On Aug 15, 3:19*am, "Flaps_50!" wrote:
On Aug 9, 1:49*am, Mxsmanic wrote:



a writes:
A couple of days ago the NTSB found the 320 series to have too
sensitive a rudder, it can be torn off with peddle pressures. What's
especially of interest is the problem seems to persist even when crews
are given special training about the problem.

There are some details here.

http://content.usatoday.com/communit.../2010/08/ntsb-....

Hmm. The whole purpose of having computers that fly the airplane, and ignore
the pilots' inputs if they find them contrary to what French engineers have
decided, is to prevent exactly this sort of incident. Why don't the
all-knowing, all-wise computers prevent any rudder movement that might
endanger structural integrity?

Because the computers don't know actually know the relationship
between yaw, airspeed and allowable rudder input/structural load and
they are not required to.

You jest, surely?? If I understand what you say, most flights in
Autopilot through moderate turbulence would result in splintered
aluminum tubes raining down.

Any pilot would tell you that humans are incapable of matching
computers' sophistication in precision flying. Why else would most
airline SOPs actually bar pilots from hand-flying above 1,000 feet?


Neither do most pilots when they step on the
rudder pedals. Think about it...


Well, if the manufacturer intends to convey a limit that can be
reached where the airplane's structure is threatened, it should either
automatically limit the pilot's motion to a point before such
threshold is reached. Proper pilot training is a sine qua non, however
not a substitute for the automatic limitation.

I still can't believe the ultra-sophisticated Airbuses allow rudders
to move so much that the empennage can actually sever from the rest of
the fuselage. As omissions go, that must take the biscuit!

Cheers,

Ramapriya