The aircraft will have configurations that are known to be good. For example a particular thrust level and pitch at cruise that should avoid overspeed. Or usi

The aircraft will have configurations that are known to be good. For example a particular thrust level and pitch at cruise that should avoid overspeed. Or using a normal ascent profile at lower altitude, or full thrust in a go around. It should be perfectly possible to divert and land without functional air speed or AOA sensors. And there are other good sources of independent data. For example GPS/radar ground speed, the engine stats, vertical speed, wind data etc. Although I agree that some pilots in the past have not performed well with these kind of complex failures. And criticially the solution could be an argument for more automation or less automation. And that plays into more political discussions about the future. I wonder if a third option would be to report data in real time to the manufacturer. Have a mission control style setup that is trained to rapidly analyse data and give immediate advice to the pilot. With better communication systems this could be possible. Although it does erode the concept of "pilot in command" which is another political issue. Although pilots takes advice all the time from ATC and that works well. Why not advice on the aircraft systems?