Lyman,
In the absence of PF input, NU, the a/c still trims for 1g. This means UP elevator.
If the flightpath is one of decreasing airspeed, yes.
With or without PF input, the a/c Stalls.
Unless the PF commands a downward change of flight path.
You say, the elevator moves in response to the pilots input. It doesn't, it moves as a result of input by the computer. The computer commands NU, to provide 1G. The pilot provides a collateral input, NU. There is essentially a consonant, or "dual" input.
This is getting into semantics.
RetiredF4,
The pitch command changes gradually from a pure g command in high speed to a pitch rate command in low speed.
The response of the airplane changes. For example, in a steady state pull-up at 1.5 g, the pitch rate is 5.5 deg/sec at 100 kTAS, and 1.4 deg/sec at 400 kTAS.
The changeover point being around 210 Kts.
It was 400 ft/s in the first application, but may vary as required in other applications. At the changeover speed the nz contribution to the feedback is equal to the pitch-rate contribution. Using that value in the above example, the pitchrate contribution would be 70% at 100kTAS, and 37% at 400 kTAS.
That does noit change the Nz-law, without outside input the aircraft maintains 1 g flight and is therefore flightpath stable.
That is essentially correct except that, if the airspeed changes and the flight path is not level, maintaining 1g means that the flight path changes (slightly).
To maintain 1g flight ...
Agreed.
The timeframe (...) is after stall warning 2, when the THS trim started to move NU. And this movement would have happened also with SS neutral, as in NZ-Law the aircraft tries to maintain that 1 g (tries to maintain the flightpath.) Question remains though, would it have moved in the same timeframe without the help of NU SS input?
Probably yes, but much more slowly. At 2:10:49 the pitch attitude was 6 degrees and the rate of climb 1100 fpm. Without SS input that RoC would have been maintained until the airplane stalled.