Quoting EMIT:-
"From where suddenly come the ideas that the attitude indicators were giving false indications?"
In my case, from the very first press reports on the accident, plus subsequent amplification?
"Wouldn't such a thing, massively important, have been reported in the BEA note?"
You'd have thought so, wouldn't you? But the note doesn't mention it at all. And all the original BEA interim report said about them was, basically, that they aren't supposed to have anything to do with any investigation
:-
twenty-four automatic maintenance messages were received between
2 h 10 and 2 h 15 via the ACARS system. These messages show inconsistency
between the measured speeds as well as the associated consequences.
1.16.2.5 Partial conclusion
At this stage of the investigation, the messages analysed allow us to conclude
that various monitoring processes were triggered. At least one of them
corresponds to an inconsistency in the speed measurements. Several of the
cockpit effects messages recorded could correspond to the consequences of
these monitoring processes:
AUTO FLT AP OFF,
AUTO FLT A/THR OFF,
AUTO FLT REAC W/S DET FAULT
F/CTL RUD TRV LIM FAULT,
F/CTL ALTN LAW,
FLAG ON CAPT (F/O) PFD SPD LIM,
FLAG ON CAPT (F/O) PFD FD.
Note: the CFR was designed to facilitate maintenance operations; it is therefore not
intended to be used for investigation purposes.
"The "failures" that are distilled from the ACARS messages have been explained a long time ago....."
Fine then - apologies, I must have missed it. Please post a link to the 'explanation' you're referring to?