New Speculation About American-US Airways Merger

CNN Money just reported that three American Airlines unions support a potential merger with rival US Airways.

To read the full article, please click here. Also watch out for an Aviation Insider blog post this weekend about why this merger may be great news for Airbus.

AF 447 Likely Crashed Because of Pilot Error

The first thing I did Friday morning was to go to BEA's website and read the most recent note about AF 447. For the first time the investigators published excerpts from the voice recorder of the downed A330-200. After reading the note it was pretty clear to me that major errors by the pilots caused this tragic accident in June 2009.

As already known, the pitot probes failed during the Airbus's flight through the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ). Experts believe that super cold water hit the tubes and froze on contact. The tubes failed and the Airbus suddenly did not have any reliable speed data. Consequently, the auto pilot and auto thrust disengaged. The A330 switched into alternate mode, giving the pilots full control of the plane. According to the transcript, the two first officers in the cockpit tried to call the captain, who was resting at the time, but he did not respond. Even though at least one of the first officers was pretty experienced on the A330, they failed to correctly interpret the computer's error messages. They were too consumed by figuring out what all the error messages meant to just focus on flying the plane.

Finally, the captain was back in the cockpit, but the situation worsened. The first officer pulled the plane up and it climbed from 35,000 feet to 38,000 feet, which was too high for the current situation in the ITCZ. Climbing also slowed down the plane and signals went off indicating that the Airbus was about to stall. At an altitude of 35,000 feet, the speed of a plane has to be within a very narrow limit, otherwise it will stall if the angle of attack is not adjusted. A difference of only 20 knots can cause a plane to stall. However, the first officers did not react correctly. The plane was still too slow and turbulence was rocking the plane to the sides.

With the fly-by-wire's envelope system down the first officers pushed the sidesticks too hard and the plane began to roll. Normally, the A330's fly-by-wire system would prevent that, but since it was down, there was no automatic protection anymore. However, and contrary to earlier reports, the Airbus was completely controllable. No primary flight systems failed. The envelope system was down, but the fly-by-wire system was still intact. The pilots had 100% control over the plane.

The first officers were not able to stop the stall. With very high vertical speed, the A330 shot toward the Atlantic. Ironically, one first officer increased thrust to 100%, increasing the plane's speed even more as it was heading toward the water. Pretty soon, the first officer realized he was not able to regain control of the plane. At 10,000 feet, he handed the controls over to the second first officer in the cockpit, who only had a few months flying experience on the A330. They must have realized they were doomed. Ironically, the pitot tubes worked again after less than one minute. The last words in the cockpit were "go ahead, you have the controls," when the first officer handed the controls over to the second first officer. A few seconds later they hit the water and were dead. And with them all 225 people on board flight AF 447.

So what happened? First, the Airbus's systems did not fail. The only thing that did fail were the pitot tubes. This is not really cause for a crash if pilots are well trained in these situations. Pitot tubes have frozen over before and never did a plane crash because of it. In this case, a chain of unfortunate events caused the accident. The following is a list of all the errors and issues that led to this terrible accident:

1) Instead of focusing on flying the plane, the two first officers were too focused on the computer's error messages. Flying the plane at an angle of 5 degrees with thrust at 85% would have been enough to fly without working pitot probes.
2) The first officers made the plane climb to 38,000 feet instead of descending. This decreased speed and caused the stall.
3) They were not well trained to regain control of the stalling plane. This had not been part of their pilot training.
4) They were not trained to realize that the frozen pitot tubes caused these problems.
5) The most experienced captain was not at the controls when the problems started.
6) At 10,000 feet - the most crucial phase of the accident - the least experienced first officer was in control of the plane.

In my opinion, well-trained pilots should have been able to handle this situation. In a BBC documentary from 2010, pilots encountered the exact situation in a simulator and managed the situation very well. Of course a simulator is not a real plane and the pilots in the simulator knew what was happening, but I strongly believe that all pilots should have the training to handle such a situation and a stall.

