The Ray Davis angle was covered earlier in the thread more than once - here:
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/52803...ml#post8209613
and here (click the arrow to go to the original post):
Originally Posted by
DozyWannabe
Notably, the ACI programme got this wrong too - it was not ATC's discrepancy with the CVR, it was a misinterpretation of the DFDR. [Davis] seems to have treated the DFDR's transmit/receive flag as referring to the call from ATC (which would be almost 5 seconds adrift from the ATC recording and unacceptable). In fact the DFDR does not flag incoming, only outgoing transmissions, and the DFDR referred to the crew's response (just shy of 1 second adrift from the ATC timestamp, and within the margin of error).
All this and more is in the Airbus document...
One thing that I didn't mention before and may have some bearing is that Mr. Davis was hired by a UK TV production company making a documentary on the subject - not of the crash itself, but of Asseline's attempt to clear his name. The Airbus document explaining where Davis may have erred does not allude to this, but there is a distinct possibility that the information supplied him may have been missing some of the details mentioned in the above posts.
We also know that the Loral DFDR units fitted to the early A320s were later known to be susceptible to write errors when subjected to unexpected shock or vibration. The estimated value of +0248 RA at TGEN335, which CONF iture has helpfully provided in magnified form, is clearly erroneous - therefore it is within the realms of possibility that the previous value is also in error. That the video evidence clearly does not demonstrate an altitude gain of 10ft before impact with the trees supports this hypothesis in my opinion.
Originally Posted by
Chris Scott
Hi gums,
Just a reminder to you and others that, in AF447, Pitch Alternate Law allowed the THS to continue auto-trimming to full nose-up trim.
Hi Chris - I hope you find this interesting, though it's on a bit of a tangent. When we tested the AF447 scenario in an A320 sim (the best we could do as there were no A330 sims available), the autotrim was limited by the system well before we got into difficulties - to simulate the scenario, the TRE had to manually wind on full nose-up trim with the wheels. If such behaviour was consistent with the A320, it follows that autotrim behaviour on the A320 series is different from that on the A330/340.