AF 447 disaster, June 2009

[Gnarly Gnu]

Article in Pop Mech: "What Really Happened Aboard Air France 447"

 

"We now understand that, indeed, AF447 passed into clouds associated with a large system of thunderstorms, its speed sensors became iced over, and the autopilot disengaged. In the ensuing confusion, the pilots lost control of the airplane because they reacted incorrectly to the loss of instrumentation and then seemed unable to comprehend the nature of the problems they had caused. Neither weather nor malfunction doomed AF447, nor a complex chain of error, but a simple but persistent mistake on the part of one of the pilots."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[rgmwa]

What a bizarre story! Pilot error aside, why would any manufacturer design a control system that allowed inputs from two pilots with no certainty that either one would be aware of what the other was doing? Think I'll fly Boeing from now on.

 

rgmwa

 

 

[facthunter]

I believe the capt's (CM1), over-rides the other. With sidestick "control" you are not inputting the control surfaces directly. The on board computers have to allow things to happen This is supposed to prevent the pilots doing things that endanger the aircraft. Nev

 

 

[Litespeed]

A classic case of not flying the aircraft.

 

Always fly the bloody aircraft, get the plane level- take command.

 

Tragic stupidity a light plane pilot would never do.

 

 

[David Isaac]

It is difficult to understand, but a 757 pilot did something similar when one of the pitot tubes blocked and he ignored the Boeing stick shaker and did almost exactly the same thing.

 

 

[Gnarly Gnu]

02:13:40 (Bonin) Mais je suis à fond à cabrer depuis tout à l'heure!

 

"But I've had the stick back the whole time!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's a real double-facepalm moment....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[facthunter]

I firmly believe that most of us would not know at all, what it is like to be in this type of situation with turbulence, false warnings. airspeed inop. and icing conditions. and flying at high altitudes when the OAT is well above normal for that situation/ level. OAT has a major effect on a planes ability to fly at height..

 

We can be astounded at someone doing things that "I would never be so stupid to do in my plane", (being a Jab or such.)

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the situation is not capable of being understood by many who have no personal knowledge/ experience of such things,

 

Sorry to bring this up, but it is not eliteism, it has to be said. I didn't say everything was done right either but how mant of you have ever flown through an Inter tropic Convergence Zone where the tops go to 60,000 feet?. Nev

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

.........but how mant of you have ever flown through an Inter tropic Convergence Zone where the tops go to 60,000 feet?. Nev

and still managed to stay VFR!!!!!

[Litespeed]

Nev,

 

I sympathise with the situation they were in and understand it would have been way outside their normal experience- but lack of situational awareness and command control decisions not been made lead to a huge death toll.

 

All aboard paid the ultimate price for lack of flying the aircraft.

 

I assume the artificial horizon would have still been working?

 

Would they not realise that when all else fails- collect all relevant info on the aircraft attitude and fly the plane.

 

The screaming stall warning with non expected data should have given them enough to see a situation had clearly developed.

 

Yes they are a highly sophisticated aircraft and ops outside of normal flight parameters would be difficult. But I find it hard to see they were completely blind info wise to the issues.

 

I think they put blind faith in the machine even when it screamed all was not ok. If the left seat to took command as he should have, time was plenty to problem solve with the right seat and gain additional info from the flight computer. GPS and nav would have told them the true speed and height. Redundant data sources are their to be used, not ignored.

 

I guess I can't see how they missed the facts- you pull back and keep pulling back.......................it stalls. Why when you have miles below you, do you keep pulling back?

 

Phil

 

 

[facthunter]

I don't think we will get enough facts to make a really constructive assessment. I would need an equivalent of an endorsement on the aeroplane. That particular type. and the version of it used by that company. Companies specify variants of the FMS. They are not all the same

 

The severity of updrafts/ downdrafts ( could easily be 6,000 fpm or more) , icing and aircraft performance ( or lack of). We just don't know enough to make any comments that would be taken as valid. Can you trust the source of the information that we are deliberating on? I don't. It's almost pointless to speculate. As I said earlier the controls do not directly respond to the sidestick. The appropriate computer processes it and allows it if there are no overriding considerations.

