I'm staggered that some engineer ******** found it impossible for a jet
aircraft to do 60kts so cuts a stall warning warning?
Jack, the explanation behind the stall warning behaviour is NOT as you believe.
Rather, it is as follows:
Below 60 kts, the AOA vanes are considered unreliable. For the stall warning to sound, the AOA vanes must be indicating the stall angle AND the vane data must be valid (2 CONDITIONS that must be met).
So, in this case, as the airspeed dropped below 60 kts, the vanes were showing stall but the computers stopped considering the vanes valid - hence the stall warning ceased (one of the CONDITIONS was no longer met).
CONDITIONS- this is one of the big areas where man and machine don't get along.
The automation has got hundreds of conditions built in. E.g. for something to turn automatically turn on, the conditions must be satisfied. For something to automatically turn off, the conditions must be satisfied.
For something to continue happening as the humans expect, all the conditions must remain satisfied. For something to NOT happen at the wrong time, some of the conditions must remain unsatisfied. You get the idea.
Problem is, however, that the number and combination of conditions is too great for any normal human to master. So when something out of the ordinary happens in these highly automated aircraft, the humans will often be unable to appreciate what is happening, but more importantly, what will happen next.