Airbus

  • | | | |

    The Only U.S. Family Settles

    The families of Mike and Anne Harris have settled their lawsuit against Air France. Michael was 60, from Greenville, South Carolina, a graduate of Clemson University, an expert in geology and oil field operations with Devon Energy in Rio and West Africa Group. (Devon Energy is based in Oklahoma.) Ann was 54, from Lafayette. She suffered from Fibromyalgia, was Fibromyalgia Association of Houston volunteer and a physical therapist. They had been married sixteen years, by the time they booked the fatal flight; and the trip was business and pleasure, because they were going to a training seminar in Paris, and for vacation. They left behind them friends in Lafayette, Houston and Brazil where they had lived.

    Mike and Anne Harris were the only Americans on the flight. According to their lawyer, the case has settled.

    Crash History
    The 4 year old Air France Airbus A330-200 en route from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil to Paris when it went missing over the Atlantic Ocean on June 1, 2009. Two hundred sixteen passengers (including seven children and one baby, 82 women and 126 men) and 12 crew were aboard. There were two Americans and 60 French citizens were on the plane. Italy said at least three passengers were Italian.The pilot had 11,000 hours of flying experience, and 1,700 hours flying this aircraft.

    The last known radio contact was an automatic message made at 0133 GMT when the plane was near the Island of Fernando de Noronha; since then, the airplane has made no radio communication. Fifteen minutes after flying through a storm and strong turbulence, there was an electrical short-circuit. Search planes left Fernando de Noronha Island looking for signs of the plane concentrating in an area 230 miles off the northeast Brazil coast. The flight left Rio at 7 p.m. and was expected in Paris on Monday at 11:15 a.m. The wreckage broke apart, the pieces scattered at sea, and the black boxes were not recovered until May 2011.

    It is an interesting time to settle the case–right when the world is on the cusp of discovery of what caused the crash.

  • | | | |

    Arm-wrestling Damages from the Mother Country: Brazil vs France


    In the continuing saga of Air France Flight 447, whether the victims are Brazilian or French, they certainly qualify for compensation. The question is how much. Everyone involved, the airlines, the insurance companies, the lawyers, the families all have different numbers in mind.

    Recovery of the black boxes is not the only Air France news.

    In the poker game of damage recovery, Air France must have blinked. The Brazilian Court system rejected the latest offer to the family of the deceased Luciana Clarkson Seba, a 31-year-old Brazilian who died along with her husband and stepparents.

    Brazil rejected the appeal and raised compensation from1.2 million reals ($744,000) to 1.4 million reals ($868,000). The decision was unanimous.

    Currently French courts are considering manslaughter charges against Airbus. At least Airbus has some good news to temper the bad, since the search has revealed the black boxes. Whether or not the integrity of the boxes has been breached has not yet been revealed. Experts predict both extremes: complete data loss due to the pressure and time and complete data recovery. We tend to believe the data is safe, since these memory devices must pass certification at 3400 G/ 600 psi.

    And when that data is recovered, the experts will be examining it, looking at the rest of the gathered evidence, including the wreckage that is being recovered right now, which will have its own tale to tell.

    It remains to be seen if the pitot tube theory will be supported by the CDR and FDR; but with all of these various sources coming together, we can anticipate a dimensional inquiry, a coordinated synthesis, and a profound deduction to explicate the enigma that is Air France Flight 447.

  • | |

    Dive and Recovery and CVR Recovery Flight AF 447

    In the continuing quest recovering the bits and pieces of the Air France Flight 447 Airbus, and the Flight Data Recorder was recovered, the French navy sent a patrol to carry the black boxes to Cayenne, French Guyana, and then flown to Le Bourget to the BEA. The BEA Investigator-in-charge, a CENIPA Investigator, and French Judicial Peace officer will be present in the ten day exchange process.

    BEA briefings indicate that on Monday the Cockpit Voice Recorder was identified. On Tuesday, it was recovered by the Remora 6000 ROV at 2:40, Tuesday May 3, 2001, and raised on board the Ile de Sein.

    Bea Photos Documenting the Recovery

    From the May 3 Briefing

  • | |

    447 History Uncovered, Black Box Memory Secured


    In April, most of the Airbus jet was found, including the motors and some of the bodies. On April 27, we reported that the empty case was recovered after the Ile de Sein came in on the 26th from Senegal to assist in performing recovery operations in the current phase of Air France flight 447 project.

