For RR
So, if possible*, would be useful to have early warning indications of UAS, conditions leading to Stall, etc.
RR, "early warning indications of UAS" doesn't make sense to me. UAS is a symptom of a problem. There is in play a very simple and effective tool that under discrete situations is prone to temporary malfunction.
Conditions leading to stall are typically warned by the stall warning device. The warning usually goes off before a stall.
* Technically speaking even the UAS condition seems be detectable "before" the Systems (Pitot scanning, etc.) process it. Freezing, etc. (most events) very probably are not instantaneous and could trigger an Early warning (of this very important parameter to "advanced planes").
UAS isn't just a symptom of freezing (pitot heat is pretty standard equipment).
Improving "Fault tolerance" and "Graceful Degradation" in order to give the crew "better chances" to timely understand and precisely act, very fast, ASAP.
Disagree with your assertion on what does, or doesn't, need to be acted up on "very fast." I find your assumption of ASAP out of synch with how
malfunctions are dealt with. Dealing with a malfunction is a deliberate process which typically precludes there being an emergency.
"Not to mention the ABSURD reliance on IDENTICAL (and statistically unreliable) AS sensors. This is not redundancy at all (in most situations)."
RR, it appears that the statistical reliability is at odds with your assertion. What is of concern is the known failure modes, and how to mitigate them.
1. Some manufacturers seem to have gotten farther along than others.
2. The regulatory bodies still have some work to do on that score.
I'd like to point out that pilots are trained to fly in a variety of degraded modes, because no matter how much you spend, things break.
Points on "graceful failure" not disgareed.