On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:56:12 -0000, "Keith W"
wrote:


"Dave Butler" wrote in message
news:1110897377.464227@sj-nntpcache-5...
Mike wrote:

Isn't it the A310 that also lost a tail and crashed in New York City a
month or 2 after 9/11. IIRC, there is a particular airplane that the
manufacturer says "don't use the rudder too hard" because if you do,
the tail could break off. Imagine if you were test driving a car and
the salesperson said "don't turn too hard or the car will break in
half".

Doesn't your airplane have any structural limitations? Just offhand, I can
think of max gear extension speed and never exceed speed as a couple of
limitations on mine. Unless you have a full authority fly-by-wire computer
limiting what you can do, you can break an airplane if you maneuver it
outside its design limitations.

It was an airbus A-300 that crashed and since that isnt a
FBW aircraft the pilot had full control authority. The NTSB
report cited pilot error in applying excessive rudder for
the aircraft speed

Oh and many cars will respond very badly to excessive
steering inputs. SUV rollovers are a major source
of fatal accidents, thats why they put warning stickers
in rental company SUV's

Keith

There is a bit of a difference between the SUV and airplane exapmles.
For the SUV, the steering inputs result in a loss of control which
results in a crash. For the airplane example, it is the control
inputs that cause the damage, and the crash is a result of the
damage.