COnf:
4. stall warning is not stall itself - a fact cheerfully ignored by those unable to tell the difference between "approach to stall recovery" and "stall recovery".
It does not matter, both should trigger the very same procedure (the new one) NOSE PITCH DOWN + THRUST REDUCE
Conf, I will presume that your point is for stall at high altitude, or for an aircraft with underslung engines, since
At high alt/high mach, overspeed can be a risk
Reducing power on underslung engines removes some of the "pitch up" input from thrust vector being below, as opposed to coincident with, the longitudinal axis.
As I ponder the point you make, it seems a simpler response to lower the nose, as doing so you will decrease AoA without touching power.
However, if you reduce power => you reduce thrust => decrease airspeed / Mach ... so ... might your power reduction risk ofsetting a nose reduction and thus keep you near stall AoA if you are trying to avoid stall?
IS part of the nose down/power reduce response intended to cause an altitude reduction and thus change the performance environment of the aircraft?
In chewing over your point, I conclude that your recommendation is confined to approach to stall/stall in the high altitude / high mach environment.
Do I understand you correctly?