    At that time, the Remora 6000 robot found the chassis of the CSMU but not the actual CSMU memory module, which (after the human remains) is the key prize wanted in this search, being the one thing that can shed light on what occurred on June 21 2009.

    An hour ago (May 1, 2010) the news was released that the missing memory was located partially buried in the sand. The memory unit is now aboard the Ile de Sein.

    BEA experts are cautiously optimistic about data recovery, and cite two years of water pressure as a disturbing factor.

    In the search, the robot sends images up to the crew, who examines the transmissions for signs of the wreckage.

    The official BEA statement is
    “The investigation team localized and identified the memory unit from the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) at 10 h UTC this morning. It was raised and lifted on board the ship Ile de Sein by the Remora 6000 ROV at 16h40 UTC.”

    Now the question remains if the data will be recoverable.

    * images and information are from Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses

  • |

    Disappeared Memory-And the 447 Recovery Continues

    Ile de Sein came in on the 26th from Senegal to assist in performing recovery operations in the current phase of Air France flight 447 recovery. The Remora 6000 robot found the chassis of the CSMU but not the actual CSMU memory module, which (after the human remains) is the key prize wanted in this search, being the one thing that can shed light on what occurred on June 21 2009.

    Where is the memory unit? Even if this is just a question of a badly designed insecure containment system, where is the crucial unit?

    68 people aboard the Ile de Sein are working the scene, armed with a crane and the Remora 6000 submarine.

    * images and information are from Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses

  • | |

    Airbus 320 Reboot Confounds United Airlines Pilots

    United Airlines pilots guilty as charged again, in that Airbus 320 that had to make an emergency return to New Orleans on April 4. A pilot in command should know he can’t skip procedures on the checklist (especially an Airbus checklist) or else there are consequences. In this case, the emergency restore didn’t work.

    Ok, lest anyone accuse me of being incorrectly legal instead of correctly tongue-in-cheek, no one was “charged” with anything.

    On April 4, 2011, the United Airlines Airbus 320-232 (N409UA), serial number 462, left Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport and returned 20 minutes after take-off due to electrical difficulties and an indication of smoke in the cockpit.

    But the NTSB investigation points to pilot error. And as far as I am concerned any error that does not result in damage, but does result in amended procedures is a good thing. What has happened as a result of this pilot error is a revision to the pilot checklist that pilots have to follow when they are handling electrical malfunctions. The malfunction was not really the pilots however. There was a faulty fire-warning sensor, but the reboot procedures just made it worse since in the reboot procedure, a generator didn’t get turned back on.

    Consequences the pilots had to deal with as a result of the absent generator included a blank screen for the copilot, steering issues with the jet’s nose gear and antiskid protection for the brakes, and the intercom.

    It must have been a pretty exciting 20 minute ride for the passengers, as it ended on emergency slided.

  • | | | |

    Faulty Autopilot Forces LAX Landing

    What: United Airlines en route to San Francisco
    Where: LAX
    When: April 17, 2011
    Why: After takeoff, the autopilot took control and would not relinquish it. The pilot had no control over the plane, but then was able to turn off autopilot and return to the airport.

    The news release of this event does not mention the type of plane; but I am not surprised at first research that it appears to have been an Airbus A320. Fortunately, the pilot regained control, and there were no injuries. But this kind of problem with an airbus could have significance relating to all fly by wire aircraft, which have the capacity to lock out the pilot.

    We need more information about this event. It should be published heavily, and we should be hearing some alerts and safety directives from Airbus.

  • |

    Latest Denial by Air France CEO

    Although Air France CEO Gourgeon said last month there’s no evidence that the crash was caused by the Pitot tubes, which were made by Thales SA. Bouillard also said last year that speed-sensor failure couldn’t alone explain the crash, and that aviation records in Europe and the U.S. document dozens of incidents where the probes failed and pilots retained control.

    Air France and Airbus have been charged with manslaughter over the accident

    In our opinion, we believe the failure of the pitot tubes played to the weakness of the Airbus fly by wire logic system. We believe that the fly by wire system received a barrage of false data put out by the frozen tubes, and shut down, taking control of the plane from the pilots. Faulty computer logic does not excuse faulty pitot tubes,

    This is conjecture on our part, but we will not be surprised if/when the black boxes are recovered, that they will reveal what happened, if they are still readable.

