[OwenKellogg]

>>> The indicator will be whether or not there was a prominent heading change BEFORE the rattle. <<<

Or a prominent roll -- the WT could likely disrupt the airflow over a single wing.

What I'd like to know -- what did ATC call out for winds? "Flight 587 cleared for takeoff, winds are .... "

This is an important fact needed to debunk or support the WT theory.

[Blueflag]

I agree. I recall the winds were out of the S- SW that day (thus the departure runway chosen). Also, the smoke from the fire was moving pretty rapidly ~100 - 300' AGL from west to east (generally). One could presume the winds aloft to maybe 800 - 900 feet were roughly the same, so the wake from the heavy should have progressed east as well. I have not seem the paths and times of the two aircraft, so this could be all wet. BUT ... It could be the A300 was inadvertently flown right into the WT of the '47, even though it turned short of its path (reportedly?).

[okie01]

-- what did ATC call out for winds? "Flight 587 cleared for takeoff, winds are .... "

Winds were reported to be coming from 320 degrees at 11 Knots.

[Beenliedto]

what did ATC call out for winds?

I think I heard that the winds were 320 at 11... pretty much straight down the runway... I flew out of an airport in Northern Virginia that morning... that would be consistent given the weather pattern of the day, IMHO.