Originally Posted by NoD
The "big red button" was precisely what caused Perpignan! The AoA probes froze at a sensible cruise reading, and despite clear indications as such to the crew (illogical Angle of Attack displays on PFDs), they proceeded to test AoA protections.
Time to read the report one more time Nigel ...
Originally Posted by vilas
I am not against the idea of having a single switch which knocks out protections
Good
But the idea of no auto trim in manual flight goes against the concept of AB FBW
I suppose some protections taking over for wrong reasons is also against the concept of AB FBW ...
Flight without auto trim for substantial amount of time will require some tactile feed back in the side stick.
Why that ?
It is almost changing airbus to Boeing FBW
And the problem is ?
Coming back to 447 what would have helped and has helped in some other such events is sensible piloting and following proper procedures. But some how that is not important to you.
Quote ?
You sarcastically used the phrase pilot proof aircraft
Certainly sarcastic as the FBW Airbus was here to correct the pilot's mistakes. Airbus just forgot to mention how the pilot could be required to protect the airplane against its own protections.
but you are actually demanding better pilot proof systems because you support pilot's lack of skill.
Quote ?
Continuity of stall warning sure nothing against it, they ignored it 50 times may be 51st time they would have heard it
Surely the captain would have loved to hear it ...
Auto trim just trims what you asked.
Not in this case, the auto trim would have trimmed hands free from the stick.
Should a pilot ask for upward trim in stalled conditions?
Should a system ask for upward trim in stalled conditions ?