airtren;
I am not sure if it's helpful... In essence, the calculations are done very, very quickly, a lot quicker than the time relevant for moving a control surface between two distinct consecutive positions - 6 (microsec) to 9 (nanoseconds) order of magnitude. At that calculation speed rate, the calculations would be looking like being done in parallel, even if they were done serially.
Yes it is helpful, thank you,
airtren. I didn't state it as such, but it was indeed the speed of processor operation that I was thinking about in terms of the "disconnection two seconds before the CAS dropped" - that the speed of processors enable downline processors (FCPC's to be exact), to "know and act", (ie., disconnect the AFS) long before the data recorders, sampling at various but obviously much slower rates, "knew" and recorded the event.
It is a point regarding the reading and interpretation of flight data that I have been wishing to make since the beginning - that when it comes down to microprocessor speeds we cannot say what is occurring "in-between" SSFDR data points and especially when we are examining parameters with different recording/sample rates such as 'g', which is typically eight to sixteen times-per-second, and CAS which is typically (depending upon dataframe programming), once per second and sidestick position which is typically four times per second - we cannot always interpolate data points in such events because there is often sufficient time between samples for a parameter to reverse itself or go to a limit then return, the actual recorded values being "none the wiser", so to speak.
In response to your question
HN39, and I'm just exploring the idea I here that I began developing in my first response, (and it may be stretching a point, I don't know yet!), - that the drop in Mach, which shows up in the data as one second long and (apparently) "caught two seconds before the CAS" may be the result of the nature of flight data recordings rather than an actual two-second difference. There is a small dip in CAS at the same time the Mach goes to M0.26, but that may be looking for data that isn't there.
The question is really, Did the FCPC disengage the AFS two seconds before the CAS showed a drop, and if so, what engagement condition was no longer satisfied among those listed in the AMM, or is the above notion a plausible explanation?