Hello
BOAC;
Would you expect that as a 'corrective' input?
No, I would not - my reaction would be the same as your own, for sure. But that doesn't mean it didn't happen. But even a smaller SS deflection is going to have quite an effect - I suspect that the two stall warning "blips" occurred as a result of momentarily exceeding the Stall AoA threshold.
I disagree on the 200t being immaterial - you speak of momentum - yes, 200t of it to get moving upwards. It does not matter what the steady state S&L match is, you still have to start the elephant moving upwards from his seat!
My thought was, relatively speaking, the airplane is, in terms of available lift against weight, able to respond to small control inputs and climb very rapidly. It doesn't take more than a couple of seconds to start the change pitch, and my guess is it took less than 10" to get to >10deg from a nominal 2.8deg[/I]), given the amount of excess energy (in forward momentum) available (and spent) in the trade for altitude.
The more times I read the interim, the more unlikely the whole scenario becomes -
. . . .
I see 1.75g quoted as an over-speed FCS 'increase' in applied PF input. Are we close?
On your first comment, yes, agree. We need the data. Hopefully it will come soon, and with as much completeness as possible. One your second re gee, I suspect fairly gentle...1.3g's, perhaps, for the pitch-up?
Bearfoil;
Re S&L flight, I am partially inferring from reading in the BEA Reports and partly drawing from experience. At 02:08:07 the PNF suggest going, "a little left." There was no hint of any changes in altitude and I suspect and infer but do not know, that whatever turbulence that may have been encountered was light, possibly slightly more with no material effect upon altitude or pitch attitude. At 02:10:05 the event began, with an AP/AT disconnect and moments later the ECAM messages were displayed, (we infer from the existence of the ACARS messages - I doubt if the the ECAM messages were recorded). There are no strong reasons to consider that the aircraft was not in stable, level flight and that the pitch up left (departed) FL350 in a climb. Remember, the altitude parameters were available and valid until, (as I know some have suggested), both roll and AoA will likely have affected altitude readings somewhat). There are no suggestions in the BEA Update of any change in altitude (downwards) which the PF was reacting against. That would have been material to the update and it was not said.
My sense of it is we will see stable, level flight in the data when it comes out. If the A330's sidesticks are the same as the A320's, the fore-and-aft movement is +/-20°, the lateral movement +/- 25°. I think we will see a five-to-seven degree, (out of a maximum deflection of 20 degrees), aft movement of the sidestick followed a neutralizing of the SS, then a strong (perhaps 10deg) forward ND movement and at 02:10:51 likely a 15-20deg aft movement of the stick, continuing for some time. I think the next ND movement will be mild, less than 10deg ND where the speed begins to pick up.
Please bear in mind that I am not "predicting" values so much as conveying a sense, from experience in the airplane, of what these movements may have been. I'm not interested in "getting it right" but I think there is some legitimacy in providing a sense, a "metric" so to speak, from experience, of what is likely and what is not likely in these various notions. It is not a matter of being right or wrong because very soon we will know. As with others, this is being assessed with the available data and so, as with all extrapolations, must be viewed with great caution.
Regarding pitch up, you are correct in stating that SOPs generally require a reduction in pitch attitude, (and TOGA thrust), if a stall warning occurs. The pitch-up may be explained in a few ways. One scenario is already discussed, (UAS drill response), the other is a "startle" reaction which would not be a sustained back-SS. Other than those scenarios which we either know about or have discussed, I can't explain the pitch-up or the back-SS in the descent.