are you saying the american airlines crew that died weren't experienced?
I'm not saying that and I have never said that, but as Collin Powell recently observed: "Experience is helpful but it is decisions that count". The last captain of PH-BUF was very experienced. So were the captains of TC-GEN, YU-ANA, N651AA and HB-IXM. It is a pity that no one will ever be able to benefit from their experience. It seems that crew involved in KORD runway excursion were very experienced but that didn't prevent them from draining their battery inflight.
I'm glad your private pilot course taught you all about this stuff.
But why didn't the FAA approved course teach these American pilots about this?
Sir, you are still evading the answer! For the third time: do you know what divergent oscillation is? I'm not asking you to explain it, a simple "yea" or "nay" would suffice. Perhaps it wasn't emphasised during your trainning but I'm certain it gets mentioned in my 2003. edition of FAA Pilot's aviation knowledge handbook. Also it is part of JAA ATPL syllabus. Why some people fail to heed a good advice is beyond me.
bubbers 44 is right about the rudder problems...thanks for posting it.
What rudder problems? He was writing about fin being repaired before the aeroplane being delivered to AA. It is completely irellevant as NTSB analysis found that fin failed during extreme sideslip, at load that heftily exceeded the ultimate design load. Ergo it took more than its fair share of punishment before parting with the aeroplane. And since you've mentioned the Air Transat incident, had the rudder of N14503 came apart before the fin failed, chances are that we wouldn't have an accident to discuss.
also the F28...that crash is interesting because another F28 in canada crashed due to similiar circumstances and the information was not passed on properly.
What information? That it is unwise to take off with upper wing surface contaminated with ice? If you had read the full NTSB report on LaGuardia accident, you would have known that this fact was known from at least 1930ies and it was made part of a lot of aeronautical regulations. And yet we've had that infamous Iberia thread here.
glad that I don't fly the 'bus
Well, then there's a piece of Airbus trivia for you: A320's speedbrakes retract automatically upon aplication of TOGA power.
AA had an MD80 that was literally rolling over, due to wake vortices, on initial takeoff in DFW. High AOA portion of takeoff. FULL aileron was NOT effective in stopping/countering imminent unusual attitude at low altitude.
What I'd like to know is how did they manage to get themselves into such a violent wake vortex in the first place. Is the report available? Or at least an ILAFFT story?
And our training program never had us resorting to rudder only during a wake encounter. Unusual attitudes, yes - ailerons supplemented with rudder.
It is tragic that someone needed the broken fin to realize that the rudder is not primary roll control surface. But it is beyond tragic that some pilots still don't accept the fact that this procedure has proven itself to be lethaly wrong. Especially so on swept wing twins with wing mounted engines.
the NTSB investigation NEVER was able to determine
So we have come to the point at last! NTSB comes out with probable cause and recomendations on how to avoid similar occurences in the future and here we have PPRuNers that know better than NTSB's experts but don't tell us what their superior analysis came out with. All we get are oblique hints unsupported by the known facts. For my part, I'll be glad if they're actually not rated to fly anything that isn't powered by Microsoft.