RetiredF4
Whilst I agree with some of what you have said in your post, here you say
Your statement suggests, that the PNF observed large SS inputs in the roll channel and tells the PF to make them smaller,
whereas in reality PNF adresses the PF to touch the lateral controls (in this case those would be ailerons and rudder) as little as possible, meaning to focus on other important things like pitch. That is quite different to your altered terminology.
I think you are making interpretations as from the BEA Interim report, he may have been making the calls due to the roll he was experiencing and seeing on the PFD.
At 2 h 10 min 16, the PNF said “we’ve lost the speeds then” then ”alternate law protections”.
The airplane’s pitch attitude increased progressively beyond 10 degrees and the plane started to climb. The PF made nose-down control inputs and alternately left and right roll inputs. The vertical speed, which had reached 7,000 ft/min, dropped to 700 ft/min and the roll varied between 12 degrees right and 10 degrees left. The speed displayed on the left side increased sharply to 215 kt (Mach 0.68). The airplane was then at an altitude of about 37,500 ft and the recorded angle of attack was around 4 degrees.
At around 2 h 11 min 45, the Captain re-entered the cockpit. During the following seconds, all of the recorded speeds became invalid and the stall warning stopped.
The altitude was then about 35,000 ft, the angle of attack exceeded 40 degrees and the vertical speed was about -10 000 ft/min. The airplane’s pitch attitude did not exceed 15 degrees and the engines’ N1’s were close to 100%. The airplane was subject to roll oscillations that sometimes reached 40 degrees. The PF made an input on the side-stick to the left and nose-up stops, which lasted about 30 seconds.