Quote:Xcitation:
Indeed, a major puzzle why ignore the stall warnings for 3 or 4 minutes? In the entire transcript of the incident not once was "stall" or "décrochage" ever mentioned by any of the 3 pilots.
Reasons
1. Both FOs overloaded for 4 minutes and did not hear it.
2. Both FOs heard it and ignored it as being false (as per recent QF72 etc malfunction.) But why not verbalize that?
3. Both FOs didn't understand it/unfamiliar "<Stall><Stall>. What's that?". Would the french décrochage or flat line tone been better warning? Were they verbalizing that they did not understand it. Perhaps confused in the heat of the moment. Or did "What's that?" refer to something else.
4. Both FOs heard it and accepted it and did not know what to do. Again why not verbalize that?
5. PF believed he was applying a correct procedure of stick back, apply TOGA and airbus protections especially alpha prot would prevent the bus from stalling with minimal height loss.