Is it really that easy as you say it? What was then the reason for doing wrong?
You might read in the history of upset and stall recovery procedure development. Since 2004 it changed 2007 and 2009 (after AF447).
upsets and stall
Those changes and developing and refining the procedures and the asociated recommended (unfortunately only recommended) training would not be necessary according to your saying. Did you do stalls and spins in real aircraft or simulator? No, not approach to stalls, real stalls? I did it in real like some others. Itīs a expierience and you dont stay cool when doing it.
If you say the upset should not have happened at all, i might agree. But the recognition and the recovery from stall is some different matter. Two years ago when i mentioned the possibility of stall on this forum, it was rebuked as not possible. Probably AF447 thought as well that it was not possible, by the way also the words of the crew on the CVR.
Not possible? Any failure is possible with humans, also the misjudgement of 3 pilots.
I think Airbus convinced Airbus operators it couldn't be stalled so why not pull back on the SS because it can't stall even with UAS. The captain most likely could have handled it just fine with his experience but these guys couldn't. Hopefully we can let these guys learn how to hand fly an airplane if the autopilot goes south from now on. I can't believe we have reached this stage of automation dependency. It can be changed, you know.