. And at extremes can present an unexpected "toll" for the operator. Just to remember us optimization is not "free".