Air France Plane Drops Off Radar Over Atlantic

[jackdanielsesq]

I dont, as a rule, indulge in hyperbole, bashing or name-calling, kindly cease & desist.

Providing logical fact - the list of wrecks came from a EADS database, it wasnt a thumb suck, so get over it - is somewhat more logical than whining because one has serious emotional issues.

As well as calling into question the Airbus flight deck modus operandi and design concept - there is ample proof that their system is bogus - not fly-by-wire, per se, as already detailed herein.

To wit, there is further proof that the entire Airbus management ethics mantra is out to lunch, were one to take the time to read the report, instead of flaming - some would call it fraud - vis-a-vis the Paris Air Show , a A320 crashed on June 26th 1988, killing 3 passengers. Officially the crash was blamed on pilot error, many questions remained unanswered including a bizarre development where Switzerland’s institute of forensic evidence and criminology determined that the plane’s flight data recorder had been substituted after the crash, placing doubt on the entire investigation. That of course does not preclude all the other unethical dealings EADS has had over time.

That being said, of course this is all speculation, nobody has invented a reliable crystal ball - or they aint saying.

The way these guys operate, we might never learn the truth. Two engines, fly-by-wire, electrical malfunction=catastrophe.

BR>Jack

[bdenner]

All sorts of speculation and innuendo in this thread! Why don't some of you just stick to the facts as reported and updated on Wikipedia, here for example?

[cgjtt]

I dont, as a rule, indulge in hyperbole, bashing or name-calling, kindly cease & desist.

Providing logical fact - the list of wrecks came from a EADS database, it wasnt a thumb suck, so get over it - is somewhat more logical than whining because one has serious emotional issues.

As well as calling into question the Airbus flight deck modus operandi and design concept - there is ample proof that their system is bogus - not fly-by-wire, per se, as already detailed herein.

To wit, there is further proof that the entire Airbus management ethics mantra is out to lunch, were one to take the time to read the report, instead of flaming - some would call it fraud - vis-a-vis the Paris Air Show , a A320 crashed on June 26th 1988, killing 3 passengers. Officially the crash was blamed on pilot error, many questions remained unanswered including a bizarre development where Switzerland's institute of forensic evidence and criminology determined that the plane's flight data recorder had been substituted after the crash, placing doubt on the entire investigation. That of course does not preclude all the other unethical dealings EADS has had over time.

That being said, of course this is all speculation, nobody has invented a reliable crystal ball - or they aint saying.

The way these guys operate, we might never learn the truth. Two engines, fly-by-wire, electrical malfunction=catastrophe.

BR>Jack

I was writing a really boring reply full of technical crap, quotes from air safety network, wikipedia bla bla bla, but here is the question, next time you fly somewhere and it's a Thai Airbus 330 . Will you get on it or quote EADS to the gate agent or get on it. If you use your argument about airbus, you should look at boeing also. Lets keep the argument factual.

[jackdanielsesq]

Mine is a statement of fact, not an argument.

I have not flown an Airbus in +24 months

BR>Jack

[bangon04]

All sorts of speculation and innuendo in this thread! Why don't some of you just stick to the facts as reported and updated on Wikipedia, here for example?

To save me reading 4 pages of pointless speculation, can somebody please tell me which Post here is the one which may in some distant way be related to THAILAND ?????

[Carib]

I dont, as a rule, indulge in hyperbole, bashing or name-calling, kindly cease & desist.

Providing logical fact - the list of wrecks came from a EADS database, it wasnt a thumb suck, so get over it - is somewhat more logical than whining because one has serious emotional issues.

As well as calling into question the Airbus flight deck modus operandi and design concept - there is ample proof that their system is bogus - not fly-by-wire, per se, as already detailed herein.

To wit, there is further proof that the entire Airbus management ethics mantra is out to lunch, were one to take the time to read the report, instead of flaming - some would call it fraud - vis-a-vis the Paris Air Show , a A320 crashed on June 26th 1988, killing 3 passengers. Officially the crash was blamed on pilot error, many questions remained unanswered including a bizarre development where Switzerland's institute of forensic evidence and criminology determined that the plane's flight data recorder had been substituted after the crash, placing doubt on the entire investigation. That of course does not preclude all the other unethical dealings EADS has had over time.

That being said, of course this is all speculation, nobody has invented a reliable crystal ball - or they aint saying.