I am convinced that the crash of AF 447 will result in lots of troubles for Air France and Thales, the manufacturer of the pitot tubes, as they will be charged with manslaughter. Air France will be blamed for not training its pilots well enough and Thales will be blamed for building faulty pitot probes, even though the company claimed that they are able to handle all real-world challenges.

For Airbus, this is a result they can live with. The A330's fly-by-wire system was working and the plane is not to blame for the crash. But that's the only good news...

First Clues in AF 447 Crash

About a month and a half ago I wrote on this blog that I was hoping the search teams would find the black boxes of downed Air France flight 447. To my own surprise, they recovered both boxes last week. Yesterday, investigators were able to have a first look at the data stored in one of the black boxes, but the voice recorder still needs to be analyzed. The families of the people who died in the crash as well as the public will finally know what happened to the A330-200 on June 1, 2009. French investigators confirmed they will be able to fully understand the causes of the crash.

In my opinion, the most surprising development was a telex Airbus issued to all A330 customers today, which stated that there are no recommendations for Airbus's highly successful widebody aircraft. Many of us asked ourselves today: What does that actually mean? And this is the sensational part of today's news - it means that AF 447 did not crash because of any technical difficulties or errors with the fly-by-wire system. This is shocking news. In a good way though for Airbus and everybody who believes in and trusts Airbus's fly-by-wire technology.

After AF 447 crashed almost two years ago, many people - and even experts - believed the jet crashed because of a "stroke inside the plane's computers," as Germany's Der Spiegel wrote in 2009. They assumed the plane's fly-by-wire system shut down, following the icing of the Airbus's pitot tubes, rendering the pilots unable to fly the plane manually. I never believed in this theory as my earlier blog posts about the topic pointed out. Many aircraft have had issues with iced pitot tubes and none of them crashed. It was just not a good reason for a modern, state-of-the art airliner to crash.

But this brings us to the next question: Now what caused AF 447 to go down in early June 2009? Well, it is still too early to know that. We now know more about what didn't cause the crash, but we still do not yet know what caused it. The investigators mentioned today it would take until this summer to come to a final conclusion. There is still a list of numerous reasons for the crash, among them pilot error. Indeed, errors by the crew now seem to be the likeliest possibility. Listening to the voice recorder will answer a lot, if not all, of these questions. While today is a good day for Airbus and the A330, there are still no good answers for the families of those who died on June 1, 2009.

United A320 Makes Emergency Landing in New Orleans

I am sure it must have been a very unpleasant landing for the passengers (and crew) on board a United A320 that made an emergency landing in New Orleans yesterday.

United flight UA 497 was on the way from New Orleans to San Francisco when it encountered severe technical difficulties. Apparently, there was smoke in the cockpit and the pilots "lost all instruments" according to a Bloomberg article. Other reports mentioned that the Airbus's primary flight computer wasn't functioning.

As U.S. media love to do (see Sullenberger Hudson landing), the pilots were quickly portrayed as heroes. Big U.S. broadcasters described this landing as a "blind landing," which is a very misleading term as non-experts may believe the pilots didn't see anything. This is not true - blind landing means that the pilots do not have any working navigational instruments. They can still see when they look out of the cockpit.

United's A320 was still functional and returned to New Orleans. With help from the folks in the tower, UA 497 performed a visual landing, which pilots do every single day at airports across the world (e.g., at DC's Reagan Airport). The plane's fly-by-wire system worked, the flaps were retracted and the landing gear worked as well. Pilots should be trained to handle situations like these.

The incident was likely caused by a cable that was heating up and starting to burn, causing the instruments to black out. This has nothing to do with Airbus's technology, flight computers or fly-by-wire system and could have happened on any plane.

To read the Bloomberg story, please click here.

The New York Times: Boeing and Airbus Waver on Reworking Planes

I just stumbled over this very interesting New York Times article from today. It basically states what I already wrote here in my post on July 30th.

