Air France Flight 447

Not that the case has literally gone before a jury yet. But in the investigation, pre-judgment is pending. The investigations and frictions continue. Theories circulate, even without the benefit of the input of the lost black boxes. Isn’t judgement supposed to be suspended until ALL the fact gathering is complete?

If nothing else, the crash of Air France Flight 447 has shown us the flaws in aircraft tools for speed measurement. The Thales brand Pitot tubes that were installed on the Air France Airbus have a tendency to ice over in certain conditions.

Perhaps before the crash, Airbus fly-by-wire aficionados may have become somewhat complacent depending on computer technology. Fly-by-wire fans forget that computers are fallible. Not just because they can’t make human, practical judgements, but also because we tend to forget how fragile precise digital mechanisms actually are. (Has no one noticed how digital appliances quit in conditions when their hardier mechanical predecessors endured? A flicker of electricity, a speck of dust can break, ruin, or reset a digital device.)

The tragedy served to remind us that there is danger inherent in flying in icy conditions and it is up to safety officials to modify the criteria to decrease the danger.

The FAA (U.S. Federal Aviation Administration) and EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency ) both sent directives out for airlines to replace Thales Pitot tubes on all Airbuses.

There is conflict between the BEA and the Brazilian examiners regarding whether or not the flight broke apart in the air or if it hit the water intact.

Dozens of headlines read: Autopsies suggest Flight 447 broke apart in sky; plane broke up in mid-air; Air France Jet Probably Broke Apart In Midair: Official

Dozens of headlines read: Jet Was Intact As It Hit Water, and Doomed Air France plane hit sea intact: investigators.

One school of thought says the flight broke apart because it was going at such speed that the plane’s (composite) frame could not withstand the pressures.

Another school of thought suggests that the plane–or part of the fuselage– hit the water intact.

The amount of fragmentation, the type of fractures, whether or not clothing was intact are all factors in figuring out the conditions of the crash.

What is my opinion? I doubt it disintegrated spontaneously; but I am guessing that something crucial like the tail rudder may have broken in the air. And some pieces of the fuselage may have hit the water intact. But that’s opinion. Let’s hope they find the black boxes in February.