Originally Posted by
CONF iture
Fast process - The protected aircraft takes advantage of the electronics to get the maximum performance in the minimum time and outperform the non protected aircraft.
Real Time process to be more precise. Actual (as opposed to theoretical) Alpha Prot, Floor and Max boundaries are calculated constantly in real time. The values are functions - not hard-coded constants.
I have some unofficial references for now, but I will try to locate and post some official ones ...
I'd be as interested in the unofficial values (and where they came from) as I am in the official ones.
I would not be immensely surprised if his real intention was to go lower
I'd be very surprised - as the Airbus test pilots who came up with the scenario were very specific about not going under 100ft RA to maintain a reasonable safety margin.
Pulling harder early in the sequence would have made the aircraft that was too fast climb far too early to his liking.
With Alpha Floor disabled, the aircraft would maintain current altitude at calculated max AoA up to theoretical Alpha Max - it wouldn't climb, if the documentation is accurate.
Late in the sequence, the pilot, now fully aware of the approaching trees, but well aware that thrust was not coming as he expected it, delayed as long as possible the pull up request.
Can you confirm in the FDR trace?
(I'm still waiting for the source that gives you 2.5deg, by the way...)
Additionally, if the PIC was expecting thrust sooner than it was provided, then he was clearly ignorant of the properties of high-bypass turbofans. Either that or ignorant of the consequences (namely allowing the engines to spool down) of the thrust settings he ordered to make the approach.