  • | | | | |

    Airbus Landing Gear Problem Returns Air France Flight to Veneuzuela

    What: Air France Airbus A330-200 en route from Caracas Venezuela to Paris
    Where: Caracas
    When: Apr 13th 2011
    Who: 207 passengers
    Why: Unable to retract the landing gear, the plane circled for three hours to burn off fuel and made a safe landing in Caracas.

    No doubt the situation caused significant anxiety. Any time an Air France flight originating in a South American country has a problem en route en route to Paris, the passengers in crisis must inevitably remember what happened to Air France Flight 447 and wonder if they too will become innocent victims, and statistics lost at sea.

  • |

    March 2011 Inventory of AF 447 & Phase 4 Complete


    The new parts of the plane which have been found include part of a landing gear, a left wing panel, one of the GE engines and a portion of the fuselage. The cockpit voice and flight data recorders have not been found, but neither have the parts of the plane where they are normally located.

    Corrosion, which is the enemy of the black boxes, is not likely to have infiltrated at the current depth, so the search is optimistic. Whatever is found will supplement the last Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (Acars) error messages that were sent by the failing Airbus.

    The debris field appears to be in a flat area within a larger area of subterranean mountainous topography.

    The ship Ile de Sein from the company Alcatel-Lucent Submarine Networks (ASN), equipped with a ROV from Phoenix International Inc., will be undertaking the fifth phase of maritime operations, directed by the BEA and financed by the French State.

    In a statement about the search, the BEA director Jean-Paul TROADEC said “to check the predictive ability of the drift calculations… drift buoys were dropped, at the BEA’s initiative, from a French Navy aircraft at the beginning of June 2010 in the area of the accident. Tracking them via satellites in the following weeks demonstrated the turbulent nature of the currents in this region and thus the difficulty of predictions.

    Analysis of all of the results from the previous searches allowed the BEA to deduce that the zones that had previously been searched using sonar did not need to be explored again, given the performance of this type of equipment.

    This was why phase 4 was based on the strategy of a systematic search of all of the zones not explored up to then during phase 2 by the IFREMER SAR sonar and during phase 3 by the REMUS and ORION sonars. This thus led to covering the whole of the remaining area of 10,000 km2 in the Circle.

    The study carried out by Metron at the request of the BEA thus consisted, based on analysis of all of the surface and undersea search data since the accident, to attributing degrees of probability of the presence of wreckage to the various regions in the Circle, given that that those that had been covered by sonar were considered “clear”.

    This study, published on the BEA website on 20 January 2011, indicated a strong possibility for discovery of the wreckage near the centre of the Circle. It was in this area that it was in fact discovered after one week of exploration thanks to the performance of the REMUS AUV’s operated by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.”

    BEA

  • | | | | | | |

    Comair jet struck by Air France Airbus on the ground.

    What: Air France Airbus 380 en route from NY to Paris
    Where: JFK, NY
    When: April 11, 2011
    Who: Air France Airbus passengers; and Comair passengers;
    Why: A Delta/Comair Bombardier CRJ-700 (N641CA) which had just flown in from Boston was struck in the tail by the left wing of an Airbus.

    There were no injuries, but a lot of inconvenience, plus damage to both planes. (The Comair left horizontal stabilizer and the Airbus wingtip.) The Air France flight was cancelled because of the damage. Both flights were cancelled, although the Air France flight hadn’t gone anywhere. The Air France passengers had to disembark and retrieve their luggage as alternatives for reaching their destination were sorted out.

    The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating.

  • | | | | |

    Air Blue Report: Where Are You?

    Do we know more than we did before the investigations? No, we do not. Because after almost 9 months, we still haven’t heard the official investigation of the Air Blue Airbus that crashed in Margalla Hills on July 28, 2010. And this is not one of those cases where the blackboxes disappeared. The black boxes on this flight were located and sent to France for processing.


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Richard Vandervord

    What: AirBlue Airbus A321-200 en route from Karachi to Islamabad Pakistan
    Where: Margalla Hills about 10nm north of Islamabad
    When: Jul 28th 2010
    Who: 146 passengers and 6 crew
    Why: While on approach to Islamabad in poor weather conditions during monsoon rain and low visibility, radio contact was lost (at 09:45) and the plane impacted the terrain.

    Helicopters flew into the mountainous area, which is difficult to access. Initial reports were that there were no survivors then helicopters were reported to have flown five survivors to hospitals. Six bodies have been recovered including the pilot but there are no survivors (in spite of the video report.)

