I beg your pardon, Doze, but this is what my copy of the FCOM states:
The attitude correction for the gee command ( load factor) provides an apparent "attitude" command, but it just ain't exactly the way HAL is working to "help" you. Additionally, this implementation also provides apparent "neutral speed stability". The basic aero of the jet still has positive speed stability, and positive longitudinal static stability, but HAL is trying to "help" you.
Only place I can find anything other than a gee command is in Direct Law.
show me how I am not getting my view of the control law from the text above from the FCOM.
As you, Doze, have pointed out many times, the primitive FBW system I flew back in the stone age would not be recommended for a commercial airliner
EXCEPT FOR THE AoA LIMIT/PROTECTION!!! We also had a heavy AoA bias with the gear down to make the thing seem more like a "normal" jet.
Our gee command/AoA curve was designed for sustained turn rate at moderate gees - figure 5 or 6 gees. Think 25 degrees per second sustained rate with no loss of energy. And at 9 gees we got more than that for about two seconds until the AoA function kicked in - eat your heart out, heh heh.
For one more time, I iterate that I flew a no-kidding electric jet that did not have inherent static stability below 0.95 mach, yet had the apparent neutral speed stability that the 'bus has ( except when gear was down). We did not have the attitude gee correction for obvious reasons. We had no "direct law" except the manual pitch override deal when AoA was above 30 degrees and we were in a no-kidding deep stall, and that only gave us direct control of the horizontal tail. The 'bus has a lot more going for it and its pilots than the Viper, but ya gotta understand how the thing works and have some basic piloting skills.