JD-EE wrote:
...the stall warning was coincident with the abrupt reduction in indicated air speed. And I take it as dead wrong. You cannot stop an aircraft that rapidly. (I read it as "seconds or less" not "tens of seconds" for the "sharp fall" from 275 to 60.
I certainly do not read a left-up control stick movement such as to the left around the storm (context, remember) as being the precipitating event to a real stall with no drop in air speed followed measurable time later by the "sharp fall".
You are absolutely right. The first stall warning was false. The flight dynamics were fine (though I wonder why the computer caused the roll that had to be corrected).
If there was a first false stall warning, would it cause the pilots to question subsequent stall warnings?