Clandestino, a couple of threads back, HazelNuts39 posted a chart that compared stall AoA to mach and altitude, and it appears that you either get stall warning, or stall ( can't recall which thread to look in) at about 4. (Big diff, obviously,, between warning and stall). Something disturbs me about your choosing to champion "rote rote and more rote" as a solution.
What is the point in climbing an aircraft to trouble shoot a problem when you have fewer parameters to mess with by trouble shooting it while straight and level?
Why add a needless performance parameter when trouble shooting a malfunction?
I am at a loss.
Look at what happens with the advocacy of "keep it at five degrees until infinity." (Or the bloody PNF finally gets the QRH out and opened to the correct page).
Pitch up to 5 deg, and leave it there.
OK, while trouble shooting UAS, you get a stall warning. (See above, if I can find that table, I'll repost it).
Now what?
Well, lower the damned nose, you just got a stall warning.
OK, warning goes away, but where should you now assign the nose? What pitch angle.
Doesn't it bother you that you got a stall warning for no good reason by keeping the nose up in a pitch climb for no good reason?
Result is that you just gave yourself a multiple malfunction, so rather than dealing with one, you are now dealing with two.
Ever heard of anyone doing that?
(The "you" here isn't Clandestino, it's a generic "you" pilot in the audience going through this drill).