The way these guys operate, we might never learn the truth. Two engines, fly-by-wire, electrical malfunction=catastrophe.

BR>Jack

You don't as a rule indulge in....., and than you start doing nothing but just that, and others have just emotional issues. Well jack, I beg to differ. Your list doesn't proof a thing, unless you can show me that it was all fly by wire induced/related accidents, and that you cannot.

You still have not educated yourself on the type of plain which went down, now have you?

And if you want to talk ethics in plane building manufacturers I would take a very good and and long look at some of the NTSB reports about for instance crashing DC 10`s and 747 fuel pumps . Look at the recommendations and what the industry did with them, they just waited till the next crash, and than they were told to implement the advices given. Also look into the fact why it was a recommendation, and not mandatory in the first place.

Look up cargo door design`s and failures and the way ALL warnings were ignored. Why?? Because it costs money, and the competitor was turning out better planes, so they were in a hurry.

To me this is not a contest, or about the better manufacturer or even nation, because that is where it comes down to in your case I think. To me it is very closely related to what I do in aviation.

But to simply state that fly by wire on a twin engined plane is doomed to be a catastrophe, is totally and utterly ridiculous.

[bkkjames]

All sorts of speculation and innuendo in this thread! Why don't some of you just stick to the facts as reported and updated on Wikipedia, here for example?

To save me reading 4 pages of pointless speculation, can somebody please tell me which Post here is the one which may in some distant way be related to THAILAND ?????

Well its more relevant the the stupid NK one because everyday - A330's fly in and out of Thailand.

[Datsun240Z]

Nobody knows the real reason for now. Maybe we will never know, because Authorities and Airbus would like to keep it secret. We have to realise that this is where the future is going, computer powered airplane... the pilot will be designed out of the cockpit. Like they want to do with cars. This change from mechanical to electric is causing alot of failures and crashing and learning to the builders for newer design studies. Unfortuniatly always people have to die first.

[cgjtt]

Maybe I should have used the KLM 747 example instead, cause in statistical reliablity there is not much difference between a 2 and a 4.

As for hiding the results I don't think so. As the accident happend in Brasilian airspace it will be under their jurisdiction. The french will be there to assist. As for locating the boxes. The US is sending a specialized sonar to help ( they have more or less 30 days before the batteries run out ).

Does this relate to this forum , I think so. At some point, we will probably set foot in a 330. If there is a design or procedure flaw, it will be in all our best interest that it be rectified.

[Pierrot]

I dont, as a rule, indulge in hyperbole, bashing or name-calling, kindly cease & desist.

Really ?

From an other thread :

I dont understand? You didnt do anything except place yourself in danger. She didnt thank you, your wife thinks ya nuts.

What more do you need from us? You are clearly confused by your inaction. Might have been an interactive M&S class that ya wrecked!

Maybe they wanted a threesome? Who cares. Get a couple beers, pack a baseball bat..

BR>Jack

You're obviously a very confused young man !

So, please, stop interfering in a discussion that is way above you head

Edited June 4, 2009 by Pierrot

[jackdanielsesq]

Ya clearly very confused Tiger - that was all said in jest - the whole thread is a troll - so now we know there's another chink in your armor - or is it amour - the froggie one. Forget it - way over ya head. Sexist too, I notice. You are complicated.

BR>Jacki

Please stop hijacking threads - it does not become you!!

You're obviously a very confused young man ! So, please, stop interfering in a discussion that is way above you head

[bravingbangkok]

Just had a rethink, this one is very strange because when you think about one theory there is always something to go against it. All the evidence points to a sudden break up of the plane but then how did these passengers have time to text anyone ?

Edited June 4, 2009 by bravingbangkok

[Carmine6]

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Airbus is going to issue an "Excessive Speed" warning or notice.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124411224440184797.html

Investigators are pursuing a theory that excessive speed --- potentially caused by malfunctioning equipment -- may have contributed to the crash of an Air France Airbus A330 into the Atlantic Ocean earlier this week, according to two industry officials familiar with the details.

The developments in the investigation into the crash of Air France Flight 447 come as Airbus prepares to issue guidance reminding airlines world-wide to follow pre-determined procedures when pilots suspect their airspeed indicators are malfunctioning, according to these officials. The Airbus announcement, expected to be released later Thursday, would be the first specific indication that investigators suspect problems with airspeed indicators could have been the first stage of a cascading series of electrical and mechanical malfunctions aboard the packed Airbus jetliner.

