# I pit the NTSB's conclusion regarding Flight 587 **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 27, 2004, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478 "2004-10-27T17:00:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![threemae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@threemae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threemae)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/1 "2004-10-27T17:00:25Z")
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3956087.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3956087.stm) IMHO, this is bullshit. The second worse aviation disaster in American history, and the co-pilot is being faulted for using the rudder to stabilize the plane after being struck by turbulence. In hindsight, yes, it appears that using the rudder to perform such a maneuver is an extraordinarily bad idea. But to suggest that the co-pilot is at fault for using a technique that he was trained to use by his airline is what irks me. Everything in the news shows that no one at American Airlines seemed to be aware of the fact that this was dangerous, either because Airbus never told them or when they did tell them, nobody listened and passed this onto pilots. Also, apparently this particular model of Airbus was particularly sensitive to rudder inputs, another fact that no one bothered to pass on to the pilots. Frankly, this seems to me to be a sort of shortcut around addressing what is a very serious safety issue with an Airbus aircraft. Given that a single rudder input at high speeds can lead to a catastrophic failure of a part of the airplane, isn’t it sort of the same thing as that Gary Larsen cartoon where the guy has a button on his audio-control panel that says, “Wings Fall Off?” What if a pilot just happens to accidentally kick the rudder controls in mid-flight at cruise altitude? It seems to me like the airplane should have been designed so that rudder inputs would be cancelled, or at least tempered, above certain airspeeds. Given that the whole plane is fly-by-wire anyway, this doesn’t strike me as a particularly difficult thing to do. At any rate, I’m pretty confident that it’s unfair to blame the co-pilot for reacting in a manner that he was trained for the deaths of some 260-odd people. Any pilots care to comment? ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/2 "2004-10-27T17:06:59Z")
It doesn’t seem to me that the co-pilot is actually being _blamed_ by the NTSB, (no matter what that headline says). The report is saying that the crash was caused directly by the actions of the co-pilot, which is different from holding him fully responsible - note that AA and Airbus are both criticised, too. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/3 "2004-10-27T17:10:17Z")
Your criticism is way off. The report says that the direct cause was the co-pilot using the rudders to stabilize the craft. But it directly faults American for training the pilots to perform that maneuver and it directly faults Airbus for the design deficiency. In other words, exactly what you said. ---
**Author:** ![threemae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@threemae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threemae)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/4 "2004-10-27T17:13:38Z")
> [@Neurotik](#): > > Your criticism is way off. > > The report says that the direct cause was the co-pilot using the rudders to stabilize the craft. But it directly faults American for training the pilots to perform that maneuver and it directly faults Airbus for the design deficiency. > > In other words, exactly what you said. Maybe I’m misunderstanding the jingo used in NTSB reports. I can understand that the co-pilot’s actions were the proximate cause of the crash, but I don’t think he’s at “fault” or “to blame” in the sense that I know the words. Is the NTSB’s decison related in any way to legal liability around a crash? ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/5 "2004-10-27T17:23:49Z")
> [@threemae](#): > > Maybe I’m misunderstanding the jingo used in NTSB reports. I can understand that the co-pilot’s actions were the proximate cause of the crash, but I don’t think he’s at “fault” or “to blame” in the sense that I know the words. Is the NTSB’s decison related in any way to legal liability around a crash? I’m not a lawyer, but I don’t think so. It still faults American for training him incorrectly - so they’re still liable as near as I can tell. I couldn’t tell you about Airbus’s liability. Although, American and Airbus are still fighting to pin the blame on the other, so that leads me to believe neither is off the hook. ---
**Author:** ![threemae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@threemae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threemae)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/6 "2004-10-27T17:28:42Z")
> [@Neurotik](#): > > I’m not a lawyer, but I don’t think so. > > It still faults American for training him incorrectly - so they’re still liable as near as I can tell. I couldn’t tell you about Airbus’s liability. > > Although, American and Airbus are still fighting to pin the blame on the other, so that leads me to believe neither is off the hook. I guess I’d tend towards blaming Airbus, they stated the “safe speed” of the rudder was 250 kts., and since the aircraft was below 10,000 feet, I assume it was under this safe speed. The fact that they didn’t program a less sensitive rudder or one that altered its sensitivity with speed suprises me. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/7 "2004-10-27T17:51:44Z")
I pit BBC News. What a crap article that is. Overstated headlines aside, if you’re gonna quote the words of the pilot and co-pilot during the crash, how about giving some sort of context as to what the jargon means? “Get out of it” and “Let’s go for power, please” are meaningless to me, since I’m not a pilot. Would it have been _that_ hard for the reporter to ask someone what that stuff means in layman’s terms? ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/8 "2004-10-27T17:57:00Z")
