And people talking about technological mitigation are confusing me even more.
It's not that confusing.
Your airplane (and every other transport in the modern era) has a takeoff warning system that monitors flap and slat, spoiler, parking brake and stab trim position (and it's actually a relatively good one, NO TAKEOFF, FLAPS! will fire if you have the lever in the
wrong takeoff position, not merely outside of
a takeoff position).
That system, like every other warning system in the airplane, is there because the technology existed and works as a last line of defense against completely catastrophic human error. It was determined to be a reasonably cheap and effective mitigation especially considered with the astronomical risk of both someones, not merely just "someone" phoning in the checklist and going "flaps um yeah bro two, two" while texting during taxi-out.
I don't think it's completely crazy to think about technical defenses for wrong-surface takeoffs as 1) they can have rather catastrophic consequences and 2) we do have more technology to fix them. I think the Airbus TOS functions are wonderful, and I'm actually sort of upset that I didn't think about the concept of wrong-surface detection and protection myself. A GPS/FMC generated
NAV ON TAXIWAY and a continuous repeated chime is a rather clear and unambiguous message to
stop, you are doing something wrong.
I think trying to takeoff on a taxiway is extremely dumb; I think it's about as dumb, in fact, as taking off misconfigured is. But if there's a way to prevent it from even starting to happen, I think it's worthy of investigation and contemplation.
By the way, the Martin 202 and 404-series airliners were the first prop-driven airplanes in the US fitted with an automatic feathering system. ALPA was all "whoa, hold up" until some Glenn L. Martin reps took the safety people flying and demonstrated a few V1 cuts with and without autofeather. They all landed changed men.