Flew the -800 with the "new, improved rudder actuator". Yeah, it's better but from my admittedly limited technical expertise view, they may not have totally eliminated the problem. I sure HOPE they did though.
As far as "pilot error" being involved I'd like to see your company docs on the accidents. I don't call uncommanded full rudder deflection a "routine rudder deflection case". I'm not sure you CAN over-react to uncommanded full rudder deflection. From what I heard and read in the Union message traffic, nobody survived the computer simulation of the accident in the simulator.
Still, I'd like to see what Boeing says.
As far as rudder actuators... you guys just aren't real good at them, sorry to say. The 707 and the -135 series all had hardover problems resulting in the installation of a rudder pressure shutoff switch on the center control stand to instantly depressurize the rudder actuator. Quite a few guys died until they resolved that one.
Same switch on the 727's, nuff said. <EDIT>: And they split the rudder in half so there were two separate systems, upper and lower rudder, each with its own control surface, acutator, and different hydraulic system. Smart; "belts and suspenders". Probably would have saved those 737's had it been used on them.)
737's? nuff said.
767-200 wags it's tail like a dog in cruise, even with the new yaw dampeners. The F/A's hate it, although it is much improved over the initial intro set-up.
757 and 767-300's are pretty good in cruise wrt "tail wagging" for some reason. I sorta think the 767-200 was just too short, too "close-coupled".
Still all in all, Boeing is "belts and suspenders" engineering. Almost always a "back-up to the back-up method" of getting things done. I love 'em.
Compared to Airbus? Not even. Do a search on how many Airbuses have been lost after capturing the glide slope on A/P. I'll take my chances on a Boeing rudder any day.
Beyond that, the "flight law" programming in the Airbus computers scares me. With Boeing and the old McDonnell stuff, the pilot is always the ultimate authority. Not so with a 'Bus.
For example, if you think you need to pull more than the design load limit (g) to save your ass, the Boeing flight control computers would let you. An Airbus computer thinks it is ultimately smarter than the pilot and will limit you to design G.
Simple difference in design philosophy that I can't agree with. Nah, no thanks.
Lastly, although I love Boeings, the best heavy transport I ever flew was the L-1011. Lord, what a plane! What a great design! What a well thought out cockpit and control set-up. No one else has come close on such smooth Cat III A/P capability to this day, and it's an old design. Sadly, the aircraft design was ahead of the technology available and it was a bit problematical on maintenance.
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: Toad ]
