It is very difficult, and often impossible with all systems operational, to get a modern airliner outside of its flight envelope. I'd imagine a tiny glider with a rocket bolted on is a different story.
Most probably because that tiny glider with a rocket bolted to it, is pushing more / has more dangerous limits than a subsonic airliner.
It's much faster to go outside the designed flight envelope if you're 3x supersonic at FL800 than cruising subsonic at FL320.
I don’t think anyone disagrees with the general assertion that rocket travel is more dangerous than airplane travel. The question is less “is this rocket as safe as an AirBus” and more “is this rocket as safe as other rockets?”
My issue with Virgin Galactic is that their rocket design is fundamentally unsafe. It requires a human crew flawlessly perform a high level of work load with minimal automation and safety interlocks. This isn’t something we’d accept with a commercial airplane, even with the much wider margins of error that those craft provide. For a rocket this is absurdly dangerous.
The designer in fact explicitly said he wants the pilots actually in control of the aircraft directly without automation, which is romantic but incredibly dumb during supersonic ascent, as the fatal crash shows.
This is not true. In most cases you will get warnings but if you are hands-on you can fly into an unrecoverable situation, specially if you are not very high.
The systems prevent you from flying outside of the flight envelope, not from smashing the plane into the ground. Of course you can crash if you want, but the plane will still be within the flight envelope.
You would have a harder time on an Airbus, but on any Boeing it is not difficult at all. The Fly-by-wire and auto-throttle on an Airbus are designed to prevent the aircraft from leaving its flight-envelope, but Boeing airliners have far less of such 'MCAS' style of protection.
