@gums:
"HAL" told the crew that - for the moment - it couldn't deal with the speeds, and the PNF seems to have been aware of that fact. The flight control system never did anything untrustworthy - the annunciator system used the <60kts value to inhibit Stall Warning (albeit very late in the sequence), but I suspect that it would have been the same in any other modern type.
Maybe I'm expressing myself in a way that's hard to understand, but I'd like to know where you get the "Dozy trusts HAL" idea from, when it has no bearing on anything I've said.
As soon as Alternate Law is triggered and latched - even if the AoA protections remain in force - they cannot counteract a sustained PFC input because the system is designed to defer to the human pilot if Normal Law cannot be maintained. If I recall correctly if the aircraft is flying the soft protections will attempt to return the aircraft to a safe attitude if the stick is released, but in this case the stick was never released.
It's possible that the PF either never heard or failed to understand the consequences of the PNF's "Alternate Law" call, but the idea that the PF believed the hard protections were still active can never be anything more than speculation.
@CONF iture - reference? [EDIT : You're right - NAV ADR DISAGREE came sometime around 02:12:44 - so it must have been an ADR FAULT triggering ALTERNATE 2. Nevertheless, the PNF seems to have been aware that pulling up was not the correct response...]
Last edited by DozyWannabe; 14th Sep 2012 at 01:03.