Originally Posted by
GerardC
Originally posted by "Dozy" With respect, all the sequence between 2:12-20 and 2:13-00 is a succession of nose down inputs followed by stall warning activations followed by nose up inputs (in reaction to the alarm ?).
Look closely:
2:12:28 - Stick *back* (between 8 and 16 degrees)
2:12:35 - Stick *forward* (16 degrees, this is the only correlation at a potentially recoverable altitude)
2:12:40-2:12:45 - Stick moves from *back* (between -4 and -8 degrees) at onset, through *neutral* to *forward* (The stall warning actually *stops* with the stick approx 4 degrees forward - correct behaviour!)
2:12:48-2:12:55 - Stick is *back* at onset (approx -12 degrees) and stall warning *stops* as stick moves from *neutral* to *forward* (approx 4 degrees), again apparently correct behaviour.
@ross_M : I'd recommend slogging through the threads to get yourself up to speed, but for reference, when airspeed becomes unreliable for more than a set period of time (25 seconds I think?) -> ADR DISAGREE mode -> ALTERNATE 2 LATCHED (which means Normal Law is out-of-bounds for the duration of the flight).
@jcj - spoken like a true weaselly lawyer, going for the deepest pockets. Airbus have already come in for criticism (and will be expected to share in the secondary causes at least) due to the pitot tube issues, and what the press are reporting as "blaming the pilots" is in fact explicit criticism of Air France and the industry in general. I think a new phrase should be coined for using the press to instill doubt in the public mind - "Doing an Asseline".
@RWA (below - sorry, don't want to spam the thread!) - It looks to me like they're just covering all bases, as according to the report, the A/P did indeed click off when ADR DISAGREE was detected, and Alternate 2 was indeed latched. It's possible that they discovered in the simulator testing that it was nevertheless possible to re-engage the A/P if the readings were similar but erroneous.