Originally Posted by hetfield
Yes, but AFTER this tragic accident!
Uh ... only partially correct. It
is what the NTSB found
after the accident. But, as you can read for yourself in the posts preceding yours (by almost a year), the regulator and the airplane manufacturer, joined by another airplane manufacturer, wrote a memo to AA some 4 years prior to the crash, in which they described the problems that may be encountered by "rudder reversals such as those that might be involved in dynamic maneuvers created by using too much rudder in a recovery attempt..." pointing out that such rudder use could "...lead to structural loads that exceed the design strength of the fin and other airframe components."
I know that hind-sight is always 20-20, but here it looks very much like a very clear concern went unheaded ... or at least taken to be applicable in one set of circumstances (windshear) and not another (wake turbulence). While any accident is tragic, I think this one was for more than one reason.