Ageing composites- more
Glad I am not alone. I do not do conspiracy theories, but the trail of events post this crash is begining to look iffy.
One other point, they found the tail fin minus the rudder -has anyone determined if the rudder came off after the fin snapped - ie as the rudder fell, or did the rudder come off prior to fin failure?
Given that the rudder is not attached to the fuselage -but to the fin - surely it's point that should be answered-ie which wagged the dog first?
As far as I am aware, there is has been no debate as to why the fin was found minus the rudder and when did the rudder come off that fin?
If you study the CVR tape it is very clear that before the application of full power -and before the sound of what might be the fin coming off. there is clearly a handling issue apparent- with reactive process from the PIC and left seater (verbal inputs). What casued that handling issues- was it relly just wake turbulence and pilot input. I doubt it.
(And if it was, that means that the generic tail design as fitted across a range of aircraft is now suspect - an entirely separate issue based on the acceptance of the NTSB findings -not the questioning of it some of now make..)
The political and financial issues as cited are of course relevant -but are not to me the fulcrum. The fulcrum- the point of the thing is that rudder and subsequent events to several aircraft - notably Transat - have not been adequately invesitgted at teh time or consequent to further events.
Nevile Shute and Ernie Gann would have worked on this one.
After careful consideration, I now doubt the accepted NTSB version of events: clearly I am not alone. The AA 587 pax and crew desrve the truth - whatever the ramifications... Time will tell.