 |
 |
August 6, 2002 |
|

|
|
 |
•
Why
Some Wineries Choose Screw Caps |
American Flight
587, bound for the Dominican Republic, fell out of the
clear blue sky on that November morning shortly after
takeoff from JFK International Airport in New York City
killing all 260 people on board as well as five more people
on the ground. Speculation on what caused the crash has
centered on two factors: that the Airbus hit turbulence
created by a jumbo jet which took off moments before and
then, the experienced pilots overreacted causing the Airbus'
tail to snap off. |
•
Suicide
Bombs Spread Rat Poison, Disease |
•
What
Really Caused AA Flight 587 to Crash? |
|
|
"That [original] idea [based on early safety board sources' evaluations]
… that the pilot then wildly overreacted without anything else going
wrong, made crazy movements on their rudder and therefore imposed
such stresses on the tail that it fell off and the plane crashed,
just doesn't hold water," said David Rose, the author of the
Vanity
Fair article.
One problem Rose points to is the A300-600's electronic control
system. There have been 21 incidents in which the rudder appears
to have moved without commands from the pilot. And other A300-600
pilots say it is wrong to blame the cockpit crew that day.
"We are always taught to try and put the airplane back in coordinated
flight," said Todd Wissing, an A300-600 first officer. "That is,
simply to put it back to a normal situation rather than slamming
it side to side."
|
MORE
ON THIS STORY |
Problems
with Inspection Practices
Wissing and seven other American pilots wrote a letter to
the Federal Aviation Administration, raising concerns about
the control system. They listed another problem with the Airbus:
the tail assembly itself.
Pilots have called for a change in the way it is inspected.
The tail is made of composite material — hundreds of layers
of carbon fiber — and a visual inspection is required only
once every five years. But, as some experts argue, this isn't
enough.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor James Williams
believes the inspection policy is inadequate because little
is known about deterioration of composites over time or from
turbulence.
"This is a lamentably naive policy," Williams told ABCNEWS.
"It is analogous to assessing whether a woman has breast cancer
by simply looking at her family portrait."
Because the composite lugs that hold together the tail to
the fuselage are hidden from view, Williams says the visual
inspections are not enough, even though some argue that deconstructing
the plane for inspection could be more destructive. He says
the designers of passenger jets should make it easier for
any vital parts made up of composites to be inspected safely
with ultrasound.
|
 |
IN DETAIL |
•
Worst
Plane Crashes
|
 |
RELATED STORIES |
•
Pilots
Request Airbus Jets Grounding |
•
Investigators
Looking into New Crash Theory |
•
NTSB:
Flight 587 Crash Looking Like Accident |
•
A
Chronology of the Crash of Flight 587 |
•
Plane
Crashes in NYC Neighborhood |
|
Airbus officials disputed any problem with the inspection policy or the
composite lugs. "We have demonstrated by empirical fact that during the
life of this part, damage which cannot be seen through visual inspection
will not grow and will not affect the integrity of the structure," said
Clay McConnell, Airbus vice president of communications.
McConnell said the National Transportation Safety Board and the FAA were
continuing their accident investigation but have not called for any design
changes. "The NTSB has said that if they had any reason to recommend changes
to A300 operations or inspection procedures, they would make those recommendations
immediately. No recommendation on any changes along those lines have been
made," McConnell said.
American is the only domestic airline flying the A300. Along with the
FAA, it says the planes are safe and has no plans to ground them.
 |
ABCNEWS' Judy Isikow produced the story for
World News Tonight.
|