Instead of crying out loud against Airbus' automation philosophy I rather would demand an accelleration alarm, giving clues to an aircrew when an aircraft is not getting speed fast enough
Please not another lady shouting at me at the most inappropriate moment!
There are way too many systems shanihaniganging between me, the aircraft and basic airmanship anyway.
It is somewhat inherent to the Airbus fraction that after each incident, especially those involving an Airbus, they are demanding even more automation and protections to help the already implemented automation, just a much as the involved pilots.
To me, Jazz hands has got it dead right:
Contained in the report is the FAA's response to the idea of developing a take-off monitoring system designed to prevent similar accidents:
It has "found the idea of these systems, with all of their inherent complexity to be more problematical than reliance on adequate airmanship".
This statement could be enlarged to the whole Airbus design.
Sure enough it is not the principal factor leading to the MEL incident. However the MFF concept with models with such a variety in performance, number of engines, fuel tanks, system and checklist variations simply increases the risk of a stuff up. The statements of the pilots concerning the acceleration feel is quite symptomatic.
The MFF concept is very integrated in the Airbus philosophy, therefore my criticism.