Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50
This takes me to BOAC's question about a crew allowing their aircraft to head into orbit: what airline pilot, flying at altitude, would find a 16 deg nose up attitude something other than abnormal?
Why would either let that nose attitude sustain?
This goes back to what may not be answerable: what did each member of that cockpit crew see in front of him, and what was he paying most attention to?
Originally Posted by DozyWannabe
This is where (and why) I keep going back to Birgenair - where a very experienced pilot stalled and span his 757 despite the fact that the only fault on the aircraft was a single blocked pitot tube.
From a pilot's point of view, I can understand loosing time or even being fixated and
not physically doing what I'm supposed to do. In the case of AF447, however, BEA report suggests a
persistent positive action from the PF. An action that is bewildering given the circumstances.
I'm with
Savrin here. The a/c systems need full scrutiny, if only to understand what made the pilots react the way they did. The problem with explaining away PF action is that it is just too persistent.