A lot of interesting reading and theories.
A quick and incomplete look at some stall accidents still bothers me.
Birgenair 757 stalled due to pitot problems and the pilots not proficient enough to recover, although the aircraft would have permitted. Reasons known and uncontested.
Cali AA 757 stalled due to the non self retracting speedbrakes and the pilots not realizing it. The aircraft would have permitted recovery. Reasons known and uncontested.
330 testflight in Toulouse stalled due to pilot mishandling leading to an unrecoverable stall. Two experienced pilots. Still some debate if the aircraft would have been able to save, still debates about the electronics/protections handling.
320 Perpignan stalled due to THS behavior. Normal pilots. Still some debate about the recovery possibility or not.
Qantas Perth. Aircraft apparently didn't obey pilot orders, recovery succeeded. Still debating about the real reason of the electronic/protections behavior.
AF 447. Enormous debate about the THS, crew performance. Unsure if the aircraft was recoverable.
The troubling questions are still looming, and they are all on AB.
Boeings might fail just as much, but it seems that they would be more easily recoverable in upsets. I can't dismiss the ugly feeling that in upsets the possibilities in AB are less and it would take almost IT trained astronauts to be able to realize and apply the multiple tasks, switchings or many and different procedures to recover.
Airbus needs to clean up their act. Even Joe bloggs like me should be able to apply and memorize a simple and uncomplicated task for upset recovery.
At the moment this seems unrealistic. Therefore all debates are basically futile, because any finding will lead to the perpetual "they should have known" which seems almost impossible.