Boeing and Airbus Waver on Reworking Planes
By CHRISTOPHER DREW and JAD MOUAWAD

The latest high-stakes maneuvering by Boeing and Airbus does not involve their top-of-the-line models, the 787 Dreamliner and the A380 jumbo jet, but instead their aging smaller workhorses.
The two companies have long been defined by their willingness to take big risks. But perhaps because of all the problems and costs involved with the bigger planes, they have turned more cautious in responding to pressure from the airlines to develop more fuel-efficient substitutes for their smaller planes, the 737 and A320.

Aviation experts say breakthroughs in engine technology offer a rare chance to re-engineer the two companies’ narrow 737s and A320s, which make up three-fourths of the fleets at the largest airlines. But while the new engines could save the airlines hundreds of millions of dollars a year, Airbus would have to invest $1.5 billion to $2 billion — and Boeing possibly twice that — to test and install them on the jets.

To continue reading, please click here.

Qantas Grounds all A380s

For decades, Australian flag carrier Qantas was known for great service, a young fleet and an unparalleled safety record. In the history of Qantas, one of the oldest airlines in the world, not one single plane has crashed. However, Qantas has had a lot of minor and even major incidents lately: 2008 - a Qantas 747-400 suffered rapid decompression after an explosion in air; 2008 - A330 suffered a rapid loss of altitude in two sudden uncommanded pitch down manoeuvres causing serious injuries; and, finally, November 4, 2010 - a Qantas A380 (the first A380 that was delivered to the airline) suffered an engine failure shortly after taking off from Singapore's Changi Airport.

Only a few minutes after take-off the inner left engine of the A380 with the tail number VH-OQA lost parts of its shell that slammed into the wing, causing a hole of several centimeters. Passengers reported they heard a slamming noise, followed by shaking of the plane. At this point, it is not clear, whether an explosion caused the engine shell to fall off or if the part that fell off caused the explosion by ripping apart cables and fuel injectors. The cockpit crew decided to dump fuel and circled above the Indonesian sea for over an hour before returning back to Singapore. Flight QF 32 safely landed at Changi about an hour and fifteen minutes after it took off to Sydney.

Soon after the incident, Qantas announced it would ground its entire Airbus A380 fleet indefinitely. In my opinion, this is not a very smart move and casts a negative light on Airbus and the A380 specifically, which they do not deserve. Obviously, the issue resulted from a problem with the engine and Airbus does not build aircraft engines. Experts agree that Airbus and the A380 did not really play a role in today's incident. The manufacturer of these engines, Rolls Royce, will have to play a major role in the upcoming investigations. There have already been several issues with these types of engines.

I also need to add here that the media totally blew up this story. The plane landed safely, nobody was really injured and three of the four engines were still running perfectly fine. There have been instances when planes crossed the entire Atlantic with only three out of four engines working. The plane was still in the air more than an hour after the incident! Had this been an emergency like the media pretended it was, the plane would have returned to Changi right away, without dumping fuel. At no point was there any chance the plane would crash. Obviously, it was very scary and uncomfortable for the passengers on board, but their lives were not in danger...

Take-off in Thunderstorms Orlando

First of all, I need to apologize for not posting anything in almost a month. I moved from New York to Florida and started a new job, so I didn't have the time yet. But I promise to blog regularly again from now on. Below is a video from my take-off from MCO en route to CLT on a US Airways A321. It was a beautiful flight. There were thunderstorms all around us. It wasn't crazy bumpy, but it was great watching the sunset, the lightning and the city below.

Old, But Amazing Video

My brother just sent me this amazing (probably very old) video. What a crazy-a** pilot! Look how close the wingtip is to the ground. Either a very stupid pilot or an amazingly good one. Just wow!

Should Airbus and Boeing Update their Narrowbody Planes or Develop Completely New Aircraft?

