Same thing with AA 587 that crashed in Queens in November of 2001. Many people reported the airplane on fire while still in the air. Also it is strange that no similar type of crash ever occurred involving a pilot overusing the rudder control, causing part of the tail assembly to break off.
“Also it is strange that no similar type of crash ever occurred involving a pilot overusing the rudder control, causing part of the tail assembly to break off.”
The FO panicked and violated operating procedures. PILOT ERROR!!
“Also it is strange that no similar type of crash ever occurred involving a pilot overusing the rudder control, causing part of the tail assembly to break off.”
There were at the time ten reports of overstressed A300 tailfins.
This is the crash where the aircraft struck the Queensboro Bridge in NYC. They tried to blame it on an “over-manipulated jackscrew” which controls the elevator function. The only problem with that theory is, since this is fly-by-wire aircraft in which pilot input goes first into the computer and then to the solenoids that control the jackscrew/elevator. The computer prevents over-manipulation by the pilot. This was explained to me over lunch one day by the Boeing engineer/investigator that was sent to the scene. He stated that FAA and NTSB issued the jackscrew story to save the commercial air travel industry, since a second terrorist attack on an airliner in less than three months would effectively shut down commercial air travel. His investigation listed probable cause as a bomb in the last rows of the passenger compartment. He said most likely similar to the thwarted “tennis shoe bomber.” The agencies were not happy with his report, and made sure to drown it out. They portrayed it as him trying to shield his company.