AF 447 Search to resume

[bearfoil]

HazelNuts39

In vertical failure, the rods are both in compression, acting as a jack would when bearing a Landing gear in the shop. The stress is assumed to be roughly equal (symmetrical), so these rods would be actually lessening the Stress on the lugs when so challenged, as opposed to their lateral design function, in which the rods alternate compression, tension, when the surface of the VS and Rudder deviate from centered aspect. Consider that as designed, they alternate pushing and pulling in each control input. Both serve to stress the eyebrow (mounting rail) away from the stressed face, and toward the unstressed side. This rail is surface mounted to the skin of the fuselage. One can be misled by entertaining one cycle of this stress at a time. The fracture one sees on the female lug shows the result of overstressing the entire bedding of the system. Its expression as a failure in the body of the component rather than one or both of its lugs merely shows that the system has worked, but exceeded its design load. The crack in each component is the result of the entire tail surface "racking", the rods have succeeded, but the design has failed. If one assumes skin cannot rack, think of a high wing aircraft with dyhedral that has flipped onto its back, (The 330 skin is riveted), every rivet will show a very small amount of slip. The added slip of each rivet contributes to several inches over several feet. The difference in additive skin movement between what occurred and what was necessary is the dimension of the fracture at maximum load, that load that occurred past the last successful defense of the lugs, laterally.

henra

Regarding the "Spinal Compression" results, I believe it was not all the victims, but 43, and these in concert with pelvic fracture and thoracic bone fractures.I too dont believe the recovered victims sank, except as a result of wave action, and then only briefly.

bear