Originally Posted by
Lonewolf_50
Dozy, the algorithm bug that has been discussed at some length is why, below 60 kts, stall warning is curtailed even if one is stalled and weight is off the main mounts and main mounts are retracted and stowed.
That would be an algorithm bug raised in this incident.
I know it sounds like I'm being pedantic, but this is not an "algorithm bug", it is a specification that, with hindsight, needs revisiting. I suspect that if you dig into the design, it is not that stall warning is intended to be curtailed under those circumstances, it is because the sensors that provide the data cannot be considered reliable below that airspeed, and so the data as a whole is discarded until the circumstances make the data valid again (which is borne out by the return of stall warning as the speed picked up). The best and simplest solution I can think of is therefore to latch the current stall warning state when the data becomes invalid, and unlatch it when it becomes valid again.
@Organfreak - it's got nothing to do with being right, it's to do with the fact that left to their own devices we'd have "yokes r teh awesoem, sidesticks drool" from the same four or five posters over and over again with no dissenting opinion. I respect pilots greatly, but it doesn't mean that they're always right, nor does it mean that one should genuflect before them by rote.
@CONF - Or you could have had a split elevator condition (as in EgyptAir990) and a nasty crash.