Assume UAS. Without Airdata, the a/c cannot be autoflown. A new Flight Law is entered, and the PF is the only way to get home (if but temporarily).
Fine. This aircraft has a reputation for being docile, easy fly, and hand flying no problemo. So why no auto flight? Again, no reliable Airdata.
So on the one hand, UAS is not a 'big' deal, but big enough that the a/c cannot do it. Just fly Pitch and Power, one hears.
Fine. Isn't Pitch and Power the easiest (basic) way to fly? So why no auto P/P?
At altitude, in those conditions, PJ2's post describes the hazards of flight re: control damping and authority.
Fine. With turbulence, the a/p has the same airmass to deal with as the Pilots, subject to overcontrol, sensitivity, g and PITCH. So the a/p can do these, but not something so simple as PnP? PnP is what it has been doing since ORARO, with flourishes, and a nice ride?
It is the fundamental duty of autoflight to keep the a/c stable and consistent. What about the challenge of UAS has nothing to do with what an a/p needs to do every day, all day long?
Yet the PF has no access to the accelerometers (except by display), and has to deal with natural conditions that don't affect the a/p one bit?
IE Dark, no constant updata, distraction, and ECAMs?
For once and all, can someone address why it is impossible to consider that the autoflight couldn't (keep up) even with reliable a/s, and UAS may have been the result of insufficient response in the auto regime? (turbulent air mass, discrepant instant baddata?)
someone, splain.