Hi,
Bear:
Certainly a rich "case study". A loss of this magnitude and the "surprises" requires attention.
Cruise flight is a challenge to remain "engaged" for the Humans.
I made dozens of high speed night long trips, solo in a "lethal fiberglass jeep" (non shock absorbing body). The technique used to be "calibrated aware" (during 10 hours single lane hwy) was to use the HF radio communicating world wide in phone (SSB). Much safer than hearing music, etc.
The interaction with other radio operators (with the car and HF background noise) allowed the right awareness.
I had two emergency situations (one transmitting and the other receiving -PTT off) without any difficulty to be "immediately inserted in the loop".
doing immediate corrections.
In one, a truck hit a horse and i saw the animal flying against my car. In the other an indigent was walking in my lane and it was required to steer (at high speed) so violently the "tires singed". The second almost causing a LOC. In both cases the other operators told my voice sounded different. Like as of gas Helium gas respiration.
I compared when used another (quiet) car without HF gear. Impossible to have the same performance.
Man machine interface is jargon. I used the concept since 1980 in a big project where i was responsible for "testability". I will consider your comment on terminology "trap".
The emphasis i put on the interface on 447 case is "manyfold":
1) Consensus must be checked.
2) The interface is important to the proper (and safer) operation
3) The concept is not sufficiently disseminated IMO
4) It can always be improved. Endless (almost). And must be K.I.S.S.
5) Affects directly crew performance, awareness, etc.
6) Automation (and complexity) requires better interfaces
So, it's a rich field connected to Human Factors. Interesting issue.