autoflight
This A320 accident seems related to conditioning and acceptance of known problems, i.e. FAC and weather.
Forget about pilot procedures, loss of control and the accident for the moment.
Can experienced airbus FBW pilots suggest other reasons why management, maintenance and multiple crews allowed this aircraft to continue to fly with a history of unresolved FAC problems?
With the limited information available, what percentage of the responsibility for flight with a dodgy FAC would be reasonably attributed to each of these 3 groups?
Alternatively, suggest who else may be responsible?
Suggested response examples:
1 Nobody is responsible for flight with FAC problems. It was just an insignificant ongoing issue. Since everybody knew about it, it was no big deal and not affecting the safety of flight.
2 Engineers 0% were seeking to repair this difficult problem. They were doing their best. Flights were 100% captain responsibility.
3 Airbus 50% and regulatory authorities 50% should know about these problems and should have grounded the aircraft for repair.
4 The airline was under financial stress, and it is OK to cut a few corners.
5 Management unwritten financial stress information filters down through the system. Anyone who makes FAC an issue will suffer, so it is 100% management responsibility. Untimately the captain has no responsibility.
6 Engineers 100% should have grounded the aircraft after a few ongoing FAC reports. Pilots 0% should be able to trust engineers.
7 Management 100%, maintenance 100%, captains who continued to fly this aircraft 100%, Experienced first officers who continued to fly this aircraft 50%, 200 hour first officers who continued to fly this aircraft 0%
8 Management 30%, maintenance 30% captains 30% experienced first officers 10%.