Machinbird
I don't think we'll agree on this and to my mind it's because of a fundamental difference in the way we're looking at things. I am looking at the actions of the PF as those of a being capable of making independent decisions unaffected by external factors. Your approach seems to be more deterministic - the PF is subject to factors which force him to act the way he does. To a large extent he has no control over what he does.
Whilst both views have a measure of validity the (shall we say) free choice view is a far better and more realistic model for explaining things. The interesting paper you mention is problematic in that it reduces the human element to a 'cog in the machine' as it were but this is symptomatic of the whole PIO approach. It is logically flawed as a concept in that it assumes no choice of action. As I have mentioned, as a piece of research it is woolly and far too broad in its spread. Choices exist but how we exercise them depends on our training, professionalism or the culture we follow. But and this is the important thing - we always have the choice. This is the case with AF447 - the pilots had choices but ignored them.
Sorry for the philosophical digression but I felt it was relevant in this case.