It is a hard decision to make. But by the end of this year, Airbus and Boeing will have to make up their minds: Will they update their A320 series and 737 planes with more fuel-efficient engines and add-ons (such as winglets, better wings, etc.) or will they stop investing in those planes and rather pursue the launch of completely new narrowbody aircraft? With rising competition, such as Embraer's E jets and Bombardier's upcoming C series, the two plane manufacturers have to keep up with rising (fuel) efficiencies to remain competitive.

According to reports in Aviation Week, both plane makers are not sure yet, what to do. It almost looks like one is waiting for the other to make the first move. And it is indeed a tricky game. The A320 series and the 737 are already fairly fuel-efficient planes. They can, however, not compete with lighter and, thus, even more fuel efficient models, such as the upcoming Bombardier C series. And with more players in the narrowbody market, it will be harder for Airbus as well as Boeing to stay at the top of the game. Just look at the success of Embraer's E jets - since the launch of the plane in 2002, more than 600 craft of that type have been sold. Hardly anyone would have predicted that.

But what are the options at this point? The idea is to keep the A320 models and the 737 basically as they are, but make some changes so they become more fuel efficient. This means: changing the structure of the wings (to increase lift and reduce weight), use more fuel efficient engines (to be outsourced to third-party manufacturers, such as Rolls Royce or Pratt & Whitney) and add certain fly-by-wire systems (for the 737). This is basically it. The goal is to reduce fuel consumption by 6 to 12 percent.

That was option 1. Option 2 is to not pursue the updates at all but rather come up with completely new narrowbody models. Say, an Airbus A360 or a Boeing 797. Those planes would not be based off of the A320 series or the 737, but engineers at Airbus and Boeing would start from scratch, maybe using completely new light materials, totally different shapes for the fuselages and so on. Obviously, this would be the more time-consuming option and would cost a lot of money. A LOT of money! The question though is: Will airlines want new models at this point? Looking at the orders for the A320 series and the 737, you can argue if there is a need for new models in the short run as both Airbus and Boeing are currently boosting their production rates for the A320 and the 737 to cope with increased demand.

So what should they do? My opinion is that - at this point - there is no need for completely new narrowbody planes. The demand for the A320 planes and the 737 is still there and I am convinced it is a wiser choice to update the current models than to come up with new models. Also, engineers are already swamped with Boeing's 787 and the 747-8, as well as with Airbus's A350. It would be very hard to make time to start new models from scratch right now. Updating current models wouldn't be that much of an effort and is way more efficient at this stage.

I also believe that Boeing should make the first move here (even though they appear to be more reluctant than Airbus). The simple reason is - the technology of the 737 is already outdated. Even the "Next Generation" 737s do not have fly-by-wire (fbw) systems. So just comparing the current models of the 737 with the A320 shows that there is a greater need for an update of the 737 than there is for the A320 aircraft (which all have fbw). Additionally, it has been a better year for the A320 series so far than for the 737. Airlines around the world slightly prefer the A320 over the 737 already, maybe because of its more advanced technology.

As mentioned above though, Boeing seems to be more reluctant to start with the updates of its 737. Experts hypothesize that Boeing is waiting for Airbus to make the next move. If the European aircraft manufacturer announced sometime this year they would start updating the A320 series, then Boeing could just say: Hey, we will not be updating the 737, but come out with a totally new, state-of-the-art plane in 5 years! The rationale is: Why would an airline buy updated versions of the A320 series planes when Boeing is coming out with a brand new, better and even more fuel efficient plane five years later? The hopes are that nobody would order the next-generation A320 planes, but wait for the new Boeing aircraft.

Still, I believe the best thing to do now is update the A320 series and the 737. Airlines haven't really voiced their demand for new narrowbodies yet. With the E jets already on the market, the C series coming out soon and the continued demand for the A320 and the 737, it is just smarter to update current models than create new ones. And if the updated versions are really 6 to 12 percent more fuel efficient, then it will be hard to come up with all-new models that can top this. In my opinion, Airbus and Boeing should listen to what the market wants and I honestly do not see a high demand for all-new narrowbody planes right now.

