Pilots of Doomed Jet Unaware Tail Fin Fell Off

Reuters | 10/29/02 | John Crawley

[kattracks]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The crew of a doomed American Airlines jetliner apparently was unaware the tail fin had fallen off as they struggled to control the plane before it crashed last year into a New York neighborhood, killing 265 in the second-worst U.S. aviation disaster.

Cockpit voice recordings released by the National Transportation Safety Board at the start of public hearings into the crash shed little light on the cause of the disaster. But they established a critical time line for events and illustrated the dramatic final seconds of Flight 587, an Airbus A300-600. Safety board investigators are probing a number of factors -- including actions of the crew, rudder movements, and the possible role of turbulence generated by a bigger plane -- in the crash that occurred 103 seconds after takeoff on Nov. 12, 2001, from John F. Kennedy airport en route to Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.

The crash took place just two months after the catastrophic Sept. 11 hijackings, and immediately raised concerns it might have been another attack. But the safety board said then, and again on Tuesday, that the crash appeared to be an accident.

"There is no indication to date of any criminal activity associated with this crash," Carol Carmody, the acting safety board chairman, said at the hearing.

Investigators also said weather, which was clear at the time of the ill-fated flight, maintenance, air traffic control procedures, and engine performance were not factors in the accident.

There were also no apparent problems with the rudder before the flight, which is a critical finding.

Investigators believe a series of aggressive rudder swings a little more than a minute into the flight created substantial aerodynamic stresses on the tail fin, or vertical stabilizer, and caused it to break off the fuselage.

The safety board believes the crew was in full command of the flight controls, including the rudder movements. There have been some reports of rudders on other Airbus planes moving on their own without a pilot stepping on the pedals.

The voice recordings, which can provide a wealth of information for investigators, included comments from the pilot, Capt. Edward States, and the co-pilot, Sten Molin, who was flying the plane, as well as sounds heard by the crew.

The flight recorder captured routine conversation before takeoff, and the clipped jargon of cockpit procedures during the first minute of the flight, which was normal.

But then the plane encountered two wakes, similar to horizontal tornadoes, generated by a Japan Airlines 747 that took off from the same JFK runway two minutes before Flight 587 and was flying about 5 miles ahead.

The first, according to documents released at the hearing, was little more than a bump as the American jet crossed over it.

"Little wake turbulence, huh?" asked States.

"Yeah," Molin said.

Flight 587 hit the second wake seconds later as it began to turn left and climb to 2,400 feet. The cockpit recorder noted one "thump," followed by two more, and then a call by Molin in a "strained voice" for "max power."

While boosting the engines, the crew initiated a series of rapid back-and-forth rudder swings.

"You all right?" States asked.

"Yea, I'm fine," Molin replied.

"Hang onto it. Hang onto it," States called out.

There was a snap, another thump and then a loud bang, which investigators believe was the tail fin falling off the aircraft traveling at roughly 240 knots.

A roaring noise filled the cockpit and then two chimes sounded seconds apart, indicating the engines had fallen off. Engines are designed to break off when a plane spirals violently.

There were no indications from the recordings that the crew was aware the tail fin had fallen off the plane, as the pilots frantically struggled to determine what went wrong.

"What the hell are we into? We're stuck in it," Molin said after the tail fin had separated.

"Get out of it, get out of it," States said.

The transcript ended two seconds later at impact.

American is a unit of AMR Corp . Airbus, owned by European Aeronautic Defense & Space Co NV and Britain's BAE Systems Plc., which has defended its rudder system throughout the investigation.

[drjoe]

I remember the last three words from the first officer after a midair and seconds before it hit the ground. "I live ya Ma" Heartrending.

drjoe

[drjoe]

pardon me "I love ya Ma."

[wndycndy]

"You always hope to pull it out and recover. What they don't tell you in these transcripts are the last two words, just when it's realized that you're out of altitude (and options)..."

My thought's exactly :(

[banjo joe]

I agree, but have attended safety seminars where the last transmissions w/ ATC are replayed, or CVR transcripts reviewed. It's chilling, but the object lesson stays with you.

[Bobby777]

I rode on a lot of Southwest birds when I flew ... never was that crazy about the 737 ... liked the DC-9/MD-8x series because they were powerful (had one guy pull out of KC to SL in 37 minutes in an MD-80 ... I was pushed back in the seat nearly the entire trip) ... I preferred the 727 with the large wing area or an L-1011 which I couldn't get except to the coasts ...

on one particular DC-9 from Houston to Oklahoma City, we hit a hard thunderstorm which was a giant black beast swallowing up the clear blue sky ... there was an NAIA basketball team (or NCAA, can't remember) but we were slapped around like plastic toy ... the pilot aborted the landing when we hit 40+ mph crosswinds just seconds before touchdown ...

