Originally Posted by rudderrudderrat
Do you not use your sensation of deceleration to adjust the amount of braking to be applied, or the sensation of delta g when changing pitch attitude to make it comfortable?
I absolutely do not, sir. For braking I use speed trend arrow, energy caret and ND groundspeed readout (GPS based) against outside visual reference to distance remaining to the exit I'm going after or the end of the runway. For pitch attitude rate I use that nice, big AH display on PFD in front of me. Sir, you heavily overestimate precision and usability of human senses of acceleration and balance in aviation.
Originally Posted by rudderrudderrat
I think you may be confusing spatial disorientation with sensed accelerations.
The second one, if not corrected by visual references to instruments or outside world, inevitably leads to first one. It's a basic human limitation no eugenics crossbreeding programe will ever be able to eradicate.
Originally Posted by HarryMann
that is, a CCTV screen may present itself more in the heads up realm.
And obscure part of instrument panel or outside view?
Originally Posted by HarryMann
Indeed, wasn't tghis just one feature of the trim-wheel.. not looked at, let alone noticed and responded too
Position of the trim wheel is completely moot point. Crew needed not be aware of trim position at all. If they pushed forward on the stick, trim would obligingly go towards nose down. Pilot pulled. And stalled. Kept pulling till the vertical distance between his aeroplane and Atlantic ocean became zero. So died.
Originally Posted by HarryMann
there is something wrong with cockpit, systems and instruments, in a human interface fashion, when such obvious things as you say, are ignored, overlooked or found difficult... by all 3 crew (even in a crisis, indeed especially in a crisis which should have got that beady eye scan going quicktime!)
If none of alleged 32 losses of all IAS indications in high level icing conditions on 330/340s before AF447 ended in PPRuNeable incident (that is, incident discussed on PPRune), then your point of systemic error certainly can not be completely valid. Yes, there was problem with sensors. Yes, airlines and manufacturers were doing something to solve it but they were not in a great hurry, after all, there were 32 crews that coped with the problem successfully. Now we have one that did not and it is absolute imperative (categorical, if you speak Kant) to find out why. It is "the Comet mystery" of our day and age.
Originally Posted by HarryMann
You cannot keep ignoring the obvious..
And yet there are many PPRuNers working overtime to prove this notion of yours wrong. I try not to ignore obvious but I do strive to ignore the oblivious.
What I find obvious from reactions on the PPRuNE is that the investigation of AF447 reminded some of the inconvenient fact that whenever they fly on the plane what keeps them alive is the knowledge and skills of the guys/gals up front.