Airblue Airbus A321 Crashes in Pakistan

An Airblue Airbus A321 crashed this morning while approaching Islamabad airport in Pakistan. Airblue flight 202 took off from Karachi airport at 7.50 am local time and did not report any troubles until it crashed. The plane was carrying 146 passengers and six crew members.

The A321, registered as AP-BJB, was built in 2000, flew for German charter airline Aero Lloyd before and was delivered to Airblue in 2006. According to CNN, the plane had accumulated about 34,000 flight hours in some 13,500 flights. This is the first crash of an A321 in the history of the plane, which has been manufactured more than 600 times and is a very popular model of Airbus's A320 series.

So far, the reasons for the crash have not been determined. Bad weather has been mentioned several times. According to reports, there was dense fog and heavy rain. In my opinion, this is a bit contradictory - have you ever seen dense fog and heavy rain at the same time? I haven't! Also, eyewitnesses report that the plane "lost balance" before it crashed. I wonder how that happened. The A321 is a fly-by-wire plane and it is pretty much impossible to make it "lose balance." The Airbus's avionics prevent a stall or the loss of lift. What is clear, though, is the fact that the plane crashed into a mountain.

The New York Times reports that the pilot did not follow the air control's instructions. The pilot received a warning that he was flying away from the runway. The pilot responded, “I can see the runway.” In a second exchange, the dispatcher advised, “Immediately turn left, Margalla [Hills] are ahead.” The pilot responded, “we can see it [the runway].” Shortly after, the plane crashed into the mountain.

It looks like this is another crash caused by pilot error. And it shows again that a plane can be state-of-the-art and equipped with great fly-by-wire systems, but it cannot prevent a bad pilot from making a poor or wrong decision. A wrong decision that, in this case, caused the deaths of 152 people.

To read the CNN story, please click here.

To read the New York Times article, please click here.

Airbus Expects U.S. Order in Coming Days

Reuters yesterday quoted Airbus's CEO Tom Enders saying in a German newspaper that the European aircraft manufacturer expects a significant order by a U.S. airlines in the next couple of days. According to Enders, the order will be for 20 to 30 new aircraft. Enders, however, did not give any specifics on which airline the planes will be for and which types will be ordered.

I have been thinking about this a lot and there are a couple of airlines that can easily be dismissed because of several reasons: Continental (all-Boeing fleet), American (all-Boeing fleet), United (unlikely to order planes at this point, due to merger with Continental), JetBlue (already has several Airbus planes on order and pushed back on deliveries lately). So my best guess is US Airways and I think the orders will be either for the A320 series or Airbus's brand-new A350.

To read the German piece in BILD, please click here.

Virgin America Orders 40 Airbus A320

It has been a great Farnborough air show for Airbus so far and the orders just keep coming in. Virgin America today announced it will add 40 Airbus A320s to its fleet. The list price for the planes is around $81 million, but Virgin probably got a decent discount.

The U.S. airline, which is partly owned by UK billionaire Richard Branson, has an Airbus-only fleet and, at this point, only serves cities in the U.S. from its California hubs Los Angeles, San Francisco and San Diego. With the additional aircraft, Virgin Atlantic is planning to extend its routes. New destinations in the U.S. will likely be Austin, Chicago and Dallas. The airline also plans on flying to its first ex-U.S. destinations by year's end. Those international destinations will likely be Cancun and San Jose del Cabo, both in Mexico.

To read the Bloomberg piece, please click here.

Emirates to Order 20 More 777s

A bit more than a month ago Dubai-based Emirates ordered 32 additional A380s and everybody thought "Wow, what are they going to do with all those planes???". Today, Reuters reports that Emirates is about to order an additional 20 Boeing 777-300. Already the largest airlines in the Arab world, Emirates is set to become the largest airline in Asia if they continue to grow with this speed.

