Banjo
Stick pushers bla bla bla
The big picture is these complex machines are designed to be operated by appropriately recruited, educated, trained, current and competent crews
The point is that when an Airbus goes into alternate law, it has less stall warning and alleviation devices than a 1960s Trident. That is not an advancement in safety.
I expect that when the AB was designed, it was not expected that so many aircraft would degrade from normal law to alternate law. But here we are, yet again. It would seem clear that the degraded systems need a stick-shaker/pusher to back up the aural warnings (or a thrust reducer, to lower the nose).
As to Nigel, who says a pusher or thrust reducer would not be good on take off (
), this never stopped the Trident having pushers, and not having any problems with them. Besides, AB could easily limit the action to greater than 2,000 ft. And as far as I can see, this would not add weight or cost to a standard AB. I am sure that both stick push and thrust reductions, for approaching the stall in alternate law, could be made as a simple software change.