land-speed
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: (no subject)

To: "'Nt788@aol.com'" <Nt788@aol.com>, land-speed@autox.team.net
Subject: RE: (no subject)
From: "Albaugh, Neil" <albaugh_neil@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 12:18:22 -0600
I'd really prefer to ride in a US- built plane, anyway. The Europeans (no
offense intended) still haven't figured out how to do air conditioning
properly-- Airbus included. Sweltering in the cabin of an Airbus on the
ground in Phoenix in not a fun way to spend a summer afternoon.

All in all, why US airlines buy foreign- made aircraft is beyond me. If
we're not careful, our US aircraft manufacturing base will be gone, just
like happened to many other US industries. Is it a matter of saving a few $
or is it question of performance that is not available from a domestic
supplier? Any ideas?

Regards, Neil    Tucson, AZ

-----Original Message-----
From: Nt788@aol.com [mailto:Nt788@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 10:41 AM
To: land-speed@autox.team.net
Subject: Fwd: (no subject)


Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 14:30:48 -0800
From: Carol & Don Schwartz <nfox4473@pacbell.net>
Subject: (no subject)
To: Art Stetler <StetlerA@aol.com>
Message-id: <3C017117.476D578C@pacbell.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en

Subject: A300 crash
>>
>  A friend sent this. Gary has dedicated his life to aerodynamics. He
>invented the Wheeler Vortex generator, and the "Gurney" wing on race
cars.>These are his views on>the crashed Airbus.)
>
>    Howdy,
>
>    Re: the New York 11-12-2001 Airbus crash.
>
>    I found this photo of the vertical stabilizer's failed composite
>  attachment blades, or webs. The bolts that attached the composite
vertical>stabilizer to the fuselage, remain properly attached.  Clearly,
the failure>is a>delamination of the composite vertical tail, above the
points of attachment>to the fuselage.
>
>    There are reasons (despite the weight savings) why Douglas Aircraft
and>Boeing have never used composites this way -- and you're looking at
one.>
>    As the delamination of the composite progressed, the entire 37-ft.
tall
>vertical tail would have fluttered briefly & violently.  That would
explain>why both engines were literally shaken off the airplane.  (This
is
>particularly remarkable, because unlike Douglas and Boeing, Airbus
has>bragged of purposely designing their engine mounting pylons to keep
the>engines in place no matter what!)  One wing tip was found several
blocks>away from the main wreckage.
>
>    BTW, you'll be hearing a lot about an encounter with wake
turbulence.>
>    That is a red herring.  Wake turbulence can make it difficult --
maybe>even impossible to control the airplane -- but no amount of wake
turbulence>can remove the vertical tail at such low flight speeds unless
there is a>preexisting>structural fault.
>
>    What is flutter?  This morning, I got an email from a friend who is
the>Director of Structural Engineering of a major American aircraft
maker.
>
>    He described a chilling picture:   "Flutter modes often have an
>  explosively quick onset, rising from nothing to catastrophic in the
> blink of>an>eye.
>
>    Furthermore, the shaking can happen so fast that, despite the large

>(huge) deflections involved, an observer on the ground might not see
it. It's>  just a blur.
>
>    "The people in the back of the airplane would have been shaken
>senseless worse as the seats tore loose and everything was homogenized
back>there; but it was all over a few seconds later."
>
>    The design weakness can and will be fixed on other Airbuses.  If
not,>  there are plenty of nice Boeing jetliners mothballed in the
Mojave Desert,>that can trade places with the Airbuses.  In the
meantime, I'm not riding>Airbus.

///
///  land-speed@autox.team.net mailing list
///  To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
///  with nothing in it but
///
///     unsubscribe land-speed
///
///  or go to  http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///
///


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>