Originally Posted by Machinbird
Clandestino, that wasn't a pitch attitude, it was a trim setting. Sorry if I wasn't clear
My bad, apologies. Anyway I don't think that trim played significant part in the grand scheme of things and whether A330 THS is a) too powerful b) barely meeting certification requirements c) somewhere in between is for aerodynamicist to answer.
Originally Posted by Retired F4
Those pages miss one vital information, the outcome of the actions in relation to airframe loadfactor.
There are acceleration graphs for all three axes in the appendix.
Originally Posted by Retired F4
There we need to look at the TOGA power input as well, because that would have had a great deal in increasing pitch and increasing g-load. And as it looks like, an unexpected one.
Acceleration graphs don't confirm that, especially longitudinal accel, at the bottom of page 111, which comes as no surprise as at high altitude a) thrust is quite lower than low down b) there's not much difference between cruise and TOGA. N1 trace is on page 108. It hovers around 100% untill 2:10:45 when TLs are pulled back. Suddenly, stall warning fires and TOGA is selected at 2:10:52. There's dip in N1 with lowest being 80% at around 2:10:50. - just as stick is pulled.
Originally Posted by Retired F4
After the initial unfortunate pullup and the following unloading hey did not recognize the stalled state, as it was against any training.
Or they were too distressed & distracted by "STALL STALL STALL STALL STALL STALL STALL STALL" to recognize they were about to stall. DozyWannabe made brilliant comment on forgetting how to recognize and deal with stall:"Like forgetting how to ride a bicycle".
Originally Posted by Retired F4
Correction followed, again the loadfactor was being kept below 1 g to get the nose slightly down and recover the altitude FL350.
No. Sidestick traces are clear. Very short excursion into nose down were way too short to affect anything. Aeroplane stalled at her apogee and never recovered.
Originally Posted by Retired F4
When approaching FL350 the level off attempt with full NU SS and THS and elevators also full NU the THS stallled and the nose dropped violently.
No. Have a look at TLA (thrust lever angles) and N1. Nose drop was due to power reduction. The aerodynamic stall of horizontal stabilizer, trimmable or otherwise, is way more violent than what is seen in pitch trace.
Originally Posted by Retired F4
The THS unstalled due to the pitchchange and grabbed air again, load factor got positive.
No. TOGA was reselected.
Originally Posted by Retired F4
I think it is not fair to say, they pulled all the way from the beginning.
Who said that? It was not they, it was him. He did not pull all the way, all the time but on average he pulled. He pulled when he shouldn't have. He died pulling. That's what RH sidestick trace shows. Is it non-PC to state in plain words what publicly available report has made clear through graph?
Originally Posted by Retired F4
There where mistakes, big mistakes like the initial pull and like not recognizing the stalled situation, but the handling of the SS had different motivations than sensless pulling.
Maybe it indeed had. For the time being, I can't figure out what was the sense behind it.