Re: Automation Issue
As already noted - it was a while ago and recollections may vary [so AC in case I am totally misremebering this - and life is too short to go look it all up again].
I thought the pilot was demonstrating the alpha protection on a go around (e.g. performing a landing, but then deciding to go-around, so push throttles forward and pull back on the stick hard, leaving alpha protection to avoid stalling). Unfortunately it was left too late and the aircraft continued to sink and went into the woods.
I recall that there was some criticism that the system was slow to spool up the engines (i.e. pilot pushed the throttle forward, but it was some seconds before the engines responded). I believe this was judged to not be a computer fault, but a natural consequence of the physics of engines (they take time to spool up). The automation was getting the best out of the aircraft within the constraints imposed by the laws of physics (plus some safety-margins) - sadly it was not enough for the situation. The (...) point is an area where Airbus and Boeing used to differ [not sure how they compare these days] - Airbus following a principal of the system providing firm protections, Boeing following a principal of "give the pilot what he is asking for" [CAVEAT: greatly over-simplified!].
For a nomal Go-Around the aircraft would normally be reasonably lined up on the runway and there would not be high obstacles in the way [though some airports may vary].
Biting the hand that feeds IT
