Thanks for engaging the broader (off-topic?) view.
No problem - I don't consider it off-topic because in this game, context is everything and it is important to understand the context in which these systems were designed. With an issue that is as emotive as this to pilots, on a forum full of pilots, it's sometimes necessary to pin down what the technology should be doing to tame the wilder theories.
Although the airline wanted its full time use, (from "just after takeoff 'til the end of the landing roll", was the SOP in the first manuals until we simply fought back and got it changed), automation was just a tool, in my back-pocket to use "when-if". That was my (cantankerous?) attitude then, and it didn't change when I retired off the A330/A340.
Not cantankerous at all - prudent, I'd say. I suspect the engineers that designed and built the Airbus systems would agree.
Just to be clear because there's a lot of "I" here, I'm describing what was the case at the time, and not "holding court"...I don't like such behaviours but sometimes one has to speak out of personal experience.
And that's exactly the kind of experience that I and others on here need to build as full a picture as possible - keep it up!
During that initial period we saw a lot of "why did they [Airbus] do this?" moments. We received a few visits from AB during the introduction of the airplane into the fleet. At meetings which the entire group of guys (who weren't flying) attended, we provided our feedback from our experience. I don't want to fully describe the engagement and reception but it was dismissive and even arrogant and it was that way over a long period of time.
They certainly didn't do themselves any favours in the early days when it came to engaging with end-users by the sound of things. I'm glad it improved - about how long would you say it was before they did?
The documents posted by PerkyPerkins bear very careful reading
Will do so.