Originally Posted by mm43
Consider the pilot knows what's best and demands NU on SS, hence the Elevators follow and as the airspeed is bled off and the 'g' commanded is not being met, the THS commences its journey. It knows no better, only that the pilot knows best.
But the logic is biased here as in Normal Law the pilot can keep pulling on the stick and still the THS will stop moving further up as speed reaches alpha prot. The system does not permit the pilot to know better, but on known sick data, the system is allowing the pilot to know better by "assisting" him when actually it should simply retract as it did by commanding AP A/THR and FD to withdraw.
The point of all this is that if the aircraft during this UAS event had actually gone into Direct Law, and the THS was limited at 3° NU, the aircraft when handled the way it was would still have stalled. Owain Glyndwr has pointed out many times that the Elevators [alone] were quite capable of providing whatever NU/ND was requested.
Of course it would have stalled, but never to that extent, and with much better chance to get an exit point.
Give a reason why it would be indicated to trim further up approaching the stall or already in it ?
The advantages of Direct Law were
significant.
Sophistication helped to set the trap.