Avitop.com Tell a Friend
Bookmark
Advertising
F16 takeoff
spacer
AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com
 Buy Aircraft
 Cool Stuff
 Fighter Gallery
 Interactive F16
 Aviation Forum
 Aviation Top 1000
 N-Number Search
 Aviation Links


Avitop.com Forums
Welcome to Aviation Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search  

**ScareBus 1 Safety 0**

Last post 05-23-2002, 5:35 PM by anonymous2. 0 replies.
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  05-23-2002, 5:35 PM 1714

    **ScareBus 1 Safety 0**

    *** Posted by T. D. Ponder ***
    IF WE CAN'T FIND A SOLUTION, LET'S REDEFINE THE PROBLEM!

    There is a very disconcerting movement afoot to quietly change the
    rules of flying after nearly 100 years. If successful, it will make life so
    much easier for certain entities --- entities like the NTSB, FAA and
    manufacturers of large aircraft. Actually it isn't just to make
    life easier: billions of dollars are involved.

    The FAA now says there is no need to ground the Airbus and says
    also that no link has been found between material in the tail fin and
    the N.Y. crash.

    Perhaps not, but there is one indisputable very large link --- the tail went for
    a swim in Jamaica Bay and the aircraft crashed and burned in a
    nearby neighborhood with the loss of all aboard and five people killed
    on the ground. I call that "a link!"

    Notable: A substantial number of American Airline pilots who fly these things
    have called for their grounding, but the government isn't listening.

    THE REALLY SCARY PART IS YET TO COME

    Boeing, at the request of the FAA, has issued a statement redefining
    pilot procedures that have successfully been in effect for nearly a
    hundred years. Isn't that incredible?

    Get this;

    From Boeing:

    "The bulletin stresses that rudder input 'as a means to maneuver in
    roll' -- often taught as part of military or general aviation pilot training
    -- 'typically does not apply' to large transport aircraft
    operations. 'The rudder in a large transport airplane is typically
    used for trim, engine failure, and crosswind takeoff and landing. Only
    under an extreme condition, such as loss of a flap, mid air collision,
    or where an airplane has pitched to a very high pitch attitude and a
    pushover or thrust change has already been unsuccessful,
    should careful rudder input in the direction of the desired roll
    be considered,' Boeing said. A rudder input is never the preferred
    initial response for events such as a wake vortex encounter,
    windshear encounter, or to reduce bank angle preceding an
    imminent stall recovery'. "

    Well now, THAT certainly takes care of the Airbus crash --- Obvious to
    Boeing only now, the pilots used their rudder below design maneuvering
    speed and caused the tail to decide to leave the aircraft to go for a swim.
    It's time to break out the Champagne in France because design
    maneuvering speed no longer applies to transport aircraft!

    You can bet your last dollar that I certainly would use rudder in the event
    of wake turbulence in order to keep from putting a couple hundred
    paying passengers on their backs! And, I would expect the aircraft
    to hold together during the recovery process! Anything else is nothing
    less than male bovine excrement.

    To continue:
    "Boeing also cautioned that 'sequential full or nearly full authority
    rudder reversals may not be within the structural design limits of the
    airplane, even if the airspeed is below the design maneuvering
    speed,' noting that no Boeing procedures 'require this type of pilot
    input.' Besides over-stressing a vertical fin, rudder reversals can put
    'excessive structural loads' on other parts of an airplane,
    such as engine struts."

    GeeJessieLee!
    Now we have not only negated forever the FAA's own definition of
    "Design Maneuvering Speed" but we also have absolved all those
    crashes and upsets on Boeing 737s that Boeing earlier reluctantly
    admitted was indeed, no fooling, a design problem. Not any more.

    WHAT IS GOING ON HERE IS MERELY AN ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE RULES

    Here is another example of a rule change:

    The bastard helicopter-yes-no-airplane V22 Osprey program has been
    in deep trouble with a number of soldier-killing crashes. So, now the
    rules are being changed by the Navy so that ... "No longer does the craft
    have to be able to land without power when it's in helicopter mode."

    What? Do you realize that means the Osprey is now safe to crash!
    "Say you lost an engine, Marine 1234? Okay, you are cleared to crash in
    your present location!"

    DON'T LET THIS CONTINUE

    Every pilot in America --- from the student pilot to the Airline Transport
    Pilot --- should be offended by these blatant attempts to change the
    nature of flying. Don't you just love the phrase, " ... military or general
    aviation pilot training -- 'typically does not apply' to large transport
    aircraft operations?"

    Excuse me, but It has typically applied for decades. But now all is
    different? Every hear of the tail section of a DC3, 5, 6 or 7 falling off
    in midflight?

    Is the basic Flight Instructor now doing his student a disservice by using
    Dutch Rolls to teach him coordinated use of controls?

    Has anyone ever ripped the tail section off a Cessna while instructing
    control coordination techniques? No, because the Cessna is designed
    and constructed to perform in a normal matter. Why suddenly are Transport
    Aircraft immune from previous design minima? Because they keep
    crashing?

    As a pilot, please make your views know now. It IS Important.
    Every Email or letter counts!

    T. D. Ponder
    Airline Transport Pilot
    716 40th Place
    Birmingham, AL
    205 785-1615
    tdponder@juno.com

    http://www.angelfire.com/al/TDsFunpage/index.html

    Contacts:

    Email:

    Your Congressmen
    http://www.mrsmith.com/index2.html

    Snail Mail:

    NTSB
    NTSB Headquarters
    490 L'Enfant Plaza, SW
    Washington, DC 20594
    (202) 314-6000

    FAA

    Federal Aviation Administration
    Aviation Safety Hotline, ASY-300
    800 Independence Avenue, SW
    Washington, DC 20591









View as RSS news feed in XML
Copyright©1998-2004 Avitop
Our Privacy Policy - Aviation
Powered by Community Server, by Telligent Systems