The whole Flight 587 story reeks of a cover up.
No, not really. What it sounds like is NTSB officials under a lot of pressure from the airline and Airbus (who are embroiled in legal battles) to determine the root cause of the accident. There is rarely a clear line of evidence in cases like this, and the explanation seems to be their best guess for what might have caused the crash, even if it is an incomplete theory.
First of all, the vast majority of aircraft accidents in this day and age are caused by human error. Sure, you have the occasional mechanical failure or just bad luck, but even those cases are often caused by a cascade of events that start with (or contain at some point) human error.
The rudder sensitivity issue and the turbulence after takeoff suggests to me that the co-pilot had trouble adjusting the rudder properly (as the article mentions NTSB conclusions that the A300 rudder system is unusually sensitive) and the aircraft entered into pilot-induced oscillations. Such oscillations definitely could
propagate to the point of causing shear failure in the tail section, especially if it was previously repaired for fatigue or damage. The problem with composite materials is that they tend to fail all at once, wheras metallic materials (i.e. aluminum) fail gradually.
The fact that the rudder was unusually sensitive is problematic, but the co-pilot's response (again, taking their explanation at face value) easily could have been overaggressive and completely unnecessary.
As for wake vortices from heavys this is a very well known problem but there is supposed to be a spacing interval to help minimize a following aircraft flying into the vortices....however if an aircraft did the descending vortices can cause large dsruption of lift for the craft unlucky enough to fly through them.
Wake vortices are a problem for light aircraft, but an A300 would have been virtually unaffected (other than slight turbulence) from even a 747's wake.
I don't see anything in these articles that suggests wake vortices were even involved. Am I missing something?