    Scheduled 14 CFR Non-U.S., Commercial operation of Airblue
    Accident occurred Wednesday, July 28, 2010 in Islamabad, Pakistan
    Aircraft: AIRBUS A321, registration: AP-BCB
    Injuries: 157 Fatal.
    On July 28, 2010, Airblue flight 202, an Airbus A321 with IAE V2500 engines, registration AP-BCB, impacted terrain in the Margilla Hills during approach to runway 12 at Benazir Bhutto International Airport (OPRN), Islamabad, Pakistan. All 150 passengers and 7 crewmembers onboard were fatally injured and the airplane was destroyed. The flight was a regularly scheduled passenger flight from Jinnah International Airport, Karachi, Pakistan (OPKC) to OPRN.

  • | |

    2006 Wake Turbulence Event

    What: Vueling Airbus A320-200 en route from Barcelona to Santiago de Compostela
    Where: Barcelona
    When: May 28 2006
    Who: 137 passengers 7 crew
    Why: The airbus suffered wake turbulence causing the plane to roll to the right. The crew regained Santiagocontrol and continued to where they landed safely, although 4 passengers and 3 crew members were hurt.

    The wake turbulence was caused by an A340 ten miles ahead.

    Separation was met, and CIAIAC said weather was not a factor. The NTSB Report said probable case was due to In flight separation of the vertical stabilizer as a result of loads beyond system design caused by first officer’s excessive rudder input.

  • | | |

    New Orleans: Smokeless Emergency Landing Examined

    The NTSB report says there was no smoke, no burning and wonders why the CVR and data recorder were turned off before the incident. (Procedure for the ECAM indication is to shut down certain electrical systems.) Pilots were acting on “autothrottle-related message” followed by an avionics smoke warning message that was accompanied by “instructions to land” but apparently neither the pilots and crew (who “reportedly received automated warnings and detected smoke in the cockpit) actually smelled smoke. Furthermore some news articles have talked about passengers being treated for smoke exposure which was more likely injury occurring on an emergency slide.

    What: United Airlines Airbus A320-200 en route from New Orleans,LA to San Francisco,CA
    Where: Louis Armstrong Airport
    When: April 4 2011 7:20 a.m. after a 13 minute flight
    Who: 100 passengers 5 crew
    Why: After takeoff, the pilot reported smoke in the cockpit, and returned to the airport. The pilot reported losing all instruments, and landed on backup power, blowing out a tire and running off the runway. Passengers evacuated via slides.

    Read more

  • | | | | | | |

    NTSB TEAM Investigating New Orleans Emergency Landing

    On April 4, 2011, a United Airlines Airbus 320-232 with 109 passengers and crew aboard returned to the airport about 20 minutes after take-off due to electrical difficulties and smoke in the cockpit. On landing, the crew described a loss of anti-skid braking and nose-wheel steering and passengers had to exit via slide. (The right front slide failed.) Dan Bower is investigator-in-charge of the NTSB team including reps of Federal Aviation Administration,United Airlines, the Air Line Pilots Association, theAssociation of Flight Attendants, and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and an Airbus rep appointed by the Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses (BEA) of the Government of France.


    What: United Airlines Airbus A320-200 en route from New Orleans,LA to San Francisco,CA
    Where: Louis Armstrong Airport
    When: April 4 2011 7:20 a.m. after a 13 minute flight
    Who: 100 passengers 5 crew
    Why: After takeoff, the pilot reported smoke in the cockpit, and returned to the airport. The pilot reported losing all instruments, and landed on backup power, blowing out a tire and running off the runway. Passengers evacuated via slides.

    After landing, passengers were taken to the Hilton.

