Could some expert explain the following part of the
FCOM page
FlightControls Normal Law, 1.27.20 P2 Seq. 001 Rev03
Pitch Control / light mode
Automatic trim is frozen in the following cases
- ....
- ....
- load factor lower than 0,5gs
- .....
Would that not inhibit the trim to move ND when unloading enough (provided elevator authority is big enough)?
further down:
When angle of attack protection is active, THS is limited between setting of entry in protection and 2° ND(f.e. further NU trim cannot be applied)
Similarily, whe the load factor is higher than 1.3 g or when the bank angle gets outside 35°, the THS is limited between the actual setting and 2° ND
Shouldn´t that have prevented or hindered the THS to move to 13°ANU?
Im familiar, that the described paragraphs relates to normal law. Are those vital features lost in ALT LAW?
A few pages down another one causing headache:
Flight controls Reconfiguration Control LAWS
Alternate LAw Alt 1
Protections
Low speed stability
At low speed, a ND demand is introduced in reference to IAS, instead of angle of attack, and Alternate law changes to direct law. It is available whatever the slats/ flaps configuration, and it is active from about 5 kts up to about 10 kts above the stall warning speed , depending on the aircrafts weight and slats/ flaps configuration.
A gentle progressive ND signal is introduced which tends to keep the speed from falling below these values. The pilot can override this demand.
Bank angle compensation is provided.
...........
As IAS was incorrect from beginning and leading to AP /Athr disconnect, and later dropped to 60 kts, could this mode have been activated on behalf of the wrong IAS? How would the ND input by the system differ on behalf of an incorrect IAS (systems gets slow IAS, but actual AS is considerable amount higher, would the ND input be more pronounced then with real lower IAS?
Could this have tricked the PF to counter the system ND input (if this protection was active and the ND input was commanded by the system) by NU SS input and contributed to the high pitch result, when PF NU input overrode the ND input of the Low speed stability protection? Which was then possible, because pitch attitude protection is lost in ALt law?
And what is meant by the term "bank angle compensation is provided"?
I still dont get the whole picture of those law changes and the asociated protection changes or protections lost.
So please be patient, if my questions look uneducated or if the questions have been answered already. And it has nothing to do with A vs. B.