"Stefan" wrote in message
...
tscottme wrote:

And there are many people that fault Airbus for not making this
"design
feature" known more widely.

Actually, they did. There was that letter which Airbus, Boeing and the
FAA (yes, all three, together, in one letter!) wrote to the operator
pointing out exactly this and asking for a change in pilot training.
But of course, "many people" in the USA welcome any rumour which could
be used against Airbus.

Stefan

I'm not all that familiar with this accident, but if I recall correctly,
a checklist item before takeoff on the airplane was to select the yaw
damper to "ON" which would have limited the rudder deflection. This
wasn't done, and if not, would have been a direct contributor in this
accident.
I believe Airbus properly supplied the operator with a valid checklist
that included the yaw damper select. The crew missed it, or ignored
it...either way, the damper was selected "OFF" when the investigators
found the sub panel .When that rudder was deflected as they entered the
turbulence from the departing aircraft ahead of them, instead of
applying a damped rudder throw as would have been the case had the
damper been properly selected to "ON", the pilot flying the aircraft at
the time applied and was given full rudder command. This, and the
inertia forces encountered in both the initial throw and the reverse,
coupled with the turbulence, was too much for the vertical stabilizer.
Had the damper been selected properly as called for by the checklist,
this accident might not have happened.
Keep in mind, I haven't even read the report. I'm just going on what was
relayed to me by an associate friend of mine with the FAA.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI Retired
for private email; make necessary changes between ( )
dhenriques(at)(delete all this)earthlink(dot)net