The stall warning is inhibited on the ground AND with IAS less than 60 kts (to prevent false stall warnings during the take off roll).
If airspeed is > 60kts or aircraft in flight then stall warning was activated.
If AB used the same logic, maybe the Captain would have diagnosed the problem correctly
Your suggestion might be valid if the certification authorities / manufacturer / design process determined:
- It is worth giving a Stall Warning from a vane that requires, let us say, 60K to give a valid output, yet IAS appears to be <60K (i.e. we want to give the warning regardless of being outside the vanes limits?)
- That it is worth giving the warning regardless at <60K WoffW since if we are <60K we are stalled (or if not, shortly will be!)
- That the various fault sequences / trees are followed
I think we are firstly jumping to fairly firm conclusions from a short interim statement from the BEA, but more importantly, zeroing in on one unusual accident, trying to close percevied design loopholes from that, and not looking at the wider picture.