Originally Posted by ptarmigan

Agree. It is one thing to solve problems from a system level, and quite another for those of us on the "sharp end" to have to deal with a poorly designed system. I have the "luxury" of working both ends of this. I have thought much about this and in the end, the reason others have survived comes down to a few issues:

1. Unfortunately, luck is involved to a certain extent. Some events just are not the same duration or involve quite the same set of circumstances. Like microburst events, there is just some random probability involved.;

2. In the cases where crews flew through without significant issue, in every case I am aware of there was at least one person at the controls with "legacy" experience, experience that came with years of flying prior to the introduction of augmented control systems and RVSM rules, where pilots still had to really hand fly a real airplane at altitude. No amount of hand-flying a FBW airplane will prepare a pilot for the handling qualities at higher altitudes without degrading it into direct law. It is just not the same animal.

Originally Posted by HIFLYR

So in number 2 you are stating that Airbus built a airliner that cannot be hand flown at altitude and ICAO and the FAA approved it's use. If that's the case I will just stick to the A300.

Originally Posted by row13please

If there had been a piece of yarn on the outside of each side window, couldn't that have cleared up their understanding in time to recover?

Originally Posted by Boris Badenov

Wait, ok, so...airplane is plummeting towards the ground, radar power, in the bars, still plummeting. We need to have a symposium to decide whether or not, you know, maybe they should be mildly criticized for not at least trying out lowering the nose? Is this for real? Is Alan Fundt hiding in the bushes?

Originally Posted by cardiomd

Exactly. At some point the groupthink and overanalysis needs to stop. Many other crews encountered the same situation as this crew and did not get into a deep stall.

If you are rapidly losing altitude and your attitude is level, your AOA is high. Simple as that. Either accelerated stall, or regular stall (around 1G). Bonin was fixed on "vitesse fou" and was convinced of the overspeed, but ultimately this was a poor recognition of a situation that should be clear to all pilots, not just pilots of their caliber.

Originally Posted by badflaps

Regardless, I say it is nuts to enter a 50,000+ C/B and not expect anything but an exciting outcome.

Originally Posted by ptarmigan

So simple in hindsight, but an incredibly naive post.

Originally Posted by cardiomd

So what else could it be? The dozens of pilots that entered identical situations figured it out. Sometimes the simplest solution is correct, and the same stick and rudder principles apply no matter what you are flying.

As a professional I encounter myriad potentially confusing situations, and am not at the bottom few percent, and try to help those that are. Sorry you feel this is complicated!