"Ron Parsons" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Paul F Austin" wrote:

"Robey Price" wrote
After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, "Paul F
Austin" confessed the following:

My impression from reading the AvWeek reports is that this problem
isn't
unique to A300s nor to Airbus products. The fin can be overloaded in
most
transports if opposite rudder is commanded while a significant yaw has
occurred. I'm not a pilot but AvWeek claimed that standard recovery
training
for transport pilots could lead to this condition.

You are correct, I fly the 757 and we've recently had some expanded
warning verbiage added to our flight manual about excessive rudder
inputs during an engine failure. Pretty soon after that AA crash we
were cautioned about excessive rudder inputs.
....

Thanks for the information. I am somewhat amazed that the FAA doesn't
require load analysis of the fin under yaw/extreme opposite rudder but
(again according to AvWeek), it does not.



Political and un-Diplomatic pressure from the foreign states heavily
invested in the sucess of Airbus.

Nonsense. The lack of analysis of that condition is long standing and
applied to Lockheed, Boeing and McAir before Airbus was born.

In case you have trouble keeping up, the failure mode that augered in AA587
probably applies to most jet transports. Because the analysis hasn't been
done, you can't prove that_any_certified for passenger service will survive
a rudder slam while in a sideslip at low altitude.

You can fix the problem if 1. you know the envelope that's survivable and 2.
you prevent excursions outside the envelope. You prevent the excursion (in
increasing order of preferability) by training, by modifications to control
"feel", by changes to control laws and by structural enhancements. The last
may not be possible within acceptable weight and moment constraints.