    TRANSCRIPT OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER, PILOT CONVERSATION
    UA 497: Clear for takeoff runway 19, thank for you very much.
    UA 497: We need to vector back to the airport, we got a smoke issue with the airplane.
    N.O. Approach: Turn right 030 (degrees) and maintain 4,000 (feet.)
    UA 497: 030 4,000. And we’d like the longest runway please.
    N.O. Approach: There are men and equipment on the runway – they’re going to try to get them off now. Descend at pilot’s discretion. Maintain 2,000.
    UA 497: We are declaring an emergency and please roll equipment for our landing please.
    N.O. Approach: We are unable for (runway) 10, can you take (runway) 19?
    UA 497: ..no..
    N.O. Approach: Roger, we are clearing the runway now.
    Airport operations: How much time do we have?
    New Orleans Tower: I’d say they are about 11 miles to the west.
    Airport operations: Tower, we can start trying to pull them off, but I don’t think we will get them all off in time.
    N.O. Approach: United 497, Say souls on board and fuel remaining.
    UA 497: 106 souls on board, fuel remaining 32,400 pounds.
    N.O. Approach: They are still trying to get all the vehicles off the runway and 19 is still available if you like….
    New Orleans Tower: … working as fast as they can (unintelligible) There is a bunch of equipment on there they’re tying to get off now.
    UA 497: You need to clear it for us.
    New Orleans Tower: I understand, sir. We’re getting them off as fast as we can.
    N.O. Approach: Turn right heading 140, main 2,000 ….cleared ILS runway 10 approach.
    New Orleans Tower: Can you verify the vehicles are exiting?
    Airport operations: We are attempting to get the vehicles off right now, I’m removing the cones also.
    New Orleans Tower: OK, cause I haven’t seen any of the vehicles move and the aircraft is ten to the northwest and they have to have runway 100.
    N.O. Approach: United 497, Turn right heading 180.
    UA 497: um…. We only have one… um … (Alarms sounding in background.)
    N.O. Approach: United 497 say again sir?
    New Orleans Tower: We need three minutes to get the runway clear.
    UA 497: (alarms blaring) We’ve lost all our instruments right now and we’re going to need (directions)
    N.O. Approach: United turn left heading, 20 degrees left
    N.O. Approach: Just continue left turn, I’ll tell you when to stop.
    UA 497: (unintelligible) What vector are we from the airport?
    N.O. Approach: Right now sir you are on the 330 degree heading from the airport. Northwest of the airport for runway 19er. If you continue on this present heading you’ll set up on the shoreline for 19.
    UA 497: Shoreline for 19.
    N.O. Approach: I can set u up there or I can vector you, what’d you need?
    UA 497: That’s fine.
    N.O. Approach: (unintelligible…)You got the water, right?
    UA 497: Yeah, we got the water and we’re going to stop here about 600 feet.
    N.O. Approach: Roger that. The airport’s currently at your 1 o’clock and five miles.
    UA 497: 1 o’clock and five miles roger.
    New Orleans Tower to fire crews: Fox-6, next arrival runway 19er is our aircraft. And the aircraft is approximately 3 miles northwest runway 19er.
    N.O. Approach: If you start your right turn now I can set you up on final.
    UA 497: Start turn on final.
    New Orleans Tower to fire crews: The aircraft is over the shoreline around two miles out. You do have permission to proceed on to the runway after he lands.
    N.O. Approach: Make a right turn. The airport is off to yoru right side,
    N.O. Approach: 497, clear to land 19er. You’ll be able to make it sir? Winds 180 at 16, gusts to 20, Clear to land. Runway 19er.
    New Orleans Tower to fire trucks: Fox-5, this is our aircraft touvh ing down bow.
    New Orleans Tower: Follow the aircraft down the runway.
    New Orleans Tower: We’re going to need runway 10 operational. Runway 19er is fouled at this time.

  • | | | | |

    Limbo

    They say that time heals all wounds. And in a sense that may be true even for the families who lost loved ones in a plane crash, as long as we can interpret “healing” to mean that time eventually eases the sharpness of the pain of loss. And while that degree of healing is something that happens with people because our nervous systems are built for survival and allow us to adapt to even agonizing loss, the same thing is not true of mechanical equipment. While people bathed in time may get a little better, black boxes, radar components and computers that sit in salt water for a long period of time do not get better. In fact a scientist could present us a ratio of the time an item spends in ocean water : accessibility of evidence in terms of a diminishing ratio of accessibility. Or in other words, the longer evidence soaks in salt water, the more diminished our capacity to analyze it. Not that the same ratio applies across the board, of course–the frailty of paper in salt water is not the same as metal. And rice paper would differ from bond which would differ from cardstock. But in general, one can certainly say the longer evidence sits in the ocean, the more degraded that item will be. Ocean-time won’t heal evidence; but it sure helps damage or destroy it. So any evidence that we find now has been quietly degrading for almost 2 years.

    So now we have the news that the fourth search for the black boxes has turned up something even more stupendous–they found identifiable remains. Great hosannas and praise by the submarine-load is being lavished by the audience of a world who is transfixed by the news. How amazing it is that on this fourth search for a needle in a haystack, after two years time and ocean currents, and countless storms and tides, with each passing moment making discovery that much less likely, after all this, a needle is found. But who is the world praising? The searchers, certainly. The searchers have as they say these days “mad” skills. But let’s not praise the sponsors of the search.

