Bill, I'm would guess the obivious that the tail separated first and thus the reason it's the fartherest away from main crash site. As to the reason of why it came off, well, I guess even the NTSB didn't want to speculate. The fact that it departed first is interesting. I wonder how many occurances of tail separations by type have occurred. My memory isn't what it used to be but I suspect the -3,-4,-6, -9, and -10 do not have the same frequency. If the tail separation causes can't be determined, would it be insane to assume that the data will get better over time without any changes ( that is, less tail separations occurances)?
Originally Posted by BillL
Is there a technical reason for the VS with upper rudder attached to have settled to earth well in advance of the HS (L & R)? The report states the HS failed first, separated (and from the debris field) landed closer to the main site.