EMIT, great post!
Very nice example that the shortcomings of AF447 have hardly anything to do with the Airbus general design.
It is very clear that both accidents started due to horrible pilot error and violation of procedures. I don't think anyone would ever argue with that.
However, an accident is a lasting process and even after the initial mistake has been made, there may be some chance to save the aircraft and the lives of the passengers. Or not. It depends on many factors, including the "error tolerance" of the plane, and the amount and quality of feedback given to the pilots:
- The Boeing that was directed by its pilot into a TV tower, was nevertheless built strong enough and had enough backup systems to survive the accident, that at first glance seems to be 100% fatal. But they got lucky and made it back to the airport.
- The Airbus that stalled at high altitude, had trimmed itself into an AOA 40 degrees, with zero chance of recovery and survival. Obviously it was the pilot who put the plane into that condition. However, if the autotrim had not been working, there might have been some, slight, chance of recovery. If the full back sidestick position had been obvious to the PNF, then maybe, just maybe he would have found some confidence to stop the madness without waiting for the captain. Or maybe the captain would have noticed the controls full back and taken action immediately after entering the cockpit. Or, if there had been an AOA indicator, maybe the pilots wouldn't have ignored the stall warning. Etc... Even a slight chance is better than nothing...