[quote][b][url=/v3/forum/histoire-et-actualit%C3%A9s-45/topic/un-c130-sur-un-porte-avion-1454/?post=61899#post-61899]cinétic[/url] a dit le 13/02/2011 à 02:57 :[/b]

D' après le rapport d'enquête du NTSB :

[quote]Subsequent metallurgical examination of the right wing disclosed evidence of fatigue cracks in the right wing's lower surface skin panel, with origins beneath the forward doubler.... The origin points were determined to be in rivet holes which join the external doubler and the internal stringers to the lower skin panel. These cracks, which grew together to about a 12-inch (30 cm) length, were found to have propagated past the area where they would have been covered by the doubler and into the stringers beneath the doubler and across the lap joint between the middle skin panel and the forward skin panel."[/quote]


[quote]“The center wing failed at a load that was approximately 30 percent of the design ultimate strength of the center wing and that the presence of fatigue cracks at multiple locations and in multiple structural elements reduced the residual strength to approximately 50 percent of design limit load and compromised the fail-safe capability of the structure.” The report opined that, “Failure was likely caused by a symmetric maneuver load exceeding 2.0g during the final drop of fire retardant.”[/quote]


Pour résumer, l'avion était bourré de criques et n' avait que 50% d'intégrité structurelle.
Les pilotes ont de plus dépassé le facteur de charge maximal (2G) de l'avion en tirant trop fort sur le manche à 2,4G. 


source: 
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20020621X00954&ntsbno=LAX02GA201&akey=1

http://www.ntsb.gov/pressrel/2002/020924.htm[/quote]