...

... Industry officials stressed that it is too early to draw definitive conclusions from the scant data available, and theories of the crash could change substantially in coming days or weeks.

Under this preliminary scenario -- which is still developing and could be altered after further analysis -- airspeed sensors called pitot tubes may have iced up as the plane flew through a ferocious thunderstorm that could have included hail and violent updrafts, these people said. The devices, which have redundant features and are supposed to be heated, are the primary way pilots know how fast their aircraft is flying.

According to people familiar with the thinking of the investigators, the potentially faulty readings may have prompted the crew of the Air France flight to mistakenly boost thrust from the plane's two engines and increase speed as they went through what may have been extreme turbulence. As a result, the pilots may have inadvertently subjected the plane to increased structural stress, according to people familiar with the investigation.

[CFIT]

From PPRuNe

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/375937-...missing-47.html

post # 921

Evidence the plane succumbed to bad weather.

This may be a first, PPRuNe has closed the subject, perhaps the reasons will help mediate this discussion;

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/375937-...missing-48.html

>>>>>>>>>>>

"P- 12" Post 912

"With the exception of a few contributions by those who actually know their stuff and who are recognized as such by others who know their stuff, this statement summarizes the serious shortcomings of this entire thread.

We have "stories" being quoted about speed control, stalling an Airbus, going 'too fast', going 'too slow', getting bombed ad nauseum, with absolutely no basis in fact, "no attribution" as one poster honestly states and no documentation.

All we have are "layman's terms" everywhere, which are not only disrespectful to a general audience but which do great violence to real understanding and comprehension of the airplane, the environment it was operating in and what the crew did and did not do.

We've seen this all before. Decades ago, Randy Sohn on AVSIG very pointedly used to ask the question all the time: "Does anybody actually read the thread?", or are they just interested in hearing the noise of their own voice?

In the eight pages growth while I slept, there is precisely nothing new or even interesting; what I read is manufactured, regurgitated (because someone was too lazy to read the thread - the Vazquez presentation is cited at least five times) or picked out of thin air.

The thread is bulging with explanations to the newly-curious about why in many cases their wild notions about what happened are wrong.

I'm not saying "wait for the report". I'm not that naive and I think informed speculation is a good learning exercise. But for the newbies and others who talk and never listen/read, please - respect what has happened and think before you write. This thread is a deep embarrassment.

However, be aware that from now on, any posts with content that is considered by the moderators to be based on un-attributed sources or more importantly theories from anyone without a proper understanding of LH, heavy metal flying will be deleted and the poster banned from the thread for future posting. We will decide on who has a realistic understanding of those criteria by reading what is posted and using our own experience as current airline pilots and crew who do LH flying on heavy metal.

If you don't sound right then you will be toast. Hopefully that will lower our workload and stop this incessant theorising by people who only know what they read and hear in the media.

>>>>>>>>>>>>

[Tywais]

To save me reading 4 pages of pointless speculation, can somebody please tell me which Post here is the one which may in some distant way be related to THAILAND ?????

The missing passengers of Air France Flight 447 include 61 French, 58 Brazilians, 26 Germans, 9 Chinese, 9 Italians, 6 Swiss, 5 British, 5 Lebanese, 4 Hungarians, 3 Irish, 3 Slovaks, 3 Norwegians, 2 Americans, 2 Spanish, 2 Polish, 2 Moroccans, 1 Argentine, 1 Austrian, 1 Belgian, 1 Canadian, 1 Croatian, 1 Danish, 1 Dutch, 1 Estonian, 1 Filipino, 1 Gambian, 1 Romanian, 1 Icelandic, 1 Russian, 1 South African, 1 Swede, 1 Turk.

Source: 447 Passenger list

Britons among Air France crash

[SMEEERE]

You're all saying that there is no backup if the electronics fail but I've seen on the news that's not true. It has a backup system (yes, electrical also) that kicks in to place if the main system fails, and they said if that fails there is a third fail-safe with manual controls, and I guess that means hydraulics but they said even that is enough to fly the plane.

There is definatly something odd here as even in a nosedive from that altitude it would take minutes for the plane to impact,. that would have ( you would think ) given the pilots time to report and update on the problem,for total electrical failure ( to not be able to transmit ) it would have had to be blown out of the sky, lightning ?.

