PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Interesting note about AA Airbus crash in NYC
Old 17th Jan 2007, 01:47
  #214 (permalink)  
misd-agin
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rainboe
Well the guy doing the simulator replication used large amounts, not 1.2". I'm inclined to believe what the simulator did, not what the FAA report stated, as all jets I know of work pretty similar. I do not believe the A300 uses 1.2" rudder pedal deflection to produce large rudder response at low climb speed. If the report insinuates this, it is written wrongly. That AA pilot on film was using large foot movements. Small or large anyway, there is no argument- the fin came off through overstressing because of large rudder deflections, not through any defect and not because it collected water. The only productive discussion is why was this technique used and are the implications of it understood by those who professed at the time to not understand the hazards involved. If anybody is still in doubt about the point, they should stop passenger flying forthwith until they are trained up.

Believe a simulator "replication" as opposed to the factual report of the NTSB?

You're inclined to believe the simulator because all jets you know of work similar? Hmmm, I think that's the first time I've seen the simulator being more accurate than the aircraft it's trying to simulate.

You said all the jets you know work pretty similar. I think your profile showed 747 and 737 knowledge. If you're talking about the rudder limiting systems, which is an issue in this crash, then they are not similar. The 747 rudder gives you about 80% more rudder travel per pound of rudder travel vs. the 737. 747 vs. A300-600R? Only 21% as sensitive. 737 vs A300-600R? Only 12% as sensitive.

You do not believe the Airbus uses 1.2" of rudder travel at low speed? Well you're either correct or very wrong. Are you talking about "low speed" or are you talking about the accident? Two distinctly different scenarios.

If you see noticeably leg movement the a/c is probably below 165 kts, or close to it.

In summary, the simulator replication showed leg movement , the facts don't matter, the FDR is wrong, the a/c rudder limiter doens't work like the engineers said it does , and all rudder designs you know "work pretty similar".

misd-agin is offline