If it ain't Boeing I ain't going...

[Furious]

staga is living proof that reading stuff on the internet makes you an expert in exactly jack ****.

[cpxxx]

Rather than indulging in asinine Euro or Airbus bashing maybe it would be more productive to speculate as to whether another aircraft type would suffer the same fate with the same rudder inputs in the same wake turbulence situation.  

The implication as I read the report and the discussions of it in various aviation journals is that  even a Boeing would lose it's fin because the design loads were exceeded .  We can argue that the light pedal  forces may have allowed the pilot to apply excessive rudder inputs.  

But surely the lesson is that an airliner is not an aerobatic aircraft and that full and rapid rudder deflections applied in a sideslip would overload any airliner's vertical tail simply because it is not designed  for that kind of treatment.

It could happen to a Boeing.

[LePaul]

Nah, Staga feels his Europe is superior to all, so anytime something shows his side being lesser than anything American, he has to find, invent or conjure why his beleives are better.  Be damned the facts.

I could care less about the two aircraft companies, Staga has made it a personal quest to attempt to debunk anything Toad has said.   whatever.  This USA vs Euro thing is getting tiring.

[Toad]

Read this again:

The NTSB believes the vertical tail broke off at 09:15:58.5 A.M. Airbus loads calculations for this moment are based on a rudder position of 11.5 degrees. But the RTLU setting was 9.3 degrees. This obviously points to a failure of the RTLU. When the NTSB asked Dominique Chatrenet, the VP at Airbus in charge of Flight Controls, about this discrepancy, Mr. Chatrenet had an inventive answer. He said the rudder position was actually at 9.3 degrees, but it was in the process of failing. The structure was deforming, thus providing this (incorrect) rudder value of 11.5 degrees.

The problem with this is that FAA certification requires ultimate loads be withstood for three seconds. If Mr. Chatrenet is correct, the structure began failing immediately upon encountering ultimate loads, if not earlier.

I think in the end, after years of maintenance inspections, the real story is going to be something like

"That could have happend to any composite tail that had delaminated at the attach points."

Now, it's merely a question of who is using composite tails that delaminate.

[Vulcan]

Originally posted by Toad
You simple putz.

I FLEW the B-737 models that HAD the single PCU. I'm well aware of the problem. Here, read this again from my first post after you rushed to defend the Bus:



Now, how many Boeing incidents can you find where the RUDDER or the ENTIRE VERTICAL STABILIZER departed the aircraft in flight?

Boeing HAD a rudder Power Control Unit (PCU) problem on the "first gen" 737's. They put ONE PCU on the plane which was stupid. The ALPA TOLD them it was stupid. They lost some aircraft over that and when the "next gen" 737's came out, they had dual PCU's. That was THE END of the 737 rudder PCU problem.

See, it wasn't that the aircraft ever suffered STRUCTURAL FAILURE in flight... like Airbus... it was that their engineers went single PCU and should have known better.

Sure wasn't a STRUCTURAL problem though.

Putz.

So ummm let me get this straight, your saying the PCU problem which results in aircraft pummeling themselves into the ground and killing everybody on board versus the rudder failing which resulted in a landing where very everbody survived makes the Boeing better?

[Fishu]

Boeings can blow up in the air on their own.

Like the 747 which blew up in the air... was it over the sea, near NYC?
The center fuel tank blew up, even though it was empty.

[Maverick]

Toad, these clowns can't grasp simple concepts like apples vs oranges.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Vulcan
So ummm let me get this straight, your saying the PCU problem which results in aircraft pummeling themselves into the ground and killing everybody on board versus the rudder failing which resulted in a landing where very everbody survived makes the Boeing better?

ummmm  


NO.

The thread deals primarily with structural failure. Someone noted that those rudder stresses would make a Boeings vert stab fail as well.

However, 737's, due to an engineering "overoptimism" mistake have had full rudder deflections at speeds nearly TWICE as fast as that Bus was going and both the rudder and the vert stab stayed on.

So the point is that composites do indeed seem more fragile than old tech metal.

Note that Boeing is going to composites in flight controls now as well. They resisted that for a very long time. Be interesting to see if their flight controls fall off now too.