Lightning doesn't blow planes out of the sky. Please educate yourself.

Well you had beter sit next to me at school as i put a question mark after LIGHTNING !..

[Burr]

What's Next

RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil (CNN) -- The Brazilian air force said Thursday night that debris picked up near where officials believe Air France Flight 447 crashed Monday into the Atlantic Ocean was not from the plane

Did we have two planes run together???

[Carmine6]

What's Next

RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil (CNN) -- The Brazilian air force said Thursday night that debris picked up near where officials believe Air France Flight 447 crashed Monday into the Atlantic Ocean was not from the plane

Did we have two planes run together???

Likely just a bunch of trash that was just floating in the water. Unless there's some aliens missing a craft.

[CFIT]

BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Debris 'not from Air France jet'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8083474.stm

Debris recovered from the Atlantic by Brazilian search teams does not come from a lost Air France jet, a Brazilian air force official has said.

Brig Ramon Borges Cardoso contradicted earlier reports that debris had been found, saying "no material from the plane has been recovered".

A wooden cargo pallet was taken from the sea, but the Airbus A330 had no wooden pallets on board.

Oil slick

Brazilian navy vessels have been combing the area, about 1,100km (690 miles) north-east of Brazil's coast.

Three more Brazilian boats and a French ship equipped with small submarines are expected to arrive in the area in the next few days.

Brig Cardoso said that fuel found in the sea probably did come from the plane, because it was not of a type used in ships.

However he said a large oil slick photographed in the area was more likely to have come from a ship.

He said the search effort would continue, with the main focus on finding bodies, but bad weather is forecast for the region on Friday.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I like this post from PPRuNe, So far, the best summation of what is known

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/376433-af447-2.html

AF447 - Page 2 - PPRuNe Forums post # 25

>>>>>>>>

CaptLoko writes;

...

Just to understand I think quite reasonable that they experienced a ".. flame out" [ engines stopped ] during the severe turbulence. Since they were flying on FL 330/350 they were unable to start the APU [ aux power unit ] .... and must fly with Stand-by instruments without Radar. Is this correct ?

If so it sounds quite mandatory do Descent in order to re start .... At night, with stand-by instruments and without Radar and flying inside the CB [ storm ] it seems a reasonable explanation of what happened. It makes sense ?

Thanks

>>>>>>>>>>>

What a nightmare scenario, can't descend to restart ( engines need thicker atmosphere to re- start ) because of a storm under you .

This explains the ACARS ( systems auto reporting to Air France headquarters ) reports of electrical systems failing.

Edited June 5, 2009 by CFIT

[harleyclarkey]

What's Next

RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil (CNN) -- The Brazilian air force said Thursday night that debris picked up near where officials believe Air France Flight 447 crashed Monday into the Atlantic Ocean was not from the plane

Did we have two planes run together???

Likely just a bunch of trash that was just floating in the water. Unless there's some aliens missing a craft.

No, not trash....oil slick, seats, life raft, etc.

Your comment about aliens is not very funny considering the loss of life.

[harleyclarkey]

Latest..

Brazil's Defense Minister Nelson Jobim said debris discovered so far was spread over a wide area, with some 230 kilometers (140 miles) separating pieces of wreckage they have spotted. The floating debris includes a 23-foot (seven-meter) chunk of plane and a 12-mile-long (20-kilometer-long) oil slick, but pilots have spotted no signs of survivors, Air Force spokesman Col. Jorge Amaral said. "Oil stains on the water might exclude the possibility of an explosion, because there was no fire," Defense Minister Nelson Jobim told reporters Wednesday.

The new debris was discovered about 55 miles (90 kilometers) south of where searchers a day earlier found an airplane seat, a fuel slick, an orange life vest and pieces of white debris. The original debris was found roughly 400 miles (640 kilometers) northeast of the Fernando de Noronha islands off Brazil's northern coast, an area where the ocean floor drops as low as 22,950 feet (7,000 meters) below sea level.

The full link is

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090603/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/brazil_plane

[harleyclarkey]

Latest..

Brazil's Defense Minister Nelson Jobim said debris discovered so far was spread over a wide area, with some 230 kilometers (140 miles) separating pieces of wreckage they have spotted. The floating debris includes a 23-foot (seven-meter) chunk of plane and a 12-mile-long (20-kilometer-long) oil slick, but pilots have spotted no signs of survivors, Air Force spokesman Col. Jorge Amaral said. "Oil stains on the water might exclude the possibility of an explosion, because there was no fire," Defense Minister Nelson Jobim told reporters Wednesday.