    If not for the sponsors quitting, this discovery would have been found two years ago, or sometime between then and now. Because let us not forget the sponsors of the search, Air France and Airbus—both of whom could well afford to continue—have THREE TIMES quit. Quit the search, leaving key questions unanswered. Quit the search, the black boxes with their priceless knowledge, unfound. Quit the search, and left the families dissatisfied, and without closure.

    Nevermind that this is such a timely find. Days after a judge takes the high road of French law and declares Airbus and Air France open to a criminal investigation for the crash of Air France 447, suddenly we have such a “feel good” media moment. Bodies found. Good job, searchers. Bad job Air France. Bad job Airbus.

    If you had not given up, (and let’s face it, your reasons were purely financial,) what is lost would have been less dispersed by currents and time. And perhaps what is more important, the families would not be having their wounds reopened. Because these are not live family members found. This will not be true joy and true relief. This is just re-opening that sense of grief and pain, which is torturous after the anesthetic of two years. For those families whose lost are still lost. And for those families now able to receive their two lost loved ones, the grief and pain will be renewed. It will force them to relive the deaths all over again. Because even when they’re found, they’re still lost.

    The question remains, why did you ever quit the search? This Pandora’s box of pain could have been closed and laid to rest by now, if you had not quit. Shame on you.

    Costuma-se dizer que o tempo cura todas as feridas. Em certo sentido, isso até pode ser verdade para as famílias que perderam entes queridos em acidentes aeronáuticos, contanto que interpretemos essa “cura” como um alívio à agudeza da dor e do sofrimento. E embora esse nível de cura seja algo possível às pessoas porque nosso sistema nervoso é projetado para sobreviver, permitindo que nos adaptemos à mais agonizante perda, o mesmo não é verdade para equipamentos mecânicos. Ainda que pessoas banhadas pelo tempo possam ficar um pouco melhores, caixas-pretas, peças de radar e computadores abandonados em água salgada por um longo tempo não ficam nem um pouco melhor. Na verdade, um cientista poderia nos apresentar uma relação em função do tempo que um item permanece em baixo d’água, demonstrando uma taxa decrescente de acessibilidade das evidências. Em outras palavras, quanto mais tempo uma evidência fica submersa, menor é nossa capacidade de analisá-la. Isso não significa que uma mesma taxa se aplique a todas as evidências – é claro que a fragilidade do papel na água não se equipara à do metal. De modo geral, contudo, pode-se afirmar que quanto mais tempo um item permanecer no mar, mas degradado ele ficará. O tempo no mar não trará cura às evidências, mas certamente ajudará a danificá-las ou destruí-las. Logo, qualquer evidência que encontremos agora terá enfrentado uma lenta degradação por quase dois anos.

    Agora somos surpreendidos pela notícia de que a quarta busca pelas caixas-pretas encontrou algo ainda mais estupendo: corpos que podem ser identificados. Graças e louvores pelas descobertas submarinas têm sido dadas pelo público mundial que se mantém atento às notícias. Como é incrível que nessa quarta busca de uma agulha no palheiro, já após dois anos, com correntes oceânicas e diversas tempestades e marés, e com o passar do tempo tornando qualquer descoberta cada vez mais improvável, uma agulha tenha sido encontrada. E quem está sendo saudado pelo mundo? As equipes de busca, com certeza. Elas demonstraram habilidades verdadeiramente fenomenais. Mas não vamos enaltecer os patrocinadores das buscas.

    Se os patrocinadores não tivessem desistido, essas descobertas teriam sido feitas há dois anos, ou em algum momento entre a data do acidente e hoje em dia. Por isso, não vamos esquecer que os patrocinadores das buscas, Air France e Airbus, que bem podiam ter arcado com sua continuidade, abandonaram-nas por três vezes. Abandonaram as buscas, deixando importantes perguntas sem resposta. Abandonaram as buscas, deixando perdidas as caixas-pretas e suas valiosas informações. Abandonaram as buscas, deixando famílias insatisfeitas e sem uma conclusão.

    Não importa que essa descoberta seja tão oportuna. Dias após um juiz aplicar os rigores da lei francesa e declarar que a Airbus e a Air France podem ser investigadas criminalmente pelo acidente com o voo 447 da Air France, temos de repente um “agradável” momento na mídia. Corpos são encontrados. Bom trabalho, equipes de busca. Grande falha, Air France. Grande fracasso, Airbus.

