Originally Posted by A-3TWENTY
1.Why did they fail to use the UAS? Probably lack of experience , but I don`t want to expeculate.It`s going to be never ending discussion.
2.Don`t you think pitots getting iced is a design problem?? Airbus does , even before the accident when they recommended operators to change it.
3. About the sidesticks , well , is something you get used to , but nobody can say it is great not to know what your coleague is doing until it has already done.The proof is this accident. Was it a boeing and the other pilot would know from the very begining his coleague was constantly puling the column.
Note:I fly the airplane for almost 10 years and like it , but I assume it has imperfections
Most everything you are bringing up now, such as the sidestick vs column debate, has been resolved or at least discussed to a standstill in the thousands of posts in these last two years. I do suggest a review. In short, plenty of Boeings have crashed with the stick full back and the Airbus advocates will inform you of that very quickly.
The pitot issue may or may not have been a "design" fault; but I think everyone agrees the pitots were not up to the task, whether by faulty design or by failure to perform as designed.
Regarding why. Until we understand how and why they failed to recognize UAS and apply the proper UAS procedure, we will be doing those dead pax a disservice.
Whether it be training, procedures, background, experience, culture, social norms, etc, it really needs to be puzzled out to a reasonable conclusion. Otherwise, as the pool of aviators dries up, and more programmers enter the workforce, the potential for another AF447 grows greater every year.