Ground the AirBus

A long and well researched post on why I will not be flying an AirBus for a long time. About a twenty minute read but he really lays things out step by step with full documentation. From William Cox at the American Chronicle:

Ground the Airbus?
Since entering service in 1974 with many technological innovations, such as computerized fly-by-wire control systems, user-friendly cockpits, and extended use of composite materials, 5,717 aircraft have been manufactured by Airbus, an European aerospace company. More than 5,100 Airbuses remain in service.

Not including losses attributable to terrorism, rebellion or military action, Airbuses have been involved in 23 fatal crashes causing the deaths of 2,584 passengers, crew members and people on the ground. In addition, there have been five nonfatal accidents causing 21 serious injuries.

While the overall number of accidents and fatalities are not disproportionate to the crash experience of Boeing aircraft, three of the Airbus crashes involved a separation of the composite vertical stabilizer (tail fin) from the fuselage. Five hundred, or one in five of the Airbus deaths, including 228 from Air France Flight 447, resulted from these three crashes.

In addition, Airbus composite stabilizers, rudders and couplers have also been involved in a number of other emergency in-flight incidents that did not lead to crashes, injuries or deaths.

There is now a question whether all Airbus aircraft equipped with composite stabilizers and rudders should be grounded until the cause of the crash of Flight 447 can be identified and it can be determined if the aircraft can be inspected, safely repaired, and returned to service.

Especially interesting in light of Boeing's announcement that they were grounding the new DreamLiner until some structural issues could be resolved with their composite body parts... From the Chicago Tribune:

Analysts said they were concerned to learn that stress-testing of the 787's wings caused its composite structure to "delaminate," or fragment, in the crucial area where the wings are integrated with the aircraft's body. Also worrisome is the fact that the materials didn't behave as Boeing's computer models had predicted.

Boeing officials said the issue should be relatively easy to fix and would involving retrofitting small metal plates to reinforce the plane's structure in about 36 areas.

But the incident throws into question the advanced computer modeling that Boeing used to design the 787 and that it had been relying on to streamline testing of the brand-new plane.

"The crucial fact that cannot be lost in the news it that the certification of the airplane relies upon [Boeing] proving to the FAA that its predictive modeling works," said Wood. "The fact that it didn't work begs the question as to where else the predictors will fail?"

Maybe add the DreamLiner to that list too... Bring back the DC-3 -- I loved that airplane; 727 too...