Bubbers44, I just can't let you say that Bonin killed off all those people because he shouldn't have been signed off as an FO. I would agree that the airline and the French Regulatory Agency killed off all those people because they signed off Bonin and Robert as FO's.
It isn't fair to blame the pilots for the lack of training they received. In this airplane, you truly don't know what you don't know. The FCOMs are not adequate to reach a level of true understanding, a situation which leaves it up to the training department pass along a great deal of information.
There are numerous links on this site to the Airbus Flight crew training manuals. Those FCTM's include info not included in the FCOMs. I had never seen a FCTM until I clicked a link on this very site. That's the best example I can give to illustrate that all info is not available to the trainee.
Indeed ....
English final report page 211
After the autopilot disconnection, while the aeroplane was stable in cruise, several
pilot inputs significantly degraded the aeroplane’s kinetic energy. The rapid exit
from the flight envelope was not anticipated by the pilots, nor as it understood. In
the absence of any reliable speed indications, understanding of the overall physics
of flight at high altitude could have considerably helped the pilots to anticipate the
rapid degradation of the situation. The same applies to the overspeed phenomena
that have evolved with modern aeroplanes.
Consequently, the BEA recommends that:
€ EASA define recurrent training programme requirements to make
sure, through practical exercises, that the theoretical knowledge,
particularly on flight mechanics, is well understood. [Recommendation
FRAN-2012-041]
This BEA remark is ironic (physics of flight at high altitude) when we know that during a flight from point A to point B far the largest flight time is going at high altitude
And it is mainly the physics of this phase of flight which is not sufficiently explained or simulated .......