Airbus Denies Cover-Up In AAL 587 Crash | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-05.05.25

Airborne-NextGen-05.06.25

AirborneUnlimited-05.07.25

Airborne-Unlimited-05.01.25

AirborneUnlimited-05.02.25

Thu, May 29, 2003

Airbus Denies Cover-Up In AAL 587 Crash

Victims' Families Say 2001 Disaster Could Have Been Averted

Did Airbus know of major problems with the rudder on its A300-600 model, yet fail to tell anyone? That's the allegation from families suing for up to $100 million in damages, as American and Airbus point fingers at each other, each denying blame for the crash.

Airbus says the crash of AAL 587 was due to pilot error. American says Airbus failed to warn customers that strong, sudden rudder inputs could cause a structural overload and lead to a tragic airframe failure.

What Did Airbus Know About Other, Similar Incidents?

Consider this similar event:

1997: Off the coast of Florida, AAL 903, stalled, descending some 3000 feet before the flight crew, using very sharp rudder inputs, were able to bring the aircraft back under control. In the process, American says, they damaged the Airbus's vertical stabilizer. The NTSB blamed the pilots for the incident, saying they were flying much too close to stall speed when it all unraveled. That, say some safety experts, should have been a red light and siren to the folks over at Airbus.

Bernard Loeb, former NTSB Chief, told USA Today earlier this week, "When I heard (about what Airbus knew) it made me sick. People are kicking themselves." Carol Carmody, who was head of the NTSB when Airbus reported the 1997 incident, said the board missed a chance to take preventative action before the AAL 587 crash in 2001.

The results of the Flight 587 investigation are still months away. But already, the NTSB reports the A300 ran into heavy turbulence soon after take-off, as it was passing over Jamaica Bay (NY). Copilot Sten Molin fought the rough air by strong rudder control inputs.

The vertical stab then broke away from the aircraft and aerodynamic control was lost.

The investigation has so far found that there were no structural defects in the tail of the A300. Initial reports indicate Molin's maneuvers simply exceeded the maximum structural capabilities of the vertical stabilizer itself.

FMI: www.airbus.com

Advertisement

More News

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (05.05.25): Circle To Runway (Runway Number)

Circle To Runway (Runway Number) Used by ATC to inform the pilot that he/she must circle to land because the runway in use is other than the runway aligned with the instrument appr>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (05.05.25)

Aero Linx: National Aviation Safety Foundation (NASF) The National Aviation Safety Foundation is a support group whose objective is to enhance aviation safety through educational p>[...]

NTSB Prelim: De Havilland DHC-1

At Altitude Of About 250-300 Ft Agl, The Airplane Experienced A Total Loss Of Engine Power On November 6, 2024, at 1600 central standard time, a De Havilland DHC-1, N420TD, was inv>[...]

Classic Aero-TV: The Boeing Dreamliner -- Historic First Flight Coverage

From 2009 (YouTube Edition): Three Hour Flight Was 'Flawless' -- At Least, Until Mother Nature Intervened For anyone who loves the aviation business, this was a VERY good day. Afte>[...]

Airborne-NextGen 05.06.25: AF Uncrewed Fighters, Drones v Planes, Joby Crew Test

Also: AMA Names Tyler Dobbs, More Falcon 9 Ops, Firefly Launch Unsuccessful, Autonomous F-16s The Air Force has begun ground testing a future uncrewed jet design in a milestone tow>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC