Originally Posted by
Adlerdriver
ptarmigan,
Q-alpha video:
A circle of lights changing color and a mechanical voice calling attention to an airspeed problem.
What's the difference between that and either (or both) PF and PM noting the airspeed problem on their airspeed indicator while the PM constantly repeats "airspeed" until a correction?
Same question for the stall recognition and entry into stick-shaker. How is the "errant mental model" going to be prevented any more effectively? Why is a voice announcing "stall" and a red circle of lights is any more effective than a stick-shaker, airspeed indicator in the red-zipper and pitch at the PLI.
Pilots manage to ignore audible gear warning systems now and then. I don't see why this system is any different. It seems to me that it has the potential to put the PF or perhaps the whole crew into audio overload as they try to communicate effectively to resolve the situation with that thing blaring constantly in their ears.
The assumption is that if the aircraft had been barking airspeed constantly, the Colgan crew would have not taken the airplane to the shaker, and beyond. The Captain pushed the power to the 70 degree point, the pusher then broke the stall, but the FO put the flaps to 0. Clearly, the startle factor with confusion, was an issue in this accident.
For reasons of mitigating inadvertent activation, the stick shaker margin has been significantly reduced from its original design. In fact, in the patent, the auto-pilot was to remain on, and do the recovery procedure, not the pilot.