AA587 - Gone not forgotten
 

The main thread on this was closed a while ago when it outgrew the available space. I hope there is still room for debate on the issues this troubling incident raises.. .. .I have read the latest NTSB update but this gives little away other than to say they are doing further testing, both non-destructive and destructive, on the fin and rudder and are also looking at another A300 involved in a stalling incident where large deflections of the control surfaces resulted. I realise we will have to await the final report from the NTSB to get the full facts - but this may be several months away. Would any A300 captains in ppruneland care to summarise for a simple private pilot what the evidence so far tells us about the structural integrity and control systems of this, and/or other large commercial aircraft. Was this a one-off event as some may hope, or is there a bigger design/certification issue which manufacturers will have to address?

You left out training as an issue, but then, we need to wait for further developments to pick the correct course of action.

Here's a little more information:. .. . <a href="http://pull.xmr3.com/p/30115-FA02/33029270/NTSB.html" target="_blank">NTSB Seeking Links Between AA587 and Earlier Incident</a>

Fishbed,. .. .if you think about structural integrity and control systems of large commercial aircraft, just think about flying level above 250 kts and then suddenly pull the elevator 11° for .5 secons, push 10.5° for .3, pull again between 10.5 and 11° for two seconds, push 10° for another one and then pull 9.5°. If you look out of your window afterwards, do you still expect to see your wings ??? They will be gone for shure !. .Exactly the same happens to a vertical stabilizer fin if you apply the same deflections to the rudder. You need no special pilot training to avoid such elevator deflections, so why should you in case of the rudder ? . .Lage transports are not designed for such maneuvers, they are designed to stand the loads normally acting with the least possible amount of weight at the lowest possible costs. Of cause you can build an airplane which stands any maneuver, but the DOC´s will be far higher as they are in the planes build today, so no operater will ever buy it. . .You can´t design a plane (or require such design by regulations) to stand any mistreatment, either by pilots or (much more likely in my opinion) by control system malfunctions.

Since we can't require aircraft builders to manufacture an airplane that can withstand full control deflection at any speed, we have to require software designers to ensure that their product does not inappropriately command a full deflection of a control surface causing the structure to fail. If they can't do that we need to go back to the days of 727's and 747 classics.

...and considering the state of software development in aeroplanes today, perhaps not a bad idea.

A new airline with 727 and 747 classic only? May I join you?

I have never used nor have I ever witnessed anyone using rudder pedals during climb, cruise and descent without an engine failure. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" />