OT: Airline Crash Report, This just doesn't make any sense Options

[Series9]

Some more funny ones:

[Series9]

two:

[Series9]

three:

[Series9]

four:

[Series9]

five:

[Series9]

six:

[Series9]

seven:

[Series9]

eight:

[Series9]

nine:

[Series9]

Last one:

[SLITS]

Manuvering speed on an Aercoupe - prolly 70 MPH. But since it has no rudder pedals and is tied to the alierons, can you get full deflection?

Drive and fly!

Ok, so some were retrofitted to be able to handle crosswinds, slips to land, etc

[SpecialK]

When I fly, I tell them, "If ain't Boeing, I'm not going"

that's the kind of plane I want to be in, one that makes it home.

I know, apples and oranges, but Boeing (formerly McDonnell Douglas) makes some pretty tough flying machines!

[SpecialK]

mid-air collision (F-18)

[SpecialK]

mid-air collision (F-18) the other plane involved. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/ohmy.gif)

[F4i]

I agree with most of what has been said. I do also agree that there could be a real mechanical problem here. The rudder hinge may not be up to task and or the fly by wire may not be optimal. I do not feel that a composite rudder is to blame however. Look at the old bombers b17 beech 18 etc. aluminum fuse wings and tail with fabric covered controls. Airbus may not be totally alone in this type of problem. I believe it was the tried and true dc9 that had the hard over problem with its rudder. Also the venerable 737 is not perfect, I know of several that are having lap joint repairs done to them (read targa top).
I also feel that the pictures very accurately illustrate that pilot error is still the leading cause of prangs.
I hold a commercial multi IFR licence and still feel this way. Of course I work as a GA mechanic now. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Grngoat]

Hello list, I've been lurking for some time, but as an airframe design engineer whose specialty is composites, I now feel compelled to add a post.

Some very good explanations of some of the contributor's to the crash have been brought up. But one important one has been missed. Almost immediately after the crash, NTSB posted photos of the wreckage on their website. The first thing that jumped out at everyone at work was the composite lugs attaching the vertical tail to the fuselage. Rather than simply having a composite skinned tail with conventional metal fitting that attaches at discreet points to the fuselage, they just pin right through the bottom of a tab out in the skin. Not the conservative approach I would take. Worse yet, this particular airplane had a delamination in the composite (like wood splintering) right at the lug attach. Time for a whole new tail, but instead they drilled a bunch of holes right through the critical section to bolt doublers to it. I think that this weakened the tail at a critical point. Its hard to tell if the failure started here or not. You can see what I'm talking about here in the next to last picture:

Wreckage Photos on NTSB Website

Maybe it's just easier to blame a dead guy.

[Elliot_Cannon]

Hi,
An aircraft accident cannot be blamed on one individual problem. It is usually a compilation of problems happening at one time. Pilot technique, design flaws, training procedures, weather, pilot fatigue, weight and balance problems, the list goes on and on of possible problematic situations. Individually they don't always amount to an insurmountable problem but when you put a few together...
Some people believe the French designed a bad airplane but it passed the same extensive certification process they all do. Some can't get passed their bigoted hatred for the French in general.
A rudder can be designed to be pushed from one stop to the other very rapidly but it would then be too heavy to fly. I have never in my training been taught to use the rudder to compensate for turbulent conditions. The only time it might be pushed to the stop would be for an engine failure at takeoff. By the way the Airbus rudder might be fly-by- wire and is electrically controlled but hydraulically powered. I don't know of any primary flight control that it powered by an electric motor.
There aren't any airplanes that are foolproof. The only way to be absolutely safe from an airplane accident is to never get in one. I know you have all heard this but it's true. You are safer in the French designed and built airplane than you are driving to the airport in your German designed automobile.
Cheers, Elliot Cannon Captain, United Parcel Service, MD11, 747, DC8

[ChrisFoley]

(What exactly do we call the stabilizers and corresponding control surfaces on a v-tail Bonanza? Rudivators? Elevudors?)

elevons

[Elliot_Cannon]

(What exactly do we call the stabilizers and corresponding control surfaces on a v-tail Bonanza? Rudivators? Elevudors?)

elevons

Ruddevators
Cheers, Elliot

[ChrisFoley]

I suppose I should know that, my dad owns one.
I never liked flying much though, except in simulator games like Falcon 3.0.
I feel safer on the racetrack than I do anywhere near an airport.