The new debris was discovered about 55 miles (90 kilometers) south of where searchers a day earlier found an airplane seat, a fuel slick, an orange life vest and pieces of white debris. The original debris was found roughly 400 miles (640 kilometers) northeast of the Fernando de Noronha islands off Brazil's northern coast, an area where the ocean floor drops as low as 22,950 feet (7,000 meters) below sea level.

The full link is

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090603/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/brazil_plane

[harleyclarkey]

To save me reading 4 pages of pointless speculation, can somebody please tell me which Post here is the one which may in some distant way be related to THAILAND ?????

The missing passengers of Air France Flight 447 include 61 French, 58 Brazilians, 26 Germans, 9 Chinese, 9 Italians, 6 Swiss, 5 British, 5 Lebanese, 4 Hungarians, 3 Irish, 3 Slovaks, 3 Norwegians, 2 Americans, 2 Spanish, 2 Polish, 2 Moroccans, 1 Argentine, 1 Austrian, 1 Belgian, 1 Canadian, 1 Croatian, 1 Danish, 1 Dutch, 1 Estonian, 1 Filipino, 1 Gambian, 1 Romanian, 1 Icelandic, 1 Russian, 1 South African, 1 Swede, 1 Turk.

Source: 447 Passenger list

Britons among Air France crash

3 Irish????

Here it is reported that 3 Irish Doctors and 2 Aer Lingus staff are missing....very regretably presumed dead.

[CFIT]

^^

Huh , latest news , from Wednesday? I understand that debri lifted IS NOT from the plane, there are more debris fields but ships haven't reached them .

Knowledgeble posters at PPRuNe have deciphered one portion of the ACAPS message and a pitot tube [ air speed and other outside air sensors ] was malfunctioning, speculate ice up, causing conflicting info to the computers.

Also there have been rumblings air France doesn't do all it can to provide accurate weather,

- however this article discounts the bad weather theory

and expands on the over automated theme. ( garbage in garbage out..)

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/wo...0,6741218.story

>>>>>>>>>>>>

A sophisticated flight-control system that relies on electronic instruments and computers came under growing scrutiny Thursday as investigators tried to unravel the mysterious crash of an Air France Airbus 330 into the Atlantic.

A series of messages sent automatically by the jet moments before it plunged into the ocean late Sunday with 228 passengers and crew members aboard has raised speculation that the crash might have involved a malfunction of the automated system that flies the plane most of the time.

One of the messages reported that one of the plane's navigational control units had failed and that, almost simultaneously, the autopilot system had disengaged.

The sequence of events forced the crew of Flight 447 to fly the jet manually, a difficult task on an Airbus traveling at high altitude near its maximum speed, aviation experts said. Any significant change in airspeed could have caused the plane to lose lift or stability, both potentially deadly conditions.

Meanwhile, new analysis of the weather in the vicinity at the time of the crash appears to cast doubt on earlier reports that the plane encountered severe thunderstorms, lightning and wind gusts. Though there were storms, they were almost certainly less intense than those sometimes encountered above the United States, and lightning was at least 150 miles away, said Greg Forbes, severe-weather expert for the Weather Channel.

Forbes said an examination of weather data for Sunday, including satellite images, indicated updrafts of perhaps 20 mph, far from the initial reports of 100 mph.

"I wouldn't expect it to be enough to break apart the plane," Forbes said.

Though experts generally agreed Thursday that weather alone did not explain the crash, USC aviation safety expert Michael Barr said the investigation was still wide open.

"You can never disregard any possibility until you can prove what happened," Barr said. "The key here is to determine what the crew could have done after the initial event. Or was there nothing they could have done and they were just along for the ride?"

Air France executives said the plane had sent out a series of messages indicating technical failures, confirming news reports in Brazil and data that U.S. aviation experts had already gained access to.

A series of serious electronic breakdowns occurred on the Airbus over a four-minute period before the jet plunged into the sea, said Robert Ditchey, an aeronautical engineer, pilot and former airline executive.

The sequence started with an autopilot failure and a loss of the air data inertial reference unit, a system of gyroscopes and electronics that provides information on speed, direction and position. That system has been involved in two previous incidents that caused Airbus jetliners to plunge out of control, though the pilots were able to recover.

