Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Jet Crash Inquiry Shifts To Tail Section Breakup!  
User currently offlineDELL_dude From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (12 years 8 months 14 hours ago) and read 1366 times:

Jet Crash Inquiry Shifts to Tail Section Breakup (new details!)

LA Times

Some selected quotes from the link:

The tail fin--which helps to keep a plane flying straight--was pulled Monday from the waters of Jamaica Bay and appeared as if it had cleanly broken away from the rest of the fuselage.

The NTSB said the rudder was trimmed to a left deflection of 10 degrees, and Barry Schiff, a retired Boeing 747 captain and air safety consultant, said this appeared to indicate that the right engine had failed.

However, since the bolts remained secured to the main fuselage, suspicion focused on the first possibility, a structural breakdown.
Officials said the vertical stabilizer cracked above its attachment point to the fuselage, while the bolts that were supposed to hold it in place remained intact. They speculated that the problem might be some weakness in the material--a combination of aluminum and a composite material.


So it wasn't the bolts?
If it was the actual material fracturing why haven't they immediatley grounded all Airbuses?






7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineHkgspotter1 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (12 years 8 months 11 hours ago) and read 1313 times:

How about because its never happened before and there are much older A300's flying that have never had this problem. I know the Americans would be very happy if every Airbus was grounded but that will not happen.

All 737 have not been grounded even though they have crashed numerous times without reason.

If the tail did break off for no reason then Airbus will I'm sure see this as a najor problem, but what happened before the tail fell off, or the plane broke apart ?. What started all the shaking ??



User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (12 years 8 months 11 hours ago) and read 1297 times:

Hello again HKspotter,

Keep in mind with the 737 incidents that the causes were unknown. Theories, but unknown. The AA587 incident, if it indeed was the tail falling off, look for the Airbus aircraft to be grounded. This was indeed the case with AA191 (DC-10) back in 1979. DC-10's were grounded when the cause was known.

As far as the root cause, investigators are now looking at seperation minimums between AA587 and a JAL 744. They may have been too close and the aerodynamic forces mat have contributed to the crash.

Regards


User currently offlineRootsgirl From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 530 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (12 years 8 months 11 hours ago) and read 1290 times:

Boeing nut, would this mean grounding all Airbus, or just the 300's?

User currently offlineBombayhog From United States of America, joined May 2001, 557 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (12 years 8 months 11 hours ago) and read 1274 times:

I completely agree with Bove. To say that Americans would be happy for Airbusses to be grounded is totally out of line and completely wrong.

Grow up is right.

/gwl


User currently offlineLsjef From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (12 years 8 months 8 hours ago) and read 1247 times:

It is ridiculous to believe Americans want Airbuses grounded but, at the same time, we must all recognize that had the events of 9/11 not happened, a healthier industry would have made it easier for the FAA to temporarily ground A300s. The fact they are not being grounded for a potential serious material fatigue issue only shows how fragile the industry is; there is HUGE political pressure to not encumber the industry with groundings, even for safety.

On the A v B issue, the more compelling question is, if this proves out to be a combination of material fatigue and wake turbulence, how might this impact the A380 and any other super-jumbos? I.e., might this incident catalyze the industry away from wake turbulence, to the point of abandoning the A380? If the FAA adds another minute or two to heavy-heavy departure separation, will the inefficiency of lost runway capacity more than offset the added passenger capacity for these heavies, further compelling airlines away from using heavies?

So, yes, there is an A v B issue here...but let's keep it civil everybody, OK?


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7965 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (12 years 8 months 3 hours ago) and read 1211 times:

I'll say this: if AA is forced to temporarily ground its A300B4-605R fleet, it would have very devestating effects on the airline, especially in the Caribbean.

Imagine JFK, MIA and SJU losing a large fraction of its AA flights until the planes are repaired--that will be how big the impact will be. AA could temporarily reassign its 767-300ER fleet, but I don't think that will come close to filling the needs of AA's very large Caribbean operations.


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13148 posts, RR: 78
Reply 7, posted (12 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1160 times:

Newer aircraft, such as the A380, are designed to minimise wake turbulence.
It's very puzzling, as stated, there are older A300-600's flying around.
So is the spotlight on AA?


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Ntsb Report On Feb-2-2005 TEB Biz Jet Crash posted Wed Nov 1 2006 02:40:44 by LTBEWR
Jet Blue Flight Diverted To MCO posted Wed Sep 20 2006 22:02:05 by United757
A380 - A Weak Tail Section? posted Sun Jul 23 2006 01:08:24 by Okelleynyc
Small Jet Crash Near Ocean City, MD posted Wed Jun 28 2006 16:01:24 by BWI757
Who Will Handle Jet Airways' New Flight To LHR? posted Tue Jun 20 2006 23:58:50 by Concorde001
Toronto Man Killed In Jet Crash At Ottawa Air Show posted Fri Jun 16 2006 22:52:28 by Irobertson
A380 Tail Section: Empty? posted Sun Feb 19 2006 04:34:25 by Rolfen
Sioux DC10 Crash Not Due To Hydraulic Failure? posted Mon Jan 9 2006 14:48:30 by Cedarjet
Will Jet Airways Ever Fly To EWR? posted Sun Nov 20 2005 18:09:33 by Aseem
777 Tail Section posted Mon Aug 15 2005 05:16:05 by Fly_yhm