Originally Posted by Gums
I also agree with a few here, that in "direct" law the inherent static stability of the Bus might have helped. In other words, to maintain an attitide you would have to push/pull and the plane would try to achieve some AoA based on cee gee and its basic pitch moment capability of the elevator/THS. Then you trim the sucker. Why this guy thot that 10 or 15 degrees of nose up attitude was acceptable is a mystery. Even in a high-performance jet fighter, those numbers were unacceptable for basic IFR or even VFR cruise. Hell, two or three degrees was about all I ever expected in mild turbulence.
Hi Gums.
The more I think about it, the concept of ALT2 Law appears to have a serious logical flaw. It leaves the crew with no AOA/speed related pitch protections and no sense of what speed the aircraft wants to fly at. At least in Direct Law, the aircraft has a speed that it wants to hold. The flight path stability that Alt2 provides can be a serious liability for the inexperienced as well as an aid aid for the competent pilot.
In other words, you have less going for you in ALT2 LAW than you do in Direct law. That is anything but graceful degradation of the system.
They ought to call ALT2 law the "You had better be a good stick" Law.