Originally Posted by
CONF iture
Does not fit too well IMO : After the initial and rapid drop, the bird would have had to show some positive path to go from 34600 to 37500 feet.
Agreed.
I think Dani summed it up pretty well:
Originally Posted by
Dani
It is strongly recommended that you never use the bird in case of unreliable instruments. You don't know which part of the instruments, ADR, IRS is not working. FPV is generated in the IR part of the ADIRS (the combined computers, 3 on board).
...
QRH 34.07A:
One of the things that bothers me about some of what I'm hearing with regard to inhibiting controls during a Stall Warning - especially during an unreliable instrument incident - is that it violates a central tenet of the Airbus design philosophy, and something I think you would be on board with, CONF - namely that in the case of a failure, the pilots must have full authority over their controls based on the assumption that the pilots will be able to troubleshoot more effectively than a machine which may or may not be suffering from bad inputs.
I'm inclined to think that if a hypothetical pilot tried to trim, required that trim for an escape maneouvre and the control logic stopped them from recovering, that Airbus would be coming in for all kinds of abuse.
You can't have it both ways...