Skip to comments.
U.S. Orders Rudder Inspections on Some Airbus Planes (A300's and A310's)
Reuters ^
| March 25, 2005
| Reuters
Posted on 03/25/2005 11:35:26 AM PST by COEXERJ145
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
To: COEXERJ145
Glad to hear it...I will prob have to take drugs so I wont make a scene and get handcuffed and sat on!!! I really hate to fly!
21
posted on
03/25/2005 1:01:32 PM PST
by
pitinkie
(revenge will be sweet)
To: pitinkie
That takes all the fun out of flying, especially on a 777. The IFE system gives passengers plenty to do (although some does cost money) and the comfort of the 777 is unmatched. Enjoy the flight on the safest airliner in the world.
22
posted on
03/25/2005 1:08:32 PM PST
by
COEXERJ145
(Believing in Internet Polls is Like Believing in the Tooth Fairy)
To: COEXERJ145
23
posted on
03/25/2005 1:24:56 PM PST
by
pitinkie
(revenge will be sweet)
To: COEXERJ145
24
posted on
03/25/2005 1:26:02 PM PST
by
Guenevere
(Sola Gratia)
To: pitinkie
New airplane. Never been on one of these.
To: Publius6961
As does the new 7E7/787 Boeing Dreamliner. I believe the newer versions of the 737, as well as the 777 use significant composite content in aero surfaces.
26
posted on
03/25/2005 2:21:10 PM PST
by
usafsk
((Know what you're talking about before you dance the QWERTY waltz))
To: Publius6961
Wouldn't your suspicion that something is wrong with composite aero surfaces support the findings of the 587 investigation? The co-pilot overreacted to an upset and snapped the vertical stabilizer. You can snap the aluminum tail off of an airliner just as easily by exceeding design limits.
27
posted on
03/25/2005 2:23:50 PM PST
by
usafsk
((Know what you're talking about before you dance the QWERTY waltz))
To: gridlock
28
posted on
03/25/2005 2:26:38 PM PST
by
patton
(the curious organism known as bdelloid rotifer)
To: usafsk
Yes, but "design limits" should include TO and landing, don't you think?
29
posted on
03/25/2005 2:32:05 PM PST
by
patton
(the curious organism known as bdelloid rotifer)
To: patton
Of course they do, if you mean taking off and landing within the design envelope of the aircraft. For 587, that wasn't the case. For the Cuba-Quebec plane, who knows what happened? The rudder came off but the vertical stabilizer stayed on, a better outcome although not one I'd like to experience.
Anyway, the 587 incident was a rare case of pilot error, although there is a dispute about whether AA training might have led him astray.
30
posted on
03/25/2005 2:36:03 PM PST
by
usafsk
((Know what you're talking about before you dance the QWERTY waltz))
To: Eric in the Ozarks
I understand AA's most senior pilots are transferring off the Airbus back to Boeings, calling the Airbuses Scarebuses.
31
posted on
03/25/2005 3:18:44 PM PST
by
kylaka
To: COEXERJ145
This is like two week old event. What's with the rush to check it out now?
32
posted on
03/25/2005 3:19:41 PM PST
by
Cboldt
To: Publius6961
Yup, that's the one. Do a search for "Another Airbus Rudder" in News, and it should pull up the thread with the comparison pics.
33
posted on
03/25/2005 3:33:17 PM PST
by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
To: patton
v-tailed DR killer but a bonanza for the lawyers!
< ]B^)
34
posted on
03/25/2005 3:49:08 PM PST
by
Erasmus
(Sled dogs and Englishmen go out in the midnight sun.)
To: Calpernia; Velveeta; WestCoastGal; jerseygirl; DAVEY CROCKETT; Tuba Guy; Chieftain; TexKat; ...
35
posted on
03/26/2005 5:57:25 AM PST
by
nw_arizona_granny
(The enemy within, will be found in the "Communist Manifesto 1963", you are living it today.)
To: MrTed; Aeronaut
36
posted on
03/26/2005 6:24:42 AM PST
by
Calpernia
(Breederville.com)
To: Calpernia; Tijeras_Slim; FireTrack; Pukin Dog; citabria; B Knotts; kilowhskey; cyphergirl; ...
37
posted on
03/26/2005 6:26:46 AM PST
by
Aeronaut
(I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things - Saint-Exupery)
To: usafsk
You can snap the aluminum tail off of an airliner just as easily by exceeding design limits.Flight 587 was doing about 240 knots when the tail came off. It should not be possible to kick the tail off an airplane of that category at that speed no matter how hard you try.
38
posted on
03/26/2005 6:53:26 AM PST
by
DuncanWaring
(The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
To: pitinkie
"...Glad to hear it...I will prob have to take drugs so I wont make a scene and get handcuffed and sat on!!! I really hate to fly!....."
A few belts of Scotch always works for me!
I've been flying most of my 59 years but I never forget to self-medicate.....
39
posted on
03/26/2005 7:08:21 AM PST
by
Victor
(If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert." -David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister)
To: pitinkie
777s are just fine. We do not have the same manufacturing methods that AirBus used in their earlier jets anymore. AirBus since the A320, has been using methods similar to what Boeing does; processes that were perfected on the B-2 bomber. Given a choice, I would not fly anything from AirBus earlier than the A320, which is a fine jet, now that the pilot actually gets the last word against the computer. It wasn't always that way.
40
posted on
03/26/2005 7:45:47 AM PST
by
Pukin Dog
(Sans Reproache)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson