Who invited the filthy casuals from Reddit
 

#1 What would you suggest as more appropriate FAA action?
I ask this because, as a 5 post noob to APC, I can tell you must have half a century of industry background, and 20,000 hours on type, and thus your opinion must be heard. I know this because I am an excellent judge of character when it comes to meeting people online.

#2 You have 4 posts to your existence and then you revive a 12 year old thread?

#3 I just received a completely legitimate email detailing a large sum bequeathed to me by a Kuwaiti prince, I am wondering if you would like to share in the spoils. I am mailing him a check for the full amount, and he is going to send double the amount back to me Western Union. If you are interested in joining in this financial quest, please PM me for a mailing address where you may send your check.

More, under the new set up for the cabin (new being 1998 when I retired) the purser, previous known as the number one flight attendant kept a maintenance log separate from the ships log book. This was to be presented to Maintenance when flight attendances met with maintenance once a year. Thinking this was just an oversight by people unfamiliar with FARs I contacted the Flight Attendant Supervisor and told her all maintenance complaints must be in the ships log book. She told me cabin complaints to be kept separate because it would empower the Flight Attendants. Again I went to Railsback and said you can't believe what the crazy FAs are doing. He said I know about the separate cabin logs, but marketing, in which the FAs fall under has more clout then Operations so my complaint has been ignored. I said "Do realize the FAA is going to go nuts when they find out all that's going on here?" He said "I know but nobody listens". So in direct conflict with procedures successfully followed for 30 years the school house developed new one in spite of being told these new practices were dangerous as the aircraft could not take the proposed g loading. The Simulators were biased to the new procedures and not how the aircraft reacted. Individual flight managers were sent out to the various bases to extol the new procedure after being told they would unlikely work. (Attendance to those meeting was required). And the FAs were told to keep a maintenance log sperate from the ships. They did not do that on my airplane because anyone doing so I would remove from the airplane. I was close to retirement and once was listened to as I had been a test pilot for the company and an engineer it was obvious my day was long passed. So I said hell with it, the company is not going to my plane down. Insanity reigned. After the crash the FAA was said to correct the afore mentioned practices. People should have gone to jail.


Why I didn't post before, I didn't know website like this existed. and since I probably won't live much longer maybe there are things that ought to be told.

It's more then just rudder input. Correcting Dutch Roll with rudder doesn't work because of the lag time from input to rudder deflection and our lag time. We are actually making the oscillations worse by using the rudder the forces on the vertical stab are the rudder inputs plus the aircraft oscillations. Use the spoilers with the yoke to kill Dutch Roll.

The tail fin on that airplane was damaged in the Airbus factory before delivery, then “repaired”.
I did training at the school house before 587, if there was corrupt management and conspiracies I did not see it.:rolleyes:
Go back to retirement pooch..

From Defense Daily
https://www.defensedaily.com/america...uncategorized/

From this article
"However, in their 1997 letter, the manufacturers and the FAA representative said they had a "concern" about "excessive emphasis on the superior effectiveness of the rudder."
"Rudder reversals such as those that might be involved in dynamic maneuvers created by using too much rudder in a recovery attempt can lead to structural loads that exceed the design strength of the fin," the letter warned.
Perhaps more telling is the May 27, 1997, memorandum sent to Ewell by Capt. Paul Railsback, then the airlines manager of flight operations, technical. The memorandum was sent following the Flight 903 upset earlier that month. Prophetic in hindsight, Railsback attributed the upset to "excessive rudder inputs by the crew" as a result of their AAMP training and that the airline was "at grave risk of a catastrophic upset because AAMP is teaching dangerous aerodynamic theory."
Railsback expressed his concern more bluntly in a deposition taken in April 2003."

About that same time I had lounged a similar complaint that was also ignored

Cecil Ewell referred to was the VP of flight at the time of the Railsback letter, Cecil had been a copilot of mine and was a dinner party guest. He was being celebrated at that time as the savior of an A300 (AAs first one) and told us the story. A fuel leak had developed in the pylon on a flight from New York to San Juan. They were over water and so much fuel was leaking they couldn't get to land. They had used the A300check list but that had not helped. Cecil got on the HF and called for help. A Eastern flight told him to pull the fire handle and he did cutting off the leak and saved the plane. RJ Hart, a great guy, that I had flown copilot for was also at the party, shakes his head and says damn using HF when you have vaporized fuel trailing. The HF arcs like hell you are lucky you weren't blown out of the sky.' Not knowing Cecil would rise to be my boss. I open my dumb big mouth. I said - Cecil don't you know every aircraft certified for 121 ops in the US has to have a cutoff valve located in the wing root activated by the fire handle? Screw the check list use your GD brain. I would have been wiser to keep my mouth shut.

Why can’t this just be closed?

Because it will happen again.

Flight Management at American became a collection of guys that had flown the F4 in Vietnam. The F4 was the best fighter in the world at that time and only the best were selected to fly it. Being a F4 pilot in the 60s and 70s was worthy of praise. But that had been 20 to 30 years ago. They were living on their past laurels and not abiding by the most basic rule of flying -Fly the Airplane you are in. The F4 was a flying brick its most powerful control it's rudder. You could kick rudder in an F4 but an airliner is not a fighter and must be treated differently. They were warned repeatedly that teaching this heavy use of rudder could bring down a plane and yet they persisted. Those of you still in aviation can not allow this sort arrogance.

Because according to wikipedia:

All 260 people aboard the plane (251 passengers and 9 crew members), as well as one dog, carried in the cargo hold, died in the crash.[1]:412 Five bystanders and one dog on the ground were also killed.[1]

This accident, more than most, is actually repeatable and will serve for the next few decades as a reminder of what can happen to a major, modern airliner if one over controls the rudder. According to the investigation, the tail and both engines were lost in the air due to excessive loads.

Well said!