And, as far as engineering mistakes, before you howl about the single PCU on the 737, take a look at the abysmal record of Bus in the "flight control laws" of the computerized flight controls. It starts with the "homelite chainsaw" incident and continues through several "on autopilot ILS, crashed short of the runway incidents".

I hope that clears it up for you.

[Toad]

Looks like we should only fly on B-777's.

A lot of those Airbus incidents stem from the control laws/human factors. I think the high incidence of CFIT shows that as well.

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by cpxxx
But surely the lesson is that an airliner is not an aerobatic aircraft and that full and rapid rudder deflections applied in a sideslip would overload any airliner's vertical tail simply because it is not designed  for that kind of treatment.

Party pooper

[Airhead]

Originally posted by SOB
I'll be boarding two Airbus A319s tomorrow.  

I've heard of large people being charged for two seats before, but two PLANES?!?

Call your travel agent SOB.

[Fishu]

Originally posted by Airhead
I've heard of large people being charged for two seats before, but two PLANES?!?

Call your travel agent SOB.

I think it's time to call the doctor

[cpxxx]

Originally posted by Sixpence
Party pooper

Yeah sorry, boring is me.  Not taking sides.

Boeing or Airbus. Both are made in foreign countries, nothing to do with me.

[Toad]

Originally posted by cpxxx


But surely the lesson is that an airliner is not an aerobatic aircraft and that full and rapid rudder deflections applied in a sideslip would overload any airliner's vertical tail simply because it is not designed  for that kind of treatment.

It could happen to a Boeing.

True story:

On dark and stormy night (literally) I got called out at 2AM to S/O a 727 on a functional check flight when it came out of phase maintenance. Captain was an ex-Navy "fighter pilot". Wasn't my first FCF but it was my most exciting.

One check is to turn off both yaw dampers at cruise speed, induce dutch roll with rudder input and turn on ONE yaw damper and make sure the yaw damper stops the dutch roll. Then you do the same thing with the other yaw damper.

Most folks put in a bit of right then left rudder and got about a 10 degree of bank dutch roll going.

This Captain had the F/O do the first one and that's what the F/O did, about 10 degrees. The skipper says... "That's no Ductch roll.. here, lemme show ya."

Immediately, the little red light that flashes in your brain when trouble beckons started going off on the F/O, S/O and two maintenance guys heads. We could see it on each other's faces but it was 1982, when a Captain was a CAPTAIN. (Before CRM).

Ewwwwwwwwww yah.  He turns off the yaw dampers and goes about full throw with the rudders in a left/right/left/right/left quick step.

By the time he's done, the aircraft is Dutch rolling in excess of 60 degrees of bank... I couldn't see the ADI very well because I was hugging the S/O panel to keep from getting seat belt/shoulder harness bruises. The mechs are bouncing around the cockpit.

The Captain reaches down and ... the chief mech yells "NO!!!" slaps on the yaw dampers, which are close together and he hit both guards at once.  BOTH yaw dampers snap on.

WHAM! It stopped that Dutch roll right now. Violently. 60+ bank to straight and level in one click.

Captain says, "Ops, one at a time. We gotta do it again." we all shout "NO!"

He looks at us, frowning and getting pissed... "WHAT?"  

Us: "NO!"

He says "P      s".  (word for multiple feminine sex organs) and proceeds to brood and frown the rest of the flight.

Chief Mech says "now we'll have to inspect the vert stab again to see if anything broke.

We landed, they inspected. I checked the records... all OK.

Scared the doo dah out of four people though.. didn't bother the other one, however. Yeah, I like Boeings. Metal ones, anyway.

[Staga]

Originally posted by LePaul
Nah, Staga feels his Europe is superior to all, so anytime something shows his side being lesser than anything American, he has to find, invent or conjure why his beleives are better.  Be damned the facts.

I could care less about the two aircraft companies, Staga has made it a personal quest to attempt to debunk anything Toad has said.   whatever.  This USA vs Euro thing is getting tiring.

FYI LePaul I don't think anyone is superior but if You like to think so please do so; Your opinion is really valuabe like always.

Anyways it can be found from airdisater.com that some Boeings are doing better than Airbuses and some are doing worse.
I just find it idiotic when some eurohater nutcases are thinking that Boeing is somehow superior or at least they are denying or ignoring those aircrafts have their flaws too.