411A;
the above statement I suspect is indicitive of a present day general lack of swept-wing aircraft aerodynamic knowledge...IE: if dutch roll conditions should develop (especially, at higher altitudes), the last thing a pilot would want to do, is have pilot applied larger rudder inputs, because....this will make the dutch roll conditions much worse, not better.
A known fact, decades ago, but I now suspect...totally forgotton, or never taught.
Concur, 411A. Seen it in major carriers as well and not just the smaller outfits. It's barely bread-and-butter training all the way down. Along with instruction on high-altitude flight, more-than-basic met (thunderstorms, windshear, frontal analysis etc etc etc), anything on swept-wing flight (what's a 'yaw damper?") and how to do a proper visual approach in a transport aircraft, I have never seen a course on radar use either. In a recent conversation with colleagues, I am informed few know how to use the B777 radar either, with recent, "interesting" results in the same ITCZ.
The lo-cost mentality now embraced by all airlines, has taught passengers to expect and demand $1.49 fares in exchange for on-time, completely-safe transportation by highly-experienced, fully-trained personnel. Those illusions are coming home to roost.
Passengers can't have it both ways nor can airline owners or managements.
The industry has driven the airline-pilot profession into a place and into such a state of disrespect and relative poverty where nobody wants to come to it anymore when there are far greener fields elsewhere with far less risk and a more secure future. "Love of flying" just doesn't do it anymore.
The industry is hiring the relatively-inexperienced-and-basically-trained because, as I said two years ago, the pipeline is drying up, and is leaving the training of these issues which rightfully belong in every professional airline pilots' toolkit, to "home-study".
This is NOT a comment on the AF crew. This is a comment on where this profession has been taken/pushed by forces and priorities which do not comprehend aviation but which nevertheless manage large airlines. Back to the thread.
All we know is, the vertical stabilizer came off at some point during the accident sequence. The evidence is, (as I posted) extremely thin so nothing may be concluded except the VS is off the airplane and intact, with rudder, with slight damage to the bottom/rear of the structure and a possible, though not proven, presence of at least one fastening lug. Hopefully photos will emerge soon and that notion can be proven/disproven.
THAT said, the presence of the lug, (should it be there), proves nothing more than "the fin broke off the airplane". Possibly, as has been suggested, analysis of the failure modes (bent sheet metal, tear lines, telltale scratches, torsion and tension fractures) done by qualified engineers may inform us further. Until then, we only know that the fin broke away. We know nothing about pilot inputs or the severity of lateral loads sufficient to break the fin off. It happened and whatever did it had severe force way beyond the design limits of this and, I suspect, any transport aircraft.
In terms of conducting a search for the main wreckage, assumptions must be made in order to use resources efficiently in the large area under consideration so it makes sense to build scenarios and assess reasonableness then begin. It is logical and not merely speculative to expect that the fin's location, given last transmitted aircraft position, winds and currents will be in the main wreckage's proximity. A "radius of action" can be maximally and minimally determined, outside of which the location of the fin would not be possible and a search conducted rationally. One expects that these processes are already either underway or now even complete and a search begun with the advertised deep-sea robotic equipment.
There remains absolutely no evidence whatsoever of pitot or TAT icing, hot-rising-air-in-thunderstorms, (anectdotal testimony is interesting but if it was that hazardous, we'd be hearing a lot more about it) and no evidence whatsoever of "coffin corner" issues. I know that specialists have contributed a great deal of knowledge regarding interpreting the messages but the ACARS messages do not place such conclusions beyond reasonable doubt. All notions remain entirely unsubstantiated theories. There is nothing anyone can post that will change this state of affairs. Because we know so little and there is so little "trace", we must demand very high standards of any new evidence and be careful not to wander beyond what that evidence can tell us directly.
ELAC;
As usual, first class call - spot on.