NOD, stepwilk, aguadalte,
Pitch controls airspeed.
Power controls altitude.
I was reacting to above statements
Yes, in a climb or descent pitch=speed, but then power becomes rate
But otherwise:
In a prop: pitch=speed, power=altitude
In a jet: pitch=altitude, power=speed
When you fly an ILS and you get a little high, you don't pull the power, you put your nose down.
What I am objecting to is GB's notion that the 2 mentioned accident are attributed to this pitch/power thing, and what I object most to is his "advice":
Trying to control altitude with pitch is a loser, regardless.
Now back to the AF447 and all this discussion about the stall recovery "procedure".
Stalls aren't trained anymore, they are such basic flying skills that the only time you do them is as mandatory items during type conversions,
but on every type conversion from the very beginning of my flying career they are (with the exception of the option of flapextension on some types) the same: lower your nose (on the horizon will do most of the time) and put on some power and you're out of it.
I can't believe that a pilot with the experience that equals the AF447 least experienced pilot consciously counteracts a stall with pitch-up command.
The big issue here is what the pilots felt and saw, and the BEA statements are a bit puzzling here.
I don't understand the sequence of AP and ATS dropping of before the airspeed indications became faulty. You only get alternate law after ADC's become unrelaible but the aircraft was already in alternate law before the speed dropped from 275kts to 60.
I don't understand the low speeds; I would expect speed increasing with altitude with blocked pitots.
I also don't understand the pilots perseverence in maintaining pitchup command; in his situation I could understand a temporary wrong input, but why so long?
Personaly I think the BEA has not given the full picture regarding actual flight laws; I am also afraid some unknown pitch protection feature played a role, pulling the nose up, while we are thinking it was the pilots doing...
Anyway the pilots were most likely overloaded, spatially disoriented and fooled by their indications, as we all would be.
I don't think an industry wide change of flying technique "Pitch equals speed", as GB suggests, would have saved the day here.
And as much as I like to be a "hands on" pilot, I think the prevention of this happening again will be a technical/engineering solution and not a piloting skill.
BTW, no, I am not a FS wannabe