Another Air France related hoax?

There is another Air France A-330 story being sent all over the ethernet and blogosphere that makes my brow furrow with suspicion. It ‘sounds’ so true, that it even had us, airline veterans, going here.

Upon Google-ing the story, and its supposed author before I blogged about this, I can find nothing directly from the author. You only see this story in a very second hand manner on these blogs, or sent by ‘conservative’ friends who are probably reading these blogs.

It’s not showing up on any reputable or mainstream news source - and I can’t find citation for the original article by George Larson.

Therefore, I view this with extreme skepticism. It’s another one that I would recommend not be passed along. Due diligence, folks.

If anybody out there can show me the original article, including the date it was published and where, I’d really like to know.

Here’s how the email and story as it appears on a number of right wing conservative and/or aviation/military blogs goes:

Subject:Air France Accident: Smoking Gun Found

A Brazilian Navalunitreportedly found thecomplete vertical fin/rudder assembly of the doomed aircraft floating some 30 miles from the main debris field.The search for the flight recorders goes on, but given the failure history of the vertical fins on A300-series aircraft, an analysis ofits structure at the point of failure will likely yield the primary cause factor in the breakup of the aircraft, with the flight recorder data (if found) providing only secondary contributing phenomena. The fin-failure-leading-to-breakup sequence is strongly suggested in the attached (below) narrative report by George Larson, Editor emeritus of Smithsonian Air & Space Magazine. It’s regrettable that these aircraft are permitted to continue in routine flight operations with this known structural defect. It appears that safety finishes last within Airbus Industries, behind national pride and economics. Hopefully, this accident will force the issue to be addressed, requiring at a minimum restricted operations of selected platforms, and grounding of some high-time aircraft until a re-engineered (strengthened) vertical fin/rudder attachment structure can be incorporated. Les —————————————(George Larson’s Report)——————————- This is an account of a discussion I had recently with a maintenance professional who salvages airliner airframes for a living.He has been at it for a while, dba BMI Salvage at Opa Locka Airport in Florida. In the process of stripping parts, he sees things few others are able to see. His observations confirmprior assessments of Airbus structural deficiencies withinour flight test and aero structures communities by those who have seen the closely held reports of A3XX-series vertical fin failures. His observations:

“I have scrapped just about every type of transport aircraft from A-310,
A-320, B-747, 727, 737, 707, DC-3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, MD-80, L-188, L1011
and various Martin, Convair and KC-97 aircraft.

Over a hundred of them.

Airbus products are the flimsiest and most poorly designed as far as
airframe structure is concerned by an almost obsession to utilize composite
materials.

I have one A310 vertical fin on thepremises from a demonstration I just performed.It was pathetic to see the composite structure shatter as it did, something a Boeing product will not do.

The vertical fin along with the composite hinges on rudder and elevators is
the worst example of structural use of composites I have ever seen and I am
not surprised by the current pictures of rescue crews recovering the complete Vertical fin and rudder assembly at some distance from the crash site.

The Airbus line has a history of both multiple rudder losses and a vertical
fin and rudder separation from the airframe as was the case in NY with AA.
As an old non-radar equipped DC4 pilot who flew through many a thunderstorm
in Africa along the equator, I am quite familiar with their ferocity. It is not difficult to understand howsuch a storm might have stressed an aircraft structure to failure at its weakest point, and especially so in the presence of instrumentation problems.

I replied with this:

“I’m watching very carefully the orchestration of the inquiry by French
officials and Airbus. I think I can smell a concerted effort to steer
discussion away from structural issues and onto sensors, etc. Now Air
France, at the behest of their pilots’ union, is replacing all the air data
sensors on the Airbus fleet, which creates a distraction and shifts the media’s focus away from the real problem.
It’s difficult to delve into the structural issue without wading into the
Boeing vs. Airbus swamp, where any observation is instantly tainted by its
origin. Americans noting any Airbus structural issues (A380 early failure
of wing in static test; loss of vertical surfaces in Canadian fleet prior to
AA A300, e.g.) will be attacked by the other side as partisan, biased, etc.”
His follow-up:

One gets a really unique insight into structural issues when one has
first-hand experience in the dismantling process.

I am an A&P, FEJ and an ATP with 7000 flight hours and I was absolutely
stunned, flabbergasted when I realized that the majority of internal
airframe structural supports on the A 310 which appear to be aluminum are
actually rolled composite material with aluminum rod ends. They shattered.

Three years ago we had a storm come through, with gusts up to 60-70 kts., catching several A320s tied down on the line, out in the open. The A320 elevators and rudder hinges whose actuators had been removed shattered and the rudder and elevators came off.

Upon closer inspection I realized that not only were the rear spars
composite but so were the hinges.While Boeing also uses composite material in its airfoil structures, the actual attach fittings for the elevators, rudder, vertical and horizontal stabilizers are all ofmachined aluminum.” ————————-(end of narrative)———————-