    Se vocês não tivessem desistido (e, sejamos francos, seus motivos foram puramente financeiros), as perdas teriam sido menos dispersadas pelas correntes marítimas e pelo tempo. E talvez, ainda mais importante, as famílias não teriam suas feridas reabertas. Como não estamos falando do encontro de sobreviventes, essas descobertas não trarão verdadeiro alívio e verdadeira felicidade. Elas apenas servirão para recrudescer aquela sensação de dor e sofrimento, que é uma tortura após dois anos de anestesia. Para aquelas famílias cujos entes queridos não serão encontrados, e para as demais que agora receberão os restos de seus familiares, a dor e o sofrimento serão renovados. Isso as forçará a reviver as mortes mais uma vez.

    Porque, mesmo encontrados, eles continuam perdidos.

    A dúvida permanece: “Por que vocês desistiram das buscas?” Se vocês não tivessem desistido, essa Caixa de Pandora de dor já poderia ter sido fechada e enterrada a essa altura. Vocês deviam se envergonhar!

  • | | | | |

    Alitalia Airbus Emergency Landing


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Erezms

    What: Alitalia Airbus A321-200 en route from Palermo to Rome Fiumicino Italy
    Where: Palermo
    When: Apr 3rd 2011
    Who: 150 passengers
    Why: While en route, the crew encountered an undesignated technical problem.

    The crew returned to Palermo where they made a safe landing. The Airbus was flown to Milan for examination and repair.

    Passengers were provided alternative flights.

  • | | | | | |

    Lufthansa Emergency Landing


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Ralf Meyermann

    What: Lufthansa Airbus A320-200 en route from Frankfurt to Moscow
    Where: Frankfurt
    When: Apr 2nd 2011
    Who: 80 passengers
    Why: Engine exhaust increased in temperature. The pilots returned to Frankfort where they made a safe landing. Passengers were provided a replacement flight 3 hours later.

  • | | | | | |

    Hard Landing in Cairo by Egyptair


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Giovanni Verbeeck

    What: Egyptair Airbus A321-200 en route from Brussels (Belgium) to Cairo (Egypt)
    Where: Cairo
    When: Apr 1st 2011
    Who: 76 passengers
    Why: On landing at Cairo, the crew aborted the initial approach on receipt of an unsafe gear indication.The plane rotated with the airport to the right, and leveled off.

    The cabin crew announced the flight would be landing later due to traffic then made a hard landing on runway 23L. The plane rolled out, with firetrucks on standby. The landing gear was examined on the runway.

  • | | | | |

    Smoke in American Airlines Flight


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer

    What: American Airlines McDonnell Douglas MD-82 en route from Fort Myers to Dallas TX
    Where: Jacksonville
    When: Mar 30th 2011
    Why: While en route, the crew smelled smoke in the cabin.

    They diverted to Jacksonville. By the time they landed, the odor dissipated. The plane was examined; and a replacement MD-83 was flown in.

    Passengers arrived 2 and a half hours late.

  • | | | |

    Unruly United Airlines Passengers Trip Cut Short


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Frank Robitaille

    What: United Airlines Airbus A320-200 en route from Washington to Portland
    Where: Chicago
    When: Mar 29 2011
    Who: 3 unruly passengers and one ill passenger
    Why: While en route, three unruly passengers caused the pilot to divert to Chicago for an overweight landing. The passengers disembarked, and the fight continued to Portland, albeit between four and five hours late. The passengers who disembarked were re-screened.

  • | | | | |

    Washington National: Act II


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Jean-Claude Simard

    What: United Airlines Airbus A320-200 en route from Chicago O’Hare,IL to Washington National
    Where: Washington DC
    When: Mar 22nd 2011
    Who: 68 people aboard
    Why: The United crew was informed that the airport was “uncontrolled” via the advisory frequency. The plane made a visual approach and landed ten minutes after the American Airlines flight

  • | | | | | |

    Airbus Yesterday, Air France Today: Justice Wheels Grind Slowly

    George’s Point of View


    Thursday’s news was that Airbus is being investigated for Air France Flight 447. Airbus officials made a public statement that they “strongly disapprove” of the decision, (no doubt!) but would comply with the investigation. Note to readers: This is law, not option. So let’s take that cooperation with a grain of salt, shall we? When the judge tells you that you’re being investigated, you say, “Yes Ma’am.”

    March 20 is the date the search starts again, more on that below.

