T. D. Ponder ponder at charter.net
Fri Dec 7 10:13:18 EST 2001


It just may be time for grounding A300-600's, eh? You will not find me on
------------------------------------------------------------------------- --

Lima. Peru (AvWeb) --- An American Airlines Airbus A300-600 departing Lima
Wednesday evening experienced severe rudder problems and returned to land
safely at the airport. Pilots said the aircraft began "fish-tailing" soon
after takeoff. Investigators are examining the flight recorders. The
aircraft is the same model aircraft as American Airlines Flight 587, which
crashed in New York on November 12, killing 260 people on the plane and five
people on the ground. Rudder problems are suspected in that crash.
tdponder at juno.com

"T. D. Ponder" <ponder at charter.net> wrote in message
news:u0tint8ipslrb5 at corp.supernews.com...
> Once again, an aircraft manufacturer, this time the European Airbus
> Consortium, is attempting to blame pilots for what many pilots consider
> apparent manufacturing design errors in the crash last month of American
> Airlines FL587, an Airbus A310 that plowed into a New York City
> shortly after departing JFK killing 265 people. The Airbus (called the
> Scarebus by some US pilots) crashed into a residential area after its tail
> section apparently separated in midair.
> And now, according to news reports, Airbus and Boeing seem to be
> to blame American Airlines' doomed pilots for incorrect rudder usage.
> Fact:
> Aircraft manufactures design and build aircraft.
> Fact:
> The FAA approves design and performance data according to strict
> and certifies aircraft makes and models as being airworthy.
> Airworthy --- as in flyable within all normal operating envelopes with
> normal piloting skills and abilities!
> This does not mean that the "tail" should routinely come off if a pilot
> needs to use rudder deflection fully to its design limits, and that means
> FAA certified "Design Limits!"
> So, here it appears that the aircraft manufacturer is choosing to point
> toward some alleged pilot input, not especially difficult to do since
> pilots were killed, to take away attention from a possible inherent fault
> with the design and manufacture of its aircraft.
> For a pilot, this is unconscionable. Boeing tried it with its defective
> Boeing 737 rudder control system, but didn't get away with it. The FAA
> mandated design changes for the B737 rudder system after two crashes that
> were believed to have involved the B737's rudder system.
> It remains to be seen if Airbus is going to get away with an attempt to
> blame pilots now. I would hope the FAA in its current investigation will
> able to show the exact structural nature of this crash.
> There are two deceased American Airline pilots who need badly to be
> exonerated!
> If Airbus gets away with this one, the trend of always blaming pilots for
> design defects will just go on an on.
> At least one news report stated,  "...regardless of how the rudder may
> been moved, the tail shouldn't have sheared off the way it did, some
> and American officials have said."
> Stand up and scream, fellow pilots. We are about to be blamed once again!
> ###
> T.D. Ponder
> Airline Transport Pilot
> 10,000+ hrs. Pilot in Command
> Birmingham, AL 350641
> tdponder at juno.com
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------

More information about the Bioforum mailing list