The order could be a key feature of the opening day of the July 19-25 Farnborough air show in England on Monday, when the Dubai-based airline is expecteded to hold a news conference.

To read the Reuters story, please click here.

Alitalia Takes Delivery of First A330-200

I have to admit, I am not the biggest fan of Alitalia, Italy's flagship carrier. I have been on five Alitalia flights in my life and they were absolute average. Service was okay (on a flight from EWR to Rome, all flight attendants completely disappeared for three hours), the planes were fairly old (the 767-300 that I was on to and from Dubai looked older than pretty much every plane I have ever been on) and the prices were not really cheap. So far, I would not have really recommended Alitalia to anyone.

However, Alitalia has made some pretty good decisions lately when it comes to the long-haul aircraft they ordered. Alitalia has placed an order for 12 Airbus A330-200 and another order for 12 A350-800. On July 15, Alitalia received its first A330-200, which will replace the airline's 767-300s. At this point, Alitalia does not have any outstanding orders with Boeing and it looks like the A350s will be used to replace Alitalia's 777-200s. Alitalia looks set to become an airline with an Airbus-only fleet soon. Italy's largest airlines is also currently replacing its MD-82s with aircraft of the A320 series. Maybe I should give Alitalia another chance...

To read the Airbus press release, please click here.

Bruce Dickinson Flying the A320

Beautiful video on the fly-by-wire system of the A320.

Lufthansa Receives First A380

Thursday was a very exciting day for Europe's second largest airline Lufthansa: It finally received its first A380, nicknamed "Lady Bee" (I still hate that name) and officially titled "Frankfurt am Main." Lufthansa is only the second European airline to receive the A380, after Air France, which is using the super jumbo on its route from Paris to JFK.

Lufthansa has announced it will be flying the first three A380s being delivered this year on routes to Tokyo, Beijing and Johannesburg. The first flight with passengers will bring Germany's national soccer team to South Africa in early June for the World Cup. Regular A380 flights can already be booked through Lufthansa's Web site. Unfortunately for me, LH does not plan to use the A380 on routes to North America until mid of 2011 earliest.

Compared to other airlines, especially those from the Persian Gulf and Asia (Emirates, Singapore Airlines, etc.), Lufthansa has been reluctant to buy a lot of A380s. Right now, only 15 A380s have been ordered by Germany's biggest airline, compared to 20 Boeing 747-8s. This is contrary to LH's overall strategy to replace fuel-consuming Boeing aircraft with more fuel-efficient Airbuses, especially for short-haul planes. Obviously, Lufthansa does not want to become too dependent on only one manufacturer when it comes to long-haul aircraft and similar approaches can be observed for most other big airlines. Interestingly, Lufthansa has neither placed orders for the 787 nor the A350. But the German airline has always been very picky when it comes to aircraft orders. In contrast to most other airlines, Lufthansa never owned the extremely popular 777. It also refused to order the 757 and the 767, which it only used for its former subsidiary Condor.

To read Lufthansa's press release on the A380 delivery, please click here.

To see more pictures of the new Lufthansa flagship, please click here.

CNN: A330 Crashed Because of Pilot Error

As I predicted, a pilot error likely caused the crash of an A330 in Tripoli, Libya, on Wednesday. Apparently - and contrary to what had been reported before - the visibility at Tripoli airport was not very good, caused by mist and sand. The pilot turned off the autopilot and tried to land the plane himself (as mentioned before, Tripoli airport is not equipped with ILS), but could not align the Airbus with the runway. He tried to switch on the autopilot again when he noticed he was in trouble. But before the A330 could gain enough thrust to pull up again, the plane crashed into the ground.