    So yesterday, Thursday, was Airbus’s turn in court–
    Today, Friday, Air France has been called in its turn before a judge in France to get its hand slapped. Or get in preparation to get its hand slapped, in ten years or so. Anyway, Air France is also on the mat.

    Or, as they call it in France, (to be purists here) Mise en examen

    This is a criminal investigation. It is a matter of FRENCH LAW. As it was explained to me, “Every air accident is also a criminal matter, and a judge is appointed to oversee the investigation and follow up including charges if any to be filed.”

    So what was the problem with the flight? It crashed. It killed lots of people No one knows for sure why. (Though to some of us it seems obvious.) No black boxes, right? But we’re not idiots. We have plenty of information about what was going on. Not everything, of course, but we have the messages sent by the plane’s computers. They reflect faulty readings which are believed to be the result of faulty pitot tube readings and a series of system failures. We would have a rounder picture of events if the black boxes, which hold crucial information were not misplaced somewhere in the Atlantic. They think they know where it is, (or at least they say they know or say they think they know) based on drift and whatnot (heavy on the whatnot.) But millions have been spent finding this needle in a stack of needles under the ocean, in a submarine mountain range. Nearly 30 million dollars has been spent on the search for the black boxes so far. The cost of the new search is shared by Airbus and Air France and will cost 12.5 million.

    What about the details about the mise en examen preliminary manslaughter charges filed Thursday against Airbus? They were filed in French court by Judge Sylvie Zimmerman over the 2009 deaths of 228 people aboard Air France Flight 447. Fatal accidents automatically prompt criminal probes running concurrent with civil investigations, but a couple of points which may not be obvious to Americans not versed in French Justice are that the charges may be issued pending further investigation, and may hinge on the black boxes which have not been found and may never be found; AND the dual investigation slows things down. That may be one item that delayed the Concord trial 10 years after the accident. You’ve seen pictures of a guy walking around with a tiny ankle-biting dog chewing on the hem of one pants leg? Well, instead of a chihuahua, picture the entire french justice system. Might tend to slow down ones progress, do you think?

    So Air France will be in court Friday, ie today. Watch the news, because what we saw yesterday about Airbus, we’ll see today about Air France. I hope the families are getting some satisfaction from this, because it is going to be a long (long long long) time before they feel like they’re actually being heard, not herded into obscurity.

  • | | | |

    Close Encounters of the Airport Kind


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Urs Zimmermann


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Tsuyoshi Hayasaki – AroundWorldImages

    What: Swiss Airbus A320-200 en route from Zurich Switzerland to Madrid, Spain
    What: Swiss Airbus A320-200 en route from Zurich Switzerland to Moscow Domodedovo Russia
    Where: Zurich
    When: Mar 15th 2011
    Why: To save space, lets call these planes Swiss Airbus Spain and Swiss Airbus Russia …
    Swiss Airbus Spain was taking off when ATC had them abort the takeoff.
    Swiss Airbus Russia was taking off simultaneously, and they were allowed to continue.

    An an ILS calibration flight was measuring runways 14 and 16 in the area at the same time. Russia was on one of the runways being measured, but not Spain.

    Swiss Airbus Spain stopped with hot brakes, and takeoff was delayed for three hours. Russia was allowed to continue.

    A near miss may be a near collision, but a close call is a close call. And this was a close call.

  • | | | |

    Display Failure Aboard Airbus: Now What?


    Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
    Contact photographer Paul Carlotti

    What: Air Canada Airbus A319-100 en route from Toronto to Winnipeg
    Where: Sault Ste Marie
    When: Mar 8 2011
    Who: 125 aboard
    Why: While en route, the plane was over Canada when the displays quit. The loss of the displays is being attributed to an electronic power failure. (Wonder if there was a short or if it was something else?) The displays were only offline for less than a minute, and subsequently began flashing error messages. Pilots continued on to Winnipeg and managed to land safely. The plane was taken out of commission in order to have an Airbus inspection to determine what exactly was going on.

    Flying an Airbus without electronic displays is, I think, tantamount to suicide. I am surprised they didn’t divert somewhere and land immediately. Is it not somewhat risky to continue flying an airbus when the display connections are flakey? This same sort of thing happened on a BMI Airbus A321. Apparently catastrophic failure in rough conditions is not unheard of. In fact, rough conditions are not required to cause the need for a reboot. The term for “rebooting” an airbus that has lost its electronics is called “recycling,” a common enough thing that there is recognizable pilot humor regarding it.