The whole time I’m reading these articles, I’m having the same thoughts as the OP. The fucking plane is fly by wire. Just add a line of code that if airspeed is larger then X, limit the rudder movement by 50% or something. ---
**Author:** ![BJMoose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/5fc32e/32.png) [@BJMoose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BJMoose)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/9 "2004-10-27T18:10:57Z")
[Link to NTSB page on Flight 587 investigation](http://www.ntsb.gov/events/2001/AA587/default.htm) You’re welcome. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Chao\_Goes\_Mu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_chao_goes_mu/32/3191_2.png) [@The\_Chao\_Goes\_Mu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Chao_Goes_Mu)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/10 "2004-10-27T18:15:21Z")
After the horseshit the NTSB cranked out after TWA flight 800 and the fiasco after the crash in Chicago in 1983 (I forget the flight number.) I am a little skeptical of of their “findings.” ---
**Author:** ![VunderBob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/839c29/32.png) [@VunderBob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VunderBob)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/11 "2004-10-27T18:23:16Z")
A huge problem is that simulators do not behave like real planes when you exceed the envelope. The pilots are trained to the simulator’s behaviors, and when something bad happens in real life, shit happens like snapping off the rudder simply because the simulators don’t take thing like that into account. Plus, the fact that the co-pilot **could** snap it off so easily means the Airbus has a structural problem. Last shot: pilot error gets used a lot as a cause because the tend to not survive and challenge the finding. IANAP, but I am in the aviation safety biz, and the simulator question in the first paragraph pays my salary. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/12 "2004-10-27T18:26:35Z")
I am not a pilot, but…Count me in the conspiracy-theory ‘It was a bomb’ crowd. Seriously, I don’t buy that the frigging rudder tore the tail off. Especially not right after take-off. Indicated airspeed was 255kts. My ass the tail tore off at that speed from rudder input. ---
**Author:** ![don\_t\_ask](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e68b1a/32.png) [@don\_t\_ask](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/don_t_ask)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/13 "2004-10-27T18:26:52Z")
[airdisaster.com](http://www.airdisaster.com/news/1004/26/news.shtml) has a typically thorough coverage of the matter. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/14 "2004-10-27T18:33:52Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > I am not a pilot, but…Count me in the conspiracy-theory ‘It was a bomb’ crowd. Just think it through. If it was a bomb, there’d be obvious evidence of a bomb (ie obvious to investigators). Are you really suggesting that every person involved with the case has been bought off? And why? ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/15 "2004-10-27T18:35:57Z")
> [@GorillaMan](#): > > Just think it through. If it was a bomb, there’d be obvious evidence of a bomb (ie obvious to investigators). Are you really suggesting that every person involved with the case has been bought off? And why? Because he’s fucking nuts, that’s why. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/16 "2004-10-27T18:52:46Z")
> [@GorillaMan](#): > > Just think it through. If it was a bomb, there’d be obvious evidence of a bomb (ie obvious to investigators). Are you really suggesting that every person involved with the case has been bought off? And why? Dude, don’t bring your ‘logic’ into this. OK. Fine. Kibosh my tinfoil-hat fun for the day. Probably not a bomb, but hard rudder _ripping the fucking tail off within rated airspeed_? Come on. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/17 "2004-10-27T19:00:59Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > …rudder _ripping the fucking tail off within rated airspeed_ …while being used in a way which Airbus had specifically been warning against for several years. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/18 "2004-10-27T19:04:39Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > Dude, don’t bring your ‘logic’ into this. > > OK. Fine. Kibosh my tinfoil-hat fun for the day. There’s always the moon hoax. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/19 "2004-10-27T19:16:52Z")
> [@GorillaMan](#): > > …while being used in a way which Airbus had specifically been warning against for several years. > [@](#): > > But the manufacturers say they issued warnings about the vulnerability of the tail section when put under heavy load. Fine, so I didn’t read that bit. But goddamn, that use of normal control surfaces can result in the loss of precious bits is disconcerting. I know that you can do stuff that results in the loss of lift or turns you into a lawn dart or whatever, but what next, pull back on the fly-by-wire control column hard enough and rip off the wings? Sheesh. > [@World Eater](#): > > There’s always the moon hoax. I should research that using some quality made-in-America [psi-devices!](http://www.futurehorizons.net/psi.htm) ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478/20 "2004-10-27T19:20:06Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > I should research that using some quality made-in-America [psi-devices!](http://www.futurehorizons.net/psi.htm) Nice, now only if they’ll fedex my wishing machine before the election. 😛 [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-ntsbs-conclusion-regarding-flight-587/271478.md?page=2)