Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up?

Would not a helium balloon tethered to the floor/dash solve this problem for basically no cost?

Keep in mind that unlike auto accidents, incidents like AF447 are incredibly rare. That particular problem could've been fixed with better pitot heaters, no need for HAL-like software gimmickery. By implementing large-scale changes in an attempt to eliminate corner cases like that, it is all too easy to introduce vulnerabilities that will lead to completely different accidents, no less unpredictable.

There's a lot I don't understand about AF447, like, why couldn't a simple GPS receiver have saved them? GPS does a relatively poor job at reporting altitude, and is obviously useless at reporting airspeed, but it's certainly capable of telling you that you've dropped 10,000 feet over the past minute or two. I can understand how pilots could become disoriented, such that they don't know "which end is up," but I can't fathom why they shouldn't even know whether they are climbing or descending, which apparently was part of the AF447 scenario.

On Sept 6, 2011, ANA Airlines had one of their flights flipped almost 180 degrees, because one of the pilots pressed the wrong button. The weird thing is that although passengers felt the turbulence, they didn't know they had flipped almost upside down, I guess because of the same forces that confused these pilots. It's a scary thing, and if I remember correctly, its the same thing that killed JFK Jr.

http://blogs.wsj.com/japanrealtime/2011/09/29/wrong-button-s...

There are meterological radars that use doppler shift to measure wind speed, I wonder if you could use the same basic idea to construct a radar airspeed indicator?

The airfrance crash INMHO was a lack of training( or missunderstanding of it) because the pilot flying on the captain seat ( actually a copilot, the captain was resting) was performing the maneuver for fighting windshear( you won't find this on any conclusions  is my guess from his input on the sidestick). 

In a stall you want to recover your speed asap , you dive and apply full throttle till you are able to level off with normal speed.  Windshear usually happens when you encounter heavy wind changes on approach or take off, usually caused by heavy thunderstorms. Your speed will increase and then sudenly decrease to stall levels. It can very easily throw you to the ground.

As you are very low, the stablished procedure is to apply full throttle ( as in a stall) but PULL your controlls full up ( the software limits the nose up position to around 25 deg nose up in airbus models). You flight at the minimum speed ( airbus airplanes will not allow you to fly below that speed at least if you are at low altitude, a plane using both engines at go around power will climb). The point is that as they entered the thunderstom ( that previously was avoided by preceding airliners) and had that pitot icing, they reacted with a windshear procedure when it was unnecessary ( there is a procedure to flight without reliable speed indications just trusting your artificial horizont and thrust position for a given speed, they should have applied it in a perfect world[it is very easy to say what is the solution afterwards of course]).

At those altitudes the engines have no power left to perfor a windshear,  so the speed started falling till they entered a deep stall. That stall was recoverable( this is a supposition) for lets say 2 minutes, but they still were aplying full up controlls thinking :why is this procedure that I have practiced thousand times in the simulator not working?( not understanding they were in a common stall)

It seems that the other  flight officer may have known what was happening but failed to take the controls.

All this is my supposition based on the preliminary documents pblished and my experience with A320 aircrafts wich have pretty similar flight controls logic ( I am an airline pilot with 12 years experience flying boeing, douglas and airbus). Something completely diferent could be the final cause.

Windshear is a primary maneuver to practice and master  due to the extreme danger that it represents for any kind of plane ( maybe not for fighters). Stall is seen as a improbable danger due to the airplane software protections. Both are practised but the windshear is more enfaticed at least in europe, also the stall is seen as a basic flying skill, something not practical to practice in an expensive simulator with limited training time for all that complicated failures.

To reply your question, you can not induce a roll to an airbus airplane ( not past 45 deg with normal conditions) unless you have lost some flight computers. You could for example with MD 80 or 737 as there are no computer protections. I don't know about 777 or other fly by wire boeings, but I guess they got some kind of protection.

Sorry for all the typos and spelling! I am writting on a van  on my way to the airport.