To add a bit more, it's interesting to note that at several points in the recording the pilots can be heard fighting the controls and apparently requiring force for that (https://youtu.be/VzCNKhFOPqU?t=25 for example). I know the two ariplanes are unrelated but this was also the case for 737 Max IIRC.
Yeah, when autopilot is engaged it requires a good bit of force to override it without just turning it off first.
I think the issue on the 737 Max was that there's been a known and studied system (called the MCAS IIRC) on Boeing planes that overrides pilot controls under some specific pre-determined circumstances and that system had been buffed to compensate for design flaws that were discovered too late to be corrected. On top of being faulty, that buffed system was also way outside of its initial intent and purpose (or rather the parameters guiding its operation were changed so much that it should have been addressed as a separate system and mandated specific training while they were trying to portray the plane as a simple evolution requiring no pilot re-training from earlier versions of the 737).
So, to me, it looks like yet another issue with a system overriding pilot controls for whatever reason.
More generally, this falls into that weird pattern of relying on external sensors which starts a chain of bad decisions leading to accidents (this was also a sensor issue with the Air France 447, although the chain was largely human this time, the pilots realizing way too late their repeated mistake).
https://internationalaviationhq.com/2019/11/23/language-used...
> The language used by Air Traffic Control is quite simple: whichever the pilot chooses to use. Normally this is between English and whatever the language is of the place that they are flying to/from. Although English is the only official language.
Radio English has specific alternative prononciations, which help avoid this, like "fife" and "niner".
There's also a defined cadence and order for many transmissions. If you read off the automated weather or a clearance in the usual order, it's easy to transcribe it. If you read it off out of order, it would sound the same [and just as difficult] to a non-pilot, but would be much more difficult for a pilot to write down.
However if it is clear enough and there is no ambiguity, the common way of saying numbers can be used, so zéro onze is acceptable. In normal conditions, no french speaker will mistake "onze" for "un", the latter should be "unité" anyways.
The main problem with "un" is that it sounds like "hein?", which means something like "huh?", the kind of meaningless words that punctuate conversations without even noticing.
The other day I asked for direction at a front desk and the lady told me to go to the office # "trente quatre vingt", I wasn't sure whether that was "3420" or "3080".
Pilots on international flights shall demonstrate language proficiency in either English or the language used by the station on the ground.
Regulation (EU) 2016/1185
(a) The air-ground radiotelephony communications shall be conducted in the English language or in the language normally used by the station on the ground.
https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/easy-access-rule...
Listening to the distress in the pilot's tone made me uneasy. This is probably a good indication that the situation was very serious.
What's going on with those Boeing airplanes?
I don't think it's only Boeing airplanes where the autopilot will resist your attempts to override it with manual control inputs. If anything, I kinda expect that Airbus planes are even more opinionated about that type of behavior.