gums:
... maybe sub-law 2 (c) iv
I think that the Left Seat Pilot activated that, by calling the Captain.
Lyman:
The Three? ASI. This is about velocity, not attitude, or altitude. This would be expected with UAS, speeds being misleading, depending on rate and simultaneity of ICE blockages.
Lyman, I am not so sure about that.
PL: According to the three you're going up, so you go back down
I'd say, within the context of that passage, the gent in the left seat was referring to ALTITUDE and CLIMB, since SPEED display systems at this point weren't showing any useful information.
They were in UAS at the time, so there was no good info according to the three ASIs then available to them. Does my reasoning make sense to you?
Three being VSI, altimeter, and something related to the FD. (And I may be utterly wrong.)
PJ2:
However the guidance in FCTMs is clear, that a high descent rate that cannot be arrested indicates that the aircraft is stalled and the AoA must be reduced.
The temptation for me to run yet again down that rat hole of "why no AoA gauge in the cockpit?" shall be resisted.
What I'm saying here is, I think an A330 Level D simulator is useful and not irrelevant. Airbus and the BEA must have thought so because they replicated AF447 and in the Final Report even drew graphs in comparison with AF447's flight data.
Roger. Perhaps at the very least this can be grown into at least some procedural training for future crews? We shall see. The original simulators I flew for instrument training some three decades ago were hardly Level D sims, but I sure got graded on my instrument flying in them anyway. Some training was indeed achieved, though I got no style points.
Thanks for the course correction, PJ2. As usual, a pleasure.