This is another example of the poor flying skills of African pilots in general. The continent has been hampered by accidents due to pilot error for a while. The crash of Ethiopian Airlines flight 409 in January off the coast of Lebanon was also caused by pilot error. I can only recommend it again and again - whenever you book a flight, pick an airline whose pilots you trust. Not even a state-of-the-art Airbus equipped with world-class fly-by-wire can save you when your pilot doesn't know how to handle the plane in difficult circumstances.

To read the full CNN story, please click here.

Another A330-200 Crash within Less than One Year

It hasn't been a good year for Airbus. Within less than one year, two Airbus A330-200 crashed. The first one on July 1, 2009, on the way from Rio to Paris (I have written a lot about that crash; to read more about the Air France crash from June of last year, please click here) and the other one today, on approach to Tripoli airport in Libya. For both accidents, we don't know yet what really caused them. Those are the only two times the A330 ever crashed. And both times it was the 200 version of this wide-body plane.

Afriqiyah Airways flight 771 was en route from Johannesburg, South Africa, to Tripoli, Libya, when it crashed into the runway area of Tripoli's international airport in the early morning of May 12, 2010. During the more than nine hours of the flight, no incidents have been reported and the weather at Tripoli airport was excellent. So what caused the crash and could it be related to AF 447 last year?

I believe there is absolutely no link between the Air France crash last year and today's crash. Yes, it was the same plane, but I really believe this is a coincidence. The circumstances are just too different. AF 447 was in flight mode when it crashed; at an altitude of around 10 km. Afriqiyah Airways flight 771 was approaching the airport in flare mode already and didn't have any issues at its cruising altitude. According to recent reports, flight 8U 771 crashed parallel to the runway, missing it by around 900 meters. The question here is: How could the pilot miss the runway during good weather, no winds and with great visibility? True, the airport is not equipped with state-of-the-art ILS, but under those circumstances, every pilot should have been able to land.

First reports mentioned technical difficulties. This has not been confirmed, but it is possible. Later reports mentioned that the pilots radioed for ambulances to be ready and a passenger allegedly twittered that something was wrong with the plane's wing. None of this has been confirmed. In the end, there are only three possible reasons for the crash: pilot error, technical difficulties or a combination of both. After all, it is very confusing that the pilot made it to the airport (so he must have been in control of the plane), but crashed while missing the runway.

I am really not sure what caused this crash, but let me offer my personal opinion: I think it was a pilot error. The A330 is equipped with a state-of-the-art fly-by-wire system, but if the airport doesn't have ILS, then the A330's autopilot is not able to automatically land the plane. So maybe the pilots were tired? Fell asleep for a few seconds (well, it happens in cars all the time)? I really don't know. It is highly unlikely though that a technical error occurred only during landing and so short of the airport. If flaps don't work or engines are broken, pilots notice that fairly quickly into the flight, not during the last 30 seconds of a flight. It is also unlikely that the fly-by-wire system failed at such a late stage. This has never happened before.

I think we should not draw false parallels here to AF 447. I am convinced the causes of those crashes are very different. With flight 8U 771 I am, however, certain we'll have all answers soon, since the black boxes have already been found. I will keep you posted...

A330 Crash in Libya

An A330-200 crashed this morning while trying to land at Tripoli airport. Read more about the crash and first analysis later today on The Aviation Insider.

Reuters: Breakthrough in Air France Crash Black Box Search

Today is a good day - for those who lost relatives and friend in the crash of Air France flight 447 on June 1, 2009, as well as for everybody else interested in aviation. I am very sick of hearing that AF 447 crashed because of turbulence, bad weather or pitot tube malfunctions. I want to know what really happened to the Air France A330 almost one year ago.

The French defense ministry today announced the search teams have found what could be the first concrete clues to the location of black boxes missing from last year's Atlantic jet disaster, but warned on Thursday there was no guarantee the breakthrough would lead to their recovery. This allows experts to narrow the search to a few square kilometers from several thousand ahead of the anniversary of the airline's worst crash.

To read the full Reuters story, please click here.