To: dawn53
The problem comes in because the tail fell off. In most planes (haven't seen indication that the A-300 is an exception) the FDR is in the tail. It's in the tail because that's usually the last part involved in an accident (if you review crash photos you'll see that frequently the tail assembly is just sitting there mostly whole) so it impacts with less energy and takes less damage. In this one, with the tail apparently falling off first, with the FDR still plugged into all the systems and getting yanked out, God knows what kind of electrical and impact forces the thing took, certainly more than in most crashes, then it splashed in water and any exposed electronics got wet. The problem with playing the law of averages is that somethings break the law.
76 posted on
11/16/2001 1:10:45 PM PST by
discostu
To: discostu
Does the A300 have an APU in the tail? If it exploded..due to sabotage or whatever...it could account for the tail coming off....
78 posted on
11/16/2001 1:10:45 PM PST by
ken5050
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson