Originally Posted by Clandestino
That the 32 crews that didn't put themselves into stall when faced with UAS were just lucky?
Originally Posted by Diagnostic
Basically, yes.
Those previous 32 UAS events (which you've mentioned a few times now, in an apparent attempt to show that AF447 was the exception), were not all identical in their effects, and many of those crews also made various mistakes in handling them (some of which were the same as AF447 e.g. not treating it as a UAS event in the first place!). Look at BEA Interim Report 2, page 51 onwards (English version of the PDF) for the evidence.
Of course they aren't all the same, but one can't help noting a few similarities between the 13 incidences they examined more closely: IMC, cruise level, slight to strong turbulence, a/p disconnect, alternate law (in 12 cases). Sounds quite familiar so far...
"The variations in altitude stayed within a range of more or less one thousand
feet. Five cases of a voluntary descent were observed, of which one was of
3,500 feet. These descents followed a stall warning;"
That indeed makes AF447 sort of an exception, having quite involuntarily descended 48000 ft from FL350.
Whatever the other crews did - they didn't point the nose into orbit and kept it there for minutes a couple of seconds after they had to start flying their plane themselves. Please tell me that isn't considered a matter of luck these days?