Originally Posted by
TTex600
In this accident we have an aircraft designed to be flown by computers
Not so - the Airbus FBW series were intended to be no more reliant on automation than any other contenporary type.
that suffers a GIGO computer issue that convinces the computers to give up on their job.
See Birgenair for an example of what happens when the automation does not know when to give up...
Which leaves the pilots with a system designed to be flown by computer and they now have no computer or at least not all of the computer.
See my first reply. The system is not designed to elevate the computer over the pilot(s) and never was.
BUT, it still wants to be flown like it is a computer because only PART of the computer system gave up, the rest is still working and it only knows computer sense.
Again, no - it wants to be flown like any other aircraft, with the caveat that the trim is automatic. In such circumstances, the only thing that needs to be remembered is that the trim is affected by the PFC inputs - if sustained for long enough.
If these pilots went straight from instrument rating to ATPL - and their ATPL experience consisted entirely of Airbus FBW types - then autotrim is the norm. The habit of trimming manually grew out of technical limitations of aircraft of the postwar period - it does not necessarily follow that later designs should mandate manual trim when the flight management automation disconnects.