ECAMS:
I don't see why the AP pitched UP due to reducing airspeed. Worse still, it seems clear to me that the pilots had several STALL warnings after AP disengagement and prior to it actually dropping like a brick. What is even more perplexing is given that the pilot arrested the 7000 ft rate of climb, why he then proceeded to apply aft stick input and raise the nose?
ECAMS, considering the human "stimulus - response - conclusion" chain, did the pilot think he was dealing in a high speed stall? (As I don't know the difference in "feel" that may be an idiotic question. Some weeks ago the difference between the two was described in one of the other threads).
That said, based on how FDR records info (??) will anyone know what the PF was looking at? It is possible (not sure how likely) that his display and the PNF display were not showing the same information ... at some point control of acft changes hands, perhaps display anomalies contributed to that?
(Used to fail other pilot's gyro during instrument checks during a turn to see what people did. Was very, the variety of reaction, but I never had to take control back ... though had to talk a few folks back to wings level ... )
@ torquelink: significant difference being quite a bit more altitude and time, and experience, available in this scenario. In Colgon case A/S unreliable did not figure into the scenario, IIRC.