[ note the incidents are not named, nor the source of this info. ]

The automated messages then indicate that a fault occurred in one of the computers for the major control surfaces on the rear of the plane. Such a failure would have compounded the problems, particularly if the pilots were flying through even moderate turbulence.

The last message indicates that multiple failures were occurring, including pressurization of the cabin. Such a message would have reflected either a loss of the plane's pressurization equipment [ loss of engine ] or a breach of the fuselage, resulting in rapid decompression.

<<<<<<<<<<<<

Speculative scenario;

Iced /clogged pitot tube, conflicting info to computer , auto pilot automatically turns off, plane stalls or engine flame out , or vice versa - electronics lost , pressure lost situation deteriorates rapidly , possibly command pilot on rest segment in crew bunk .

Nasty, horrid situation.

[Datsun240Z]

Oil slick is not from a plane, it can be kerosine ( sort of diesel, but cleaner burn ).

I read on the dutch newspaper that Airbus investigated the 4 minute signals coming from the on-board computers, that the aircraft flew way to low on airspeed.

Edited June 5, 2009 by Datsun240Z

[wpcoe]

Previous Airbus disasters

Noticeably missing from that list is AA587, an A-300 which crashed in Queens (NYC) in November 2001.

[edited to add:] Okay, on third reading, I see that list only includes Airbus disasters up through 2000.

Edited June 5, 2009 by wpcoe

[Carmine6]

What's Next

RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil (CNN) -- The Brazilian air force said Thursday night that debris picked up near where officials believe Air France Flight 447 crashed Monday into the Atlantic Ocean was not from the plane

Did we have two planes run together???

Likely just a bunch of trash that was just floating in the water. Unless there's some aliens missing a craft.

No, not trash....oil slick, seats, life raft, etc.

Your comment about aliens is not very funny considering the loss of life.

The post I was responding to was about the debris that had been collected not being from the crash. It then speculates on a 2nd aircraft and a mid-air collision, which is ridiculous as none other is reported missing. The most likely source if not from the crash is not another plane, but the general stream of debris floating in the ocean.

Considering this thread had touched on the Bermuda Triangle earlier, I made the alien comment to make the point on how ridiculous the speculation was. Maybe too olique a reference.

[Datsun240Z]

Now there's more news from CNN ( Although the media can't be thrusted ), reading the story I pick up 2 things, and it could be a terrorist attack:

1: Pilots of an Air Comet flight from Lima, Peru, to Lisbon, Portugal, sent a written report on the bright flash they said they saw to Air France, Airbus and the Spanish civil aviation authority, the airline told CNN."Suddenly, we saw in the distance a strong and intense flash of white light, which followed a descending and vertical trajectory and which broke up in six seconds," the captain wrote.

Air Comet declined to identify the pilot's name but said he waited until landing to inform Air Comet management about what he saw. Air Comet then informed Spanish civil aviation authorities. The Air Comet co-pilot and a passenger aboard the same flight also saw the light.

2: Air France had received a bomb threat May 27 for a flight from Buenos Aires, Argentina, to Paris, sources in the Argentine military and police told CNN on Wednesday.

According to the officials, who had been briefed on the incident and declined to be identified because of the ongoing investigation, the Air France office in Buenos Aires received the threat from a man speaking Spanish.

As we know ETA is a terrorist group from Spain. I quote from Wikipedia:

France and Spain have often showed co-operation in the fight against ETA, despite France's lack of co-operation during the Franco era. In late 2007, two Spanish guards were shot to death in France when on a joint operation with their French counterparts. Furthermore, in May 2008 the arrests of four persons in Bourdeaux led to a major breakthrough against ETA

France and Spain have often showed co-operation in the fight against ETA, despite France's lack of co-operation during the Franco era. In late 2007, two Spanish guards were shot to death in France when on a joint operation with their French counterparts. Furthermore, in May 2008 the arrests of four persons in Bourdeaux led to a major breakthrough against ETA.

We also know are old friend Bin laden from 9/11, he loves planes and bombes. I quote again:

What was the top leadership of Al Qaeda doing in Brazil during the mid-1990s?

This is the million-dollar question American and South American security officials are trying to answer since it became known that Khalid Sheikh Mohamed, the top Al Qaeda operative snagged in Pakistan on March 1, spent three weeks at the end of 1995 in Brazil — in a region where Osama bin Laden is speculated to have visited that same year.

