My condolences to the families involved. This particular flight shows the incorrect use of aggresive rudder imputs by AA pilots which was taught as a part of their training.

I do remember watching this. Yes, it was interesting the training that these pilots were taught. Condolences to the families.

What does this have to do with FSX?

aggresive rudder imputs by AA pilots which was taught as a part of their training.

No, I think you missed something. The aggressive control inputs were being applied by the FO, who obviously didn't know what he was doing. The captain was oblivious, and AA by no means trained pilots to break the aircraft like this. Airbus was at fault equally for allowing the rudder to be moved in such a manner at high speeds that it could fatigue the entire vertical stabilizer. They [Airbus] later limited rudder movement at high speed as a result of this very crash.Thanks for the link.

Thanks Zach for clearing that up. I still find it amazing that such an input on the rudder could cause that type of damage. Good thing Airbus corrected the situation. Information like this always comes in handy to help make my simulated flying experience more safer and enjoyable.

Interesting video. Worrying that modern passenger aircraft are not structurally strong enough to take maximum rudder deflections though, irrespective of how the pilots were trainer or how the rudder was used.IAN

Worrying that modern passenger aircraft are not structurally strong enough to take maximum rudder deflections though, irrespective of how the pilots were trainer or how the rudder was used.IAN

You should be aware (especially if you fly for real) that this is in fact true for most aircraft. Full control deflections above the maximum maneuevering speed will overstress the flying surfaces. The problem in the case of the Airbus in the video which crashed, is that a combination of poor training and poor info from Airbus on how the rudder functions, combined into a lethal cocktail.Much of how you fly comes down to how you were trained, for example, I remember getting quite sternly told off by an instructor about this when I was a student pilot, after I gave a glass fibre GA aircraft a bootful of rudder at about 130 knots, not knowing any better at the time. To be fair he should have explained that to me first rather than had to warn me when I did not know any better, but the lesson did stick! This is the problem with the pilot in question - it is difficult to blame someone for doing something they do not know is wrong because they have never been told about it, although it is indeed quite shocking that an airliner pilot didn't know this.Nevertheless, it is worth noting that repeatedly putting full deflections first one way and then the other (as the co-pilot did on that Airbus) can overstress a flying surface much more easily than one single full deflection will; it is akin to something you will almost certainly be familiar with - rapidly bending a piece of wood back and forth when trying to break it - you may not be able to snap it with a single bend one way, but bending it back and forth rapidly will often mean it is possible to do snap it. The same physics apply to aircraft parts.Al

Hi Al,I agree that care must be taken above the maximum manouvering speed, rough air speed or whatever, but from what I understand, this aircraft was nowhere near that speed if climbing shortly after takeoff and below 10,000 feet.I was always a bit too cagey pulling out of spins and spiral dives in the RW for that reason.Whilst I am a big fan of Airbus, I do understand that the tail structure and compositon has the potential to be an issue.Concur with the rest of your post though.IAN

Chances of overstressing the rudder when pulling out of a spin are fairly slim, since the airspeed is not generally increasing too much as opposed to in a spiral dive, where it could be really piling on, and it is only a deflection one way on a spin recovery. Generally speaking you do need a good bootful of rudder to arrest a spin, since you need to stop a big autorotation often with the airframe blocking some of the airflow to the rudder, and you'll normally have centralised the rudder by the time the aircraft is flying again anyway, so it's only the elevator input that you'd have to be wary about then. That's the thing I am always wary about on a spin recovery - after the rotation has stopped when you see that ASI winding up really fast and the ground coming up to meet you, it is tempting to pull back too hard and stick too much G on the airframe. That's why I like aircraft with a plus four stress limit and a G meter!It is interesting to note that the B707 also originally had a rather weak tailfin; it was modified and strengthened after a BOAC 707 was destroyed in mountain wave turbulence over Japan (spookily, it was Flight number 911). It is thought that the pilots were kicking the rudder back and forth to try and sort things out and it broke up, although it may have broken up anyway, since the nose, tail, engines and most of the flying surfaces were all separated to varying degrees in the turbulence (there is a rather grim photo of this happening if you care to look here http://www.pilotfrie...ash/boac911.htm ). Examination of the wreckage nevertheless revealed that the fin mounting bolts were a weak point, and they were subsequently modified on all 707s to be a bit stronger. Of course the 707 did have the advantage of requiring really strong legs to get full rudder deflection because of the way the rudder control surface was powered with not much assistance, which is in fact why the 707 got the nickname of 'the lead sled'.Al

Wow! That´s some pretty good info Al. I can only imagine what the crew and passengers experienced in those dreadful moments. What´s good is, to know that you can learn from quite a bit about different aircraft designs, capabilities, as well as how to recognize and avoid such situations when possible.Here is another vid I found that has to do with a fautly altimiter.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03iJtR-QwdI&feature=g-vrec&context=G26219a7RVAAAAAAAABQ

Hi,Very interesting video. I am going to move this to Hanger Chat as it better belongs there. However, it will leave a link so that everyone can connect to it from here. :( Kind regards,

It is very interesting. We actually just talked about this in my ground school. The aircraft I am training on now has a drop in rudder pressure from 1500 psi to 900 psi once you cross above 140 knots. It also restricts rudder movement from 16° left and 18° right to 12° left and right when the flaps are retracted. it also specifically states that Va actually includes full deflection for all controls which Va is normally only fully aft elevator deflection.