Flt 587-Airbus vs American Airlines

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ...
"John Bailey" wrote in message
...
SNIP:
One problem, he found, was that on the A-300, the amount
of force needed to start moving the rudder was relatively high, and
the total range of motion allowed at that speed was only a little over
an inch, making it very difficult to apply any amount of rudder less
than its full extension.
SNIP:
Is he trying to say that operational reasons limit rudder motion to a
little over an inch, or what? Doesn't sound like enough to handle one
engine out with the other one firewalled to, say, climb out of San
Juan, Costa Rico.
Walt BJ

"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...
"John Bailey" wrote in message
...
SNIP:
One problem, he found, was that on the A-300, the amount
of force needed to start moving the rudder was relatively high, and
the total range of motion allowed at that speed was only a little over
an inch, making it very difficult to apply any amount of rudder less
than its full extension.
SNIP:
Is he trying to say that operational reasons limit rudder motion to a
little over an inch, or what? Doesn't sound like enough to handle one
engine out with the other one firewalled to, say, climb out of San
Juan, Costa Rico.

I'll agree with Walt's observation that the poster may wish to rethink their
contribution to the thread. Get a clue, FAA has two zeros.