Home Approach Charts Communication Human Factors Flight
Ground Instruments Navigation Performance Safety Systems Links
 

Use of rudder on transport category airplanes (pdf)(561kb)(BOEING) As part of the on-going accident investigation of American Airlines flight 587, an Airbus A300-600, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued a Safety Recommendation letter on Feb. 8, 2002. The letter recommends that pilots be made aware that aggressive maneuvering using "sequential full opposite rudder inputs" can potentially lead to "structural loads that exceed those addressed by the requirements."

 

Use of rudder on transport category airplanes (pdf)(403kb)(AIRBUS) On February 8th, 2002, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), in cooperation with the French "Bureau Enquetes Accidents" (BEA), issued recommendations that aircraft manufacturers re-emphasize the structural certification requirements for the rudder and vertical stabilizer, showing how some maneuvers can result in exceeding design limits and even lead to structural failure. The purpose of this document is to re-emphasize proper operational use of the rudder, highlight certification requirements and rudder control design characteristics.

 

Use of rudder on large transport aeroplanes   (pdf)(313kb)(UK AIS)   As a result of the A300-600 accident at New York on 12 November 2001, the NTSB recommended further guidance for pilots on the use of rudder and the structural implications of inappropriate use of this control.

 

Aerodynamic Principles of Large-Airplane Upsets  (BOEING)  Loss of airplane control in flight is a leading cause of fatalities in the commercial aviation industry. A variety of reasons exist for airplane upsets, but none is statistically significant. Reducing the number of reasons for upsets is a continual training process, and eliminating one reason will not necessarily reduce the number of loss-of-control accidents and fatalities. Additionally, many reasons for upsets are associated with the environment, in which case avoidance is the best solution, but is not always possible. Therefore, pilots must have the necessary knowledge and skills to recover an upset airplane.

 

Airplane upset recovery A test pilot's point of view    (pdf)(102kb)(AIRBUS)    The idea for a joint industry working group to produce an Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid* was first proposed by ATA in June 1996. It was in response to increasing interest by the NTSB in aircraft loss of control accidents which, together with Controlled Flight Into Terrain, cause a large proportion of all accidents. They were putting a lot of pressure on the FAA to produce new regulations covering this subject. The working group was a voluntary industry initiative to see what could be done within the existing regulations to improve the situation.

Airbus Safety Library http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/ethics/safety_lib/

 

CFIT avoidance maneuver in FBW transports   (pdf)(241kb)(ALPA)  A test program was developed to compare the CFIT maneuver performance capabilities of aircraft with hard versus soft Fly-By-Wire (FBW) flight control systems. To obtain this data, simulated CFIT avoidance maneuvers utilizing a Boeing 777-300 and an Airbus A330-200 were performed. These tests were performed at the Boeing Flight Test Facility in Seattle, Washington and the Airbus Flight Test Facility at Toulouse, France. As a direct result of this flight-test activity, one major US operator of Airbus aircraft (United Airlines) has changed the CFIT escape maneuver for these aircraft.

 

 

 

High Altitude Handling  (BOEING)  Center of gravity (CG) and altitude significantly affect the longitudinal stability of an airplane. An understanding of handling characteristics at various CG positions and altitudes permits flight crews to use proper control inputs when manually flying throughout the flight envelope.

 

Flight in Severe Turbulence   (pdf)(2.1MB)(AIRBUS)   A Close Encounter of the Rough Kind

 
Copyright BritFlight 2008