Originally Posted by 3hole
the notion that a "pilot" can be so confused by his training that he's forgotten how to recognize and recover from a stall, is, to me, NOT "sophistication".
- it depends on your definition of 'sophisticated', actually, one of which is "deceptive; misleading.". Which takes me right back to my age-old proposal in my other thread that the fault lies with the training system which is NOT ready for the automation systems, and 'encourages' a belief that the 'system' will protect you.
As gums and bubbers have eloquently stated, your whole pysche and training 'spin' tells you that the system cannot let you down, just follow the procedures (in this case Airbus have 'taught' you) and you will be fine. As Machinbird says, I cannot see anyone 'brought up' in the modern/AB philosophy seeing the need to make such a drastic change of attitude as that which was required. After all, this aircraft CANNOT stall.
I still await ANYONE who can tell me how autotrim relates to 'received' IAS input OR what baro indications the crew actually were left with. Of more interest than a hairy bat?