[CFIT]

^

There is NO evidence the plane was " Flying too slow or too fast, or for a mid -air collision, bombing, meteor strike, alien attack,

What there IS evidence of , ( and this may be all there ever is ...) All automated problem activated radio reports (ACARS) info leads to systemic degradation of sensors feeding the flight computer. Likely from icing up.

Professional speculation then has it the Auto Pilot turns off as it will in extreme conditions and suddenly a pilot is in the dark, getting false or conflicting info from faulty sensors, in a storm flying an aircraft very high up in thin atmosphere where margins of speed errors can vary by as little as 10 kph.

As for the pilots " sighting ..."

Remember aside from an impossible distance , there were many many storms and cloud formations between the two positions too.

From PPruNe http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/376433-af447-6.html

Page 6, post # 103 Member, " Lost in Saigon"

>>>>>>>

The Air Comet flight was over 2,000 km away. They could not have seen AF447. This is from the closed thread: http://www.pprune.org/4974157-post912.html

LIM (12°01'19"S 77°06'52"W) 07°00'00"N 49°00'00"W 2028 nm

07°00'00"N 49°00'00"W LIS (38°46'53"N 09°08'09"W) 2875 nm

RIO (22°54'S 43°14'W) CDG (49°00'35"N 02°32'52"E) 4950 nm

07°00'00"N 49°00'00"W 03°17'24"N 30°24'00"W 100° 1135 nm

That is too far to see anything

[CFIT]

Here's what the plane was going through, many flights have gone through the same, or worse it just happened the flight data sensors failed ...

( Not likely the Comet pilots saw through this mess, either ..)

http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af447/

>>>>>>>>>>>

And finally this image shows a zoomed image at 0215Z when AF447 made its last transmission:

Figure 6. View of AF447 track using GOES imagery, 0215Z 1 June 2009. GOES-10 is located at the 60 deg meridian.

Figure 7. View of AF447 track using METEOSAT-9 imagery, 0200Z 1 June 2009. This satellite is positioned over west Africa at the 0 deg meridian. The image shows slightly different characteristics since the satellite is positioned east of the MCS rather than west of it. The image is also 15 minutes earlier. (Special thanks to Scott Bachmeier and SSEC at the University of Wisconsin; also to EUMETSAT for making the image possible)

The resulting satellite photos clearly show an active mesoscale convective system (MCS) across the flight path. About 90% of the cloud material seen on the closeup images are actually multiple levels of convective debris fields from dying storms and activity that occurred previously during the day, with extensive cirrus fields. The active thunderstorm areas are actually defined not by the bright coloring but by small-scale mottled areas of cold cloud tops. Compare with this structural diagram below of a similar tropical MCS in the same area in 1977.

Temperature trends suggested that the entire system was at peak intensity, developing rapidly around 2300-0100Z and finally dissipating many hours later around dawn. From a turbulence perspective, the cold spots described above would be the areas of highest concern as they signal the location of an active updraft producing new cloud material in the upper troposphere.

I've taken a look at some of the new METEOSAT data posted by Scott Bachmeier and it refines some of what we've seen on GOES. The mesoscale convective system is made up of numerous cell clusters. Due to the northerly winds aloft the downdraft areas are carried southward. As a result, the MCS has organized into a configuration with a dominant stratiform area to the south and updraft area on the north side.

Also here are some distance/temperature diagrams prepared by Scott Bachmeier: 0130Z, 0145Z, 0200Z, 0215Z along INTOL to TASIL at different times (temperature in deg K) indicating that the minimum cloud top temperature along the flight route averaged -78 deg C (55,000 ft). On June 5 I also received these satellite photos from the Naval Research Laboratory showing satellite signatures, but have not yet assimilated them into my analysis or created captions yet since I just got them: GOES-12 GCD, GOES-12 CTOP, GOES-10 IR, GOES-10 CTOP, GOES-12 IR. Many thanks to NCAR and the Naval Research Laboratory, including Jeff & Rich at NRL, for these images; their message is in the comments and you can visit their website at http://www.nrlmry.navy.mil/sat_products.html. On June 5 I also received Atmospheric Infrared Sounder data courtesy of George Aumann at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory METEOSAT_AIRS_DCC.analysis_sm.jpg, showing the extent of thunderstorm overshoots in the MCS.