Originally Posted by
HundredPercentPlease
Of course they should. And no doubt this thread will gain many more posts saying the same thing.
But the constructive question is: why did two pilots, qualified to the levels the industry requires, fail to do what they were required to do?
Why?
That's the question that needs to be answered, and then the problem addressed. It's no good saying "idiots, move on".
Is there an issue with non-yoke inexperienced pilots just pulling up when in trouble (training conditioning from W/S, GPWS etc)? Are these problems caused by a complete lack of high altitude flight training? Is this a language/culture issue? Startle? Fatigue?
There are times when we need to react in a very small number of seconds - e.g. big-time windshear on late finals. Then, if the PF doesn't react correctly, it may be a case of 'IHaveControl INPUT' as fast as you can say it.
This was not such a case.
After Kegworth, our response was training and procedural; identify and cross-check the failing engine and ensure the correct actions are taken.
After this, and AF447, maybe we need a more rigidly disciplined procedural approach to upset situations, stalls in particular. CRM! Cross-check and verify, verbally and clearly: what is our attitude? What is our airspeed? Have any systems failed? What are the correct inputs, make them, and confirm they have been made?
Such an approach may have avoided AF, and this accident; it would surely be better than the chaos and evident lack of comprehension or situational awareness evident from the CVRs of both incidents.