 

As far as the AH is concerned the pitch attitude variation across the speed range (clean) could easily be 8 degrees requiring large trim changes as well. Nev

 

 

[Guest Howard Hughes]

nor a complex chain of error

Looks like a very complex chain of errors to me, I can see a number of points where different actions would lead to a different outcome, beginning with diverting around weather as they passed through the ITCZ! The holding back of the stick was just the 'fait accompli'!

The lessons to be learned from the AF447 disaster will no doubt change airline (and all) flying for years to come.

 

 

[Ultralights]

almost identical situation to the dash 8 that went in in the USA, that has now resulted in all airline crews requiring ATPL licence, and minimum 1500 hrs! the crew failed to recognise the stall, and held th aircraft in the stall all the way to the ground.. very sad. something that really annoys me when i get told when applying for airline flying jobs "sorry, you have too much experience for us"

 

 

[Methusala]

It is almost impossible to mentally transport oneself into this situation with no experience of flying an airliner in these conditions. I reccomend to everyone Earnest Gann's classic novel "Fate is the Hunter". The premise of this book put very simply is that there are millions of ways to come unstuck in the air. His fascinating reminiscences of being a pioneering "line captain" are sprinkled with anecdotes of the untimely demise of many of his esteemed peers. Good reading and compliments of the season, Don

 

 

[dazza 38]

It is almost impossible to mentally transport oneself into this situation with no experience of flying an airliner in these conditions. I reccomend to everyone Earnest Gann's classic novel "Fate is the Hunter". The premise of this book put very simply is that there are millions of ways to come unstuck in the air. His fascinating reminiscences of being a pioneering "line captain" are sprinkled with anecdotes of the untimely demise of many of his esteemed peers. Good reading and compliments of the season, Don

I have read that book twice.It is a great read.

 

 

[Garfly]

 

 

"May 23, 2026 BBC Global News Podcast

 

Air France and Airbus have been found guilty of corporate manslaughter over a plane crash in 2009, which killed all 228 people onboard. Flight AF447 from Rio de Janeiro to Paris crashed into the Atlantic Ocean during a storm. A court had previously cleared both companies of criminal liability in 2023. But on Thursday, the Paris Appeals Court found the airline and aircraft manufacturer were "solely and entirely responsible", after an eight-week trial. A group representing families of the victims said the justice system had finally recognised the pain for relatives facing ''a collective tragedy of unbearable brutality". Both Air France and Airbus have denied the charges and say they will appeal."

 

 

 

 

[facthunter]

I can't see much of a case against the Manufacturer in this one. Nev

[onetrack]

Lawyers are there to find loopholes in vast reams of documentation surrounding insurance, carriage regulations, terms and conditions and hundreds of other legal requirements. They usually find them. 

In this case, the aircraft was perfectly capable of continuing its planned flight, there was absolutely nothing wrong with it by way of design, as proven by millions of other successfully completed flights by the same model.

 

The reasons behind the crash are simple - inadequate piloting skills. Vast numbers of properly trained pilots transit the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone with no problems, every day and every night of the week.

That failure to provide pilots of adequate and competent skills (which all the pax thought was being provided), would have to fall on Air France, and around their levels and styles of training and competency checking.

 

Edited May 24 by onetrack

[facthunter]

Lawyers chase those who ARE WORTH CHASING for MONEY. It's a wonder they didn't have a go at the regulator.  I don't agree it's as Simple as you suggest. The Inter tropic Convergence zone is not to be trifled with and  Cloud tops can be to 60,000 feet, with all kinds of severe  Weather Possible. The Captain should have been present then when his experience would have Helped.  The other two have never proven they can command. There should also Have been One of the two designated as PIC for that Leg, as would be the case IF 2 Captains were flying together or any other circumstances where more than one Person can reach the Controls. They were also carrying an Unserviceability that affected the Instrument readings. 

 Non the Less a "perfectly flyable Plane" fell rapidly from cruising Level to the  sea surface in about 4  Minutes. in a FLAT attitude. That is a RoD of about 85 MPH . Nev

[Garfly]

This article adds some detail about the Paris Appeals Court process:

 

 

Airbus and Air France convicted over AF447 disaster after appeal court overturns acquittal | ICLG

ICLG.COM

---

Seventeen years after an Air France flight plunged into the Atlantic killing 228 people, a Paris court has found Airbus and Air France responsible.

