TurbineD
With utmost respect, take a breath and consider how well both takata and Smilin Ed fold in with my projection of UPSET prior to UAS. A/T was reducing N1 due a severe Updraft, and combined it with a NOSE DOWN input additive. (takata/BEA) And the a/c lost 380 feet. ACARS shows a WINDSHEAR event early on, along with TCAS warn due exit of altitude approved.
Ed is a bit more complex, since the a/c ostensibly, with Inertial recovered data, showed a PITCH resting on 0, (Three degrees+ LOW), and power that was set correctly for an airmass that was markedly different in two seconds from what was indicated and what he felt. In short, the system was dynamic, the AoA was nine degrees delta PITCH, and power was at ~73? STALLSTALL. Sound familiar? This behaviour was patent on other 330's and at least one 340 prior to 447. One cannot with confidence refuse to review patent behaviour in this accident. BEA would have it, and as you know, I trust BEA to be true to BEA past performance.
The past will repeat, especially when there is no incentive to alter the march of the chariots. The aircraft is a long and heavy tube. Which accelerometer was which, again?