Originally Posted by
rudderrudderrat
So you think stopping the stall warning when airborne and IAS<60kts clarified their situation?
You're poking at cross tortoises* with that statement and I think you know it. The fact is that you are both talking about very different phases of the accident sequence. You're referring to a later event, where the <60kts stall warning inhibition may have worked counterintuitively, and that's a fair appraisal and reasonable point. Clandestino is referring to the point just after the apogee where the stall warning is functioning and the partial IAS, altimeter and attitude indicator were all giving readings that when combined should logically indicate to an airman that their aircraft is either approaching stall or indeed stalled, and that this went on for nearly a minute without apparent corrective action by the crew before the <60kts inhibition even came into it - as such, he's also made a fair appraisal and has a good point.
* - Best Spoonerism ever IMO...