 

Excerpt:

The appeal

"Unlike the appellate process in England and other common law jurisdictions, the French appeal effectively took the form of a complete retrial, lasting eight weeks and revisiting the evidence from scratch, including technical expert testimony, pilot training procedures and Airbus’s knowledge of earlier incidents involving pitot tube malfunctions.

Prosecutors argued that Airbus had underestimated the dangers posed by unreliable airspeed data and failed to respond quickly enough to known defects affecting the sensors. Air France, meanwhile, was accused of failing adequately to train pilots to respond to high-altitude loss-of-speed warnings and autopilot disengagement scenarios. Lawyers for the victims’ families said the companies had spent years attempting to blame the deceased pilots while downplaying their own institutional shortcomings.

The defence maintained that the crash ultimately resulted from unforeseeable pilot actions inside the cockpit. Airbus also pointed to earlier procedural decisions, including the 2023 acquittal, arguing that criminal liability had never been properly established.

The decision

The court concluded that both companies bore criminal responsibility for failures that contributed directly to the crash. It found that Air France had failed adequately to prepare pilots for the precise emergency encountered on AF447, while Airbus had not fully appreciated or addressed the risks associated with pitot tube failures."

[facthunter]

Courts of LAW often don't have a great level of Practical experience that say professional pilot groups would have when such Matters are determined. These days People are specialists in certain Fields of expertise Judgements and skills and threat and error Management. Surgery can be similar.  Planes don't run on Rails or roads and can't park anywhere to wait things Out. Shortest Route might be taken instead of going a long way around bad weather. Flight hours Limitations and limited fuel carried  can often Play a Major part in how things turn out. . In Great Storms a B 747 Looks like a tiny little vulnerable Object. Natures forces Can tear them apart.  Easily. Nev

[Garfly]

Yes.  Anyway, personally, I'm beginning to see where the case against the manufacturer - and airline - has merit and where the case against the pilots is less open-and-shut.

[facthunter]

Do you have reasons for that?  Nev

[Garfly]

39 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Do you have reasons for that?  Nev

 

Mainly just by being exposed to that recent reporting (above) and the sense that those findings must have been arrived at seriously and  judiciously.  But I've probably also been influenced by a re-read of contributions to this very thread from fourteen years ago. Notably, Nev, some of your own.

[onetrack]

Perhaps a recap of the precise events involved in the crash is warranted right about now, to refresh memories. In particular, the activities and voices of the 3 pilots in the cockpit.

 

The confusion, the lack of proper cockpit procedures, the inability to even read instruments (that WERE working) properly, and the failure of the most senior pilot to take a seat, and take full control authoritatively, is astounding.

What is even more astounding is the sheer constant panic of the junior pilot, and the inability of the senior pilot to grasp the worsening situation quickly, to regain aircraft control. It's like he was lackadaisically unaware of what to do.

 

These three pilots all had major flaws in their training, their ability to follow correct procedures, and in their abilities to hand fly the aircraft. It's as if they always believed the aircraft would fly itself out of any trouble.

And the bottom line is that the pilots were the ones at the controls, and had all the information they needed to keep control once they lost airspeed indication.

But Ronin, the junior pilot started panicking the instant airspeed indication was lost, and just keep pulling back on his sidestick for the entire trip to the ocean surface - and neither of the other, more senior pilots, did anything definitive to stop Ronins constant, panicky control inputs.

 

https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/the-long-way-down-the-crash-of-air-france-flight-447-8a7678c37982

 

 

Edited Sunday at 10:13 AM by onetrack

[facthunter]

I find the STYLE of the blogger sensationalist and judgmental. Not a document a court could use as evidence very conclusively, Negotiating the ITGZ is not just a "Normal " relaxed Operation. Some track adjustments at Least would be expected  to avoid the Larger cells and Icing conditions That's what weather radar is for. Also hand flying at cruise level  is extremely difficult even in calm air conditions. Above FL 310 flying with no Autopilot requires 2,000 ft Vertical separation as maintaining the Level within +/- 200feet is Near impossible for any length if time. I've personally had to do that, so I know. . At the height they got No Way could it be Kept in control.. I have to go now. Someone's arrived.. Nev