Originally Posted by rudderrudderrat
Since the autopilot was engaged during that approach, why do you think the crew could "feel" the speed deviation through the wheel with the AP trimming the stab?
I don't. I took it just as an illustration of out of trim forces (which are usually but not necessarily introduced by autopilot), also significant was inability of the crew to immediately use manual trim to prevent nose from rising, which would not be issue with autotrim.
Do you mean "uncoupled sticks"?
Yup, sorry, my mistake.
Why do Airbus still fit coupled rudder pedals? Why not save weight and complexity with uncoupled rudder bars?
No savings there. Airbus was into preventing the pilots from going aerobatic since A300 - it is called flight augmentation. It is easier and cheaper to introduce limits into FBW than classic controls, that's why we have FBW since 320. Whether mechanical or electronic, rudder is just rudder, it's used for decrab and engine failures so no need to have sideslip protections as long as the pilot has some idea what he should be doing. If he keeps being clueless for prolonged period of time, even protections will be unable to save him.
Originally Posted by Dozy Wannabe
I suspect that if, say, a landing was performed in which a follow-through became necessary, then both the training Captain and trainee would be summoned for tea and biscuits, with the former being required to explain why they let the trainee proceed to that point.
Not necessarily. Depending on location (i.e. culture) it might end with note in the training log, air safety report or confidential report, a quiet word to chief pilot / head of training or training captain being reinforced in his opinion that all F/O trainees are indeed useless and should be administered beating until they improve.
It is worth noting that fight over controls does not leave a trace on QAR until it gets so extreme breakout mechanism gives up (if aeroplane is so equipped) and yokes go their separate ways while "Dual input" gets recorded and might get capt into trouble if it is discovered he made no attempt to elaborate the circumstances of it through ASR/CR. Darned Airbus. Darned.
Originally Posted by Capn Bloggs
You'd realise it normally doesn't work like that in the scenario the discussion is alluding to.
Normally and overwhelmingly usually it does, resulting in major non-event. It is perfectly normal for PPRuNers to assume that the most extreme events are industrial norm, after all they are the only ones picked up by media.
Originally Posted by CONF iture
Why you keep making such statements on things you absolutely have no experience on is a mystery to me ...
I can only speculate whether his intention was to demonstrate that a) experience is helpful but not prerequisite for understanding b) personal remarks that can be reduced to "I know, you don't and I'm not telling more than that" are not particularly helpful in developing meaningful discussion but if it were, he made it.