Compare that to an L-1011 I was on, which was set down on a perfect cool night ... never, and I mean never felt the belly gear touch the ground ... and I've been on passenger jets about 150+ times total ... amazing ... love the Lockheed Tri-Star ...

[Bobby777]

was that the PSA 727?

[Dan(9698)]

"...what is the actual MPH of 240 knots? ..."

73 Knots is 100 MPH.

[RS]

".....and planes don't get hit by vortexes when the takeoff pattern and timing is the same day after day after day"

Don't fly a lot, do you ?

[exit82]

I fly a fair amount each year, thanks. Nothing has been produced saying that the regular separation pattern wasn't followed here. The Airbus 300 is a substantial airplane. A 747 may leave a wingtip vortex that can flip a small Cessna, or irritate a 737, but it isn't going to rip apart an Airbus 300.

That morning was a typical morning. No reports of clear air turbulence--usually not near the ground--nor in the area reported by previous pilots. You're talking about a busy takeoff pattern here from one of the world's busiest airports.Something like that would not have gone unnoticed.

[jlogajan]

What was the "roaring noise" that filled the cockpit? If the engines had fallen off where was the noise coming from?

Okay, put you tinfoil hat down for a second. The engines had just fallen off. Why -- because the plane was in a violent spin. Now as you may imagine planes are shaped for a particular direction of travel through the air -- we call that "aerodynamic" shape -- nice and smooth curves. It really cuts down on air turbulence and drag. Now throw the plane into a violent spin through a 280mph wind -- ever hear a hurricane with 280mph winds? You get a bit of a roaring noise, no? Well, you'll get the same thing when the jet is no longer slipping nicely through the air in its designed for direction. See, the non-aerodynamic profile causes turbulence -- which is powerful noisy. Okay?

[TailspinJim]

A buddy of mine taking off from Philadelphia in a Piper Tri Pacer hit wake vortex at 300 ft and was rolled inverted, stayed with it (the roll) to complete the roll. Tower asked if everything was OK....He answered affirmative.

Another buddy on final at Chicago in clouds (IFR) hit wake in a 400 Series Cessna Twin, was rolled inverted, stayed with it completing the roll, stayed on ILS and Glide Path. Wow. Some flying!

[jlogajan]

I believe this was the first shoe bomber.

Your speculation and 25 cents will buy you a cup of coffee.

[El Gato]

How is having no engines on a plane with absolutely no gliding ability supposed to help anything

I thought that seemed a bit odd too. So was the statement that the crew initiated a series of back and forth rudder movements. The obvious question would be "why?". They sure wouldn't be doing it just for the heck of it, especially on climbout.

[exit82]

I wish I could get a decent cup of coffee around here for 25 cents.

[exit82]

Your friends are good pilots--or good tailgaters--only kidding. Hope with your screen name you're not flying with them!

Smaller planes are very susceptible to vortex from larger planes, and it can occur long distances away and much lower in altitude from the plane causing the vortex.

[El Gato]

A buddy of mine taking off from Philadelphia in a Piper Tri Pacer hit wake vortex at 300 ft and was rolled inverted, stayed with it (the roll) to complete the roll. Tower asked if everything was OK....He answered affirmative.

Except for those ugly brown and yellow stains and really bad smell in the cockpit, one might assume. :)

[RS]

"I fly a fair amount each year, thanks. Nothing has been produced saying that the regular separation pattern wasn't followed here"

Believe me, when you run into it ( my last time just happened to be in an A300 out of LAX ) you will know it - and the first report of clear air turbulence allways comes from someone who had no idea that it was there.

[VOA]

So let me get this straight: this is a problem with Airbus planes yet few of them
have been grounded to fix it? Something's not right here.

I'd say a year or two ago, the results of some study group about the TWA Flt. 800
(Boeing 747) concluded that the frequency of a 747 fuel tank blowing up was so rare,
that the rational thing to do was to let 'em fly...and just pay off the families of the
deceased.

While this is apples and oranges, it's a little ironic that while Ford was (rightfully)
slammed in doing for the gas tank of the Pinto, Boeing is allowed to keep 'em in the
air even if there is a hint of exploding fuel tanks. Even without a rear-end collision!)


(...I'm no expert, but my gut tells me that if TWA 800 was actually brought down by
an exploding fuel tank, it's amazing we don't see one light off now and then
while sitting for an hour or so on the tarmac in some hot summer place like
Dallas-Ft. Worth. But that's just my amatueur musing...)

[midwestmidnight]

"If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going!"