Originally Posted by gums
The Viper could not enter a stall in the conventional sense due to the AoA versus Gee pitch command implementation.
It's pretty alike to the way the Alpha protection works on FBW Airbuses. However, Viper is supersonic combat aircraft and A330 is long-range passenger transport, so their design specifications and sensors/flight controls architecture are certain to be different, even if end results are somewhat similar.
Originally Posted by gums
And I am still not convinced that the AoA protection was working normally.
That's the point. It worked as designed - it shut itself down. Why in the hell would it do that? People more intimately acquainted with intricacies of Airbus protection systems might come up with more precise and more comprehensive answers, I'll just stick to one that first crossed my mind: AoA max of Airbus wing is quite affected by the mach number so AoA prot needs to "know" actual mach number to modify its activation threshold. threshold applicable to cruise might restrict flare capability, threshold applicable to approach would not activate protection at high mach before the aeroplane is stalled (provided G limit is not reached first, that is). In situation where there was no valid TAS, and therefore no mach, there could be no protection adjustment so alpha prot was lost.
Loss of protections is not such a stark condition as its name would imply. Airbus protections don't interfere with flying as long as one stays well within the envelope and are only very seldom met during regular flying. When they're gone, one can rely only on one's own wits to keep him from transgressing outside the flight envelope but that's what pilots have been doing since there were first pilots.
All the talking about three different aeroplanes in three different control laws is pretty non-sensical. Aerodynamically and performance-wise, it is the same aeroplane and flight controls feel is not much different. At least it is so in level D sim and I yet have to come across level D that doesn't closely match the aeroplane's behaviour - within the territory where test pilots dared to go.
Originally Posted by PuraVidaTransport
The engines (thrust) was what kept them in the nose up attitude and in the stall, not the pilot sidestick commands OR the THS.
Chances are, it were all three that kept it stalled but I doubt we'll find test pilot brave enough to check exactly how much each of them contributed to the demise of 447.