Why is "I have control" not "Mine?"

It works perfectly well if you know how to do it and set yourself some reasonable gates. Intervention training is generally part of upgrade courses and is a big part of TRI courses. When we do qualify TREs for base training we spend at least an hour each in the sim to practice all sort of mismanaged handling at low height, it just takes a bit of practice.

As Uplinker said bout the heat of the moment, sometimes there’s no time. An easy, intuitive solution to the problem they created is used by Boeing, Douglas (RIP) etc. Airbus put a lot of energy into human factors, but the uncoupled sidesticks (particularly in with the AP off) is a huge oversight, and fatal, as we’ve seen.

Sorry, but I disagree. You do have time to press the takeover pushbutton, it takes 1 millisecond regardless of the words You pronounce, if any. Being able to judge when it is appropriate to press this button is another question though and that comes also with experience, I believe we all acted with our thumb at least once either a bit too late or a bit too early (at least I did luckily without breaking anything). The basics is any time You are PM and need to act on the sidestick for whatever reason, You push the button.
Regarding the AF447 You are referring to, if You end up with 10 degrees ANU and TOGA at FL350 I believe (and much more important investigation bureaus believe) it is somewhere else we need to focus on rather than the mechanical connection between the sidesticks.

Capt presses red button, aircraft announces, "priority left", capt lands aircraft and discusses flare technique with first officer at bay after shutdown.
No "tea n' bikkies" with management as heavy landing avoided, first officer's 21st century ego takes back seat and everyone goes home happy.
Not difficult.

if you are flying Airbus why do you have to say anything? The aircraft will say that for you. Priority left is same thing. Just press the take over button, flare and land. Tell the FO to do a better job next Landing.

At 10’.........too late, all over red rover by then......

Not necessarily. All you need is to break the descent. It can be done at 10ft. But if you feel it's too late then you should do it while crossing 20ft. In the aircraft some one needs to do what is required to be done. If AP doesn't then pilot, if PF doesn't then PM has to. And the last barrier needs to be defined according to individual judgment. Cannot continue accepting hard Landings till the FO develops the judgment.

You are all obviously talking about the A320 variants as flaring at 10' on A330/A340/A350 will only drive the mainwheels into the ground harder! Intervention should have happened well before then.

Iceman, no! I didn't suggest flaring at 10ft. but ten ft as salvaging point in A320.

There's a difference between not flaring and not enough flaring. In not flaring at all the PF stick is in neutral so if the other pilot flares then it's single input and the aircraft response is normal. Not flaring enough the PF stick is out of neutral, here any input from the other side will be additive to it. Since flare and Landing is a visual manoeuvre if one is able to differentiate the change in flight path and adds his input accordingly then it will still produce the desired result even with dual input warning. The problem is if the PF for some reason pushes the side stick forward then the PM input will be cancelled and aircraft will continue it's Flight path. So the gist is if is you want to salvage the Landing you will have to do something in an approved or not approved manner. If the result is not satisfactory execute a GA. This the Achilles heal of Airbus FBW so perhaps the discomfort makes each one find his own solution.

I suppose flying allows one to get good at expecting the unexpected, but having got old, and sitting in an ATR watching a very able young man fly the sector, I was reasonably relaxed as we passed 200'. At some point, I'm not sure when, the concrete suddenly looked like it was coming through the windshields.

I'm not sure why it happened, or even how he managed it, other than it was flown, not mushing. What I do know is that with any delay, the aircraft would not have survived the impact. My frantic tug allowed one of those 3-point landings that don't allow the wheels to skid before spinning up. Despite my best efforts, exchanges in English were somewhat limited and I'll never understand, but it seems to me that a large aircraft, stacked with computing power, should be capable of protecting itself from pilot input that makes no sense.

As an example, was the 447 computer so deprived of sensory inputs that it couldn't protect the aircraft from nonsensical control inputs - or is there no such software? It seems incredible that systems wouldn't know inputs were illogical. I'm attempting to make a clear distinction between inputs and net flightpath.