An interesting discussion.
Overstress through turbulence is certainly entirely possible, and it does happen. If you want proof, look at
http://www.aaib.dtlr.gov.uk/bulletin/mar00/gbvna.htm
Aircraft structures and operating limitations are designed to ensure that an aircraft isn't overstressed by turbulence, but once in a while some poor blighter gets to the wrong end of the curve. In the case linked above, I know that one of the following aircraft had it's (6g !) mainspar bent as it passed through the turbulence.
Failures can be in one of three manners: -
- Catasrophic failure, that is it all comes apart. This is what happened with the composite structures.
- Plastic failure, that is bits of metal permanently bend. That's what happened to the aircraft following the Cuby.
- Fatigue cracks are started or enlarged, reducing the safe life of the aircraft. This happens all the time and is taken into account by the Engineers calculating the fatigue life of critical components.
The latter is the only one detectable by NDT, but it certainly can be.
In this case, well frankly I don't think wake turbulence would cause bits to fall off. Why? because in climb-out the aircraft will be slow, and there's not enough energy there to break things in a certified aircraft. What turbulence can do (and has) is cause a loss of control (I got rolled inverted in a Bulldog behind a 747 once).
So, my tentative opinion, having available to me very little evidence, is that wake turbulence did not cause this failure. Not because wake turbulence can't cause severe problems and loss of an aircraft, but because it's the wrong failure mode.
Having said that, this all assumes no pre-existing damage. At that point the picture changes. Hypothetically, if the engine mounts were misrigged, or had fatigue cracks across them, turbulence could have caused a compressor stall. This puts large torque loads on the engine mounts, and it is possible that the combinations could have causes engine separation. This scenario however the purest conjecture, please treat it as such, but it does indicate a possible sequence.
But turbulence alone, in the climb-out, no, I don't think it's possible.
G