TIMMEEEE,
I was referring to the professional engineers in QF that are involved in fleet
selection, they are not the people who sign the contract or come up with the galley/overhead locker config. They work on airframe/engine packages across the route structure. They (the professional aeronautical engineers) are the very smart people I am referring to.
How the aircraft is delivered to the customer is specified by the customer, I note that a customer has elected to order some 737NG's without window shades or reclining seats. Seems silly to me, but that’s what the customer wants.
As to the A300 rudder, no civil jet airliner is designed for rudder application in the fashion that AA had trained their pilots. They were using IMHO military training techniques on a civil airliner that designed in the normal CAT.
To quote IFALPA "The rudder/fin combination is sized for the worst case of engine failure at slow speed and maximum engine thrust on the remaining engine(s), or other foreseen unsymmetric flight conditions. Rapid rudder movement, particularly rapid rudder reversals can produce loads on the vertical fin that exceed the limits to which the airplane was certified."
I would strongly suggest yo have a look at what IFALPA has to say about this,
Use of Rudder on Airbus Use of Rudder on Boeing Aggressive Aircraft Manoeuvring
I would appreciate it if you could cast your eye over the reports on the AA A300 accident, and then get back to me to see if your employer advocates the same rudder technique.
As you know Boeing products have been know to have uncommanded rudder failures, uncommanded thrust reverser deployment, and uncommanded engine shutdowns, all you need to do is look at the 737 PCU secondary valve jams. Maybe this
ALPA SAFETY ALERT will shed some light on this for you.
No airliner/manufacturer is perfect.....they all have their faults.
