robharris
It is not so much the rudder deflection itself as the resulting yaw from that rudder input that would be the issue. The limitation on rudder travel is not so much to limit rudder loads as yaw, which produces all sorts of secondary aerodynamic and structural loading effetcs, ONE of which would be high bending and shear loads on the fin attachment to the fuselage...
Originally Posted by Nakata?
The tail fin concerns me. it looks like a fatigue fracture across the base of the tail - a perfectly shear split in a perfect line. that is very strange.
How on earth can you say that... I don't think you'd know a fatigue failure if it landed on your bacon & eggs or sushi dish, whichever is appropriate!
Making judgements from pictures such as this on TYPE of metallurgical or composite failures is just RIDICULOUS... even from sample preparation and subsequent microscopic evaluation it still takes good consideration to say either 'Prior fatigue damage or just one-time overload'
There is some really silly speculation going on here, couched as statements not questions (which anyway would be almost as annoying)
To me, there would need to be a couple of REALLY SOLID pieces of evidence to begin down the 'fin separation' theory - even then without the FDR or VCR the EXACT cause (initiation) of this disaster would still be in doubt.
One of those would be to ASCERTAIN that the fin was found a VERY significant distance away from the bulk of the main mass components of the aircraft - e.g. 25 nm or so, AND in a direction back along the known flightpath
There would have to be other corroborating FACTS to start a good line of enquiry, which as I say, would still need the FDR to conclude the SEQUENCE and TRUE cause of events.