You have to balance Stall Warnings in extremely rare events with far more common nuisance stall warnings, in order to maintain confidence in the system.
True. But where that balance point is located is a matter of opinion (i.e, professional judgement). People can and do disagree. We tend to fixate on the needs of the moment and forget there is two sides to the story. Then it just becomes a game of ping-pong where we respond to one crisis by going too far to the left and another crisis by going too far to the right. It seems to me that the better course of action over the long haul is to pick a point of balance, any point, and then train around it.
I'm not sympathetic to the cacophony that wants to tweak software systems in response to every accident. The human being with their hand on the stick has to bear some responsibility, as does the entire safety systems in the corporation. Who trained this crew? Who gave them their line checks? Who oversaw the sim sessions and designed the syllabuses.
Edit:
The aviation industry may have just found their spokesperson. Notice his emphasis on proper training and having AoA displayed . We should all be grateful he landed that plane safely on the Hudson and became a hero. It seems his time has come....
I think his time has been and gone. Everything he says sounds good in theory but he fails to mention the critical factor of money. Sims are not cheap, sim sessions are not cheap, practice lessons in the plane are not cheap. How much money is a society supposed to spend in order to save 200-300 lives. Naturally, if it's your life at stake you want them to spend a lot of money. But when it's the other guy, maybe not so much. Whether it is explicit or implicit there is always a cost/benefit analysis going on. Always.