"John Bailey" wrote in message
...
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/21/nyregion/21plane.html is a report of
the maneuvering by both Airbus and American Airlines to get in their 2
cents, pilot training vs inadequate design, in the crash of AA Flt 587
over Queens. Apparently the tail came off because of a violent yaw
type of pilot induced oscillation. The range of rudder control
available to the pilot seems grossly inadequate.

The pilot's excess command authority over the rudder control system is why
the structure delaminated.

AA may have
contributed to the problem by failing to reflect the design flaw in
their training, however their real failure might be not grounding the
planes for suicidal instability.

I'll leave this the Schmidt to answer.

Pilots of the F86D had to accept
working around a low altitude-high speed pilot induced oscillation. In
that case the oscillations were in pitch. I could accept such on a
military fighter plane, but such an accident waiting to happen in a
commercial airliner seems unconscionable.

The airplane experianced a rudder stall (rudder reversal) due to turbulent
air flow; which was probably a direct result of ATC loss of seperation.
There is a USAir flight 427 suspected of having crashed for the same reason.
It is quite possible that training pilots to use excessive rudder and
operator panic are the cause of these crashes; excepting the abnormal
operating conditions.