Training, training, training
Salute!
Thanks for the nice words, Garage.
We had no simulator back in 1979. Didn't have one for another three years, and it was a POS.
We had a very simple FBW system with few "laws" or "protections" compared to the Airbus. Our "laws" were based upon maneuver limits and not "autopilot" functions like max bank angle, restricted pitch attitude, etc. Our "limits" were there to provide max performance while reducing the odds of a ham-fisted pilot getting into trouble.
Our autopilot was extremely limited in its authority. The GD flight control wizards didn't want something getting in the way of their system.
I see the reverse in the Airbus.
I do not want to see airline pilots "experimenting" with the limits of their jets, especially with 200 SLF's in the back. But I would hope that they would occasionally fly some planes that have classic stall characteristics and learn to cope with unusual conditions.
I had just arrived at Hill when we got the word that our neat jet, which could not stall or spin or....., could enter a "deep stall" due to the basic FBW design and the aft c.g. we used. So we saw the films and the test pilot interviews and we were PREPARED for when it happened to us!
We had little, if any, "feel" for mach buffet due to the wing design. So the Airbus crews had a leg up on us. But they also had a small envelope that allows for little error WRT mach and AoA. They had to be "better" than us in that regard.
My feeling is that better training will be the cure, and not a massive overhaul of the FBW system