News Sections
Air France Flight 447 fell intact into sea
CTV News Video
Watch: See all Videos in the Player
Font-size:
Share
Print
Comments(40)
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Thu. Jul. 2 2009 5:42 PM ET
Officials say the Air France jet that crashed one month ago did not break up in the air but rather plunged vertically at a very high speed into the Atlantic Ocean.
Alain Bouillard, with the French accident investigation agency BEA, said the plane "seems to have hit the surface of the water on its flight trajectory with a strong vertical acceleration."
He added that investigators have found "neither traces of fire nor traces of explosives."
Bouillard also said life vests found among the wreckage were not inflated. He said that suggests that the passengers were not prepared for a crash landing in the water.
"Today we are very far from establishing the causes of the accident," Bouillard told reporters at a press conference in Paris Thursday.
The Airbus A330-200 plane was on its way from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil to Paris when it vanished over the ocean with 228 people on board.
In total, Bouillard said 51 bodies have been recovered, along with 600 elements of the plane.
However, search teams have been unable to locate the plane's black boxes, which would help investigators better understand what happened.
Bouillard said the search for the boxes will continue for another 10 days, even though the signals they emit are likely to have already faded out.
Bouillard did say speed sensors, called Pitot tubes, were a factor in the crash but were not the cause.
One of the automatic messages sent out by the plane indicates it was receiving incorrect speed information from its external monitoring instruments.
Experts say those external instruments may have iced over and the wrong information could have destabilized the plane's control systems.
All of the passengers on the plane were killed in the crash.
With files from The Associated Press
User Tools
Related Stories
User Tools
About the tools
Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.
-


Font-size
Print Article
Comments(40)-
Feedback
Share it with your network of friends
Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
Higher interest rates may be good for some, but generally with the inflation factor as low as it is , a higher interest rate would not be any benefit for all concerned.

Comments are now closed for this story
Michael from Toronto
0
said
0
However, it would also contradict the theories put forth based on the condition of the bodies and it would pose questions regarding why the body of the chief pilot has been found. Assuming a vertical plunge, there should be nothing recognizable left of the cockpit crew unless the pilot was not in the cockpit at time of impact.
Lorne
0
said
0
Hard to believe we can fly satellites into comets but we can't find these data recorders... Hopefully they'll get those soon and we can start solving the mystery.
Roger Hammer
0
said
0
dwayne-ottawa
0
said
0
DM in NB
0
said
0
Dumb.
This statement doesn't make sense; as a water-impact at high speed would cause multiple fractures to the bodies that are found intact, which would be few. But the bodies recovered were intact and had few fractures (which suggests they fell OUTSIDE the plane, in free-fall).
Lies starting already. Don't buy into this story, people.
Mrs. Ogga
0
said
0
Paul D.
0
said
0
John
0
said
0
charles
0
said
0
-- Pilots tell passengers to fasten their seatbealts ( rough storm), Pilot tubes then iceover, plane is still on autopilot , pilots ignore instruments and rely on autopilot, plano begins to stall and autopilot disengages violently, pilots loose control. Plane goes into water at an angle NOT vertical thats is why they have picked up some wing parts and tail section and found one of the pilots.. Now since passengers where fastened in they most likely all drowned, some bodies being throw up by pressure..
Sad accident, big loss of lives
Kathy
0
said
0
JH
0
said
0
Eileen25
0
said
0
Ted
0
said
0
Jeffery
0
said
0
Lorne answering his earlier question
0
said
0
If the pilot lost speed data (and everything else due to electrical failure) from faulty pitot sensors, he may have unintentionally reduced power to the point of a stall. This is easy to do when you don't know your speed, nor have a working horizon indicator, nor any light from the ground to tell you up from down, then add a bad storm bouncing you around. An emergency RAT (ram air turbine-a pop out spinner that generates electrical power from the wind, located at the bottom of the wing root) would have normally given power to essential instruments, but not in a flat spin, no wind to turn it.
So, my semi-educated guess is pitot failure induced faulty speed data caused the pilot to reduce power to the point of an unrecoverable flat spin. In a spin like that, when the engines stop turning, there's no power, as the plane needs engines for electricity. The RAM turbine that would normally deploy also failed to produce power because of the flat spin, and there you have it.
Even in perfect weather, this can happen folks. A Boeing 757 went down killing all passengers in the Caribbean because of wasp nests in pitot sensors and a pilot induced stall at night. Same thing happened near Peru at night in another 757 over the ocean when crews forgot to remove tape over the pitots. He flew it into the ocean in controlled flight.
Dave, Ottawa
0
said
0
Don't believe the media
0
said
0
Dean
0
said
0
Pam (Ont.)
0
said
0
Doug BC
0
said
0
Is it a sign of the times that "we don't know EXACTLY what happened" is met with accusations of lying,a cover up,or stupidity. While they have "clues",the reality is that the investigation is on-going. We need to let them do their work,and not jump to any conclusions until ALL the information possible has been collected and analyzed.
Like everything in the world these days, if those seeking the truth withold information until all that can be learned is known,the public assumes there's a cover up going on. On the other hand,if they release information as every scrap of information sees the light of day, the public jumps to conclusions of their own.
That said, I do wonder why the data recorders couldn't be built to send signals out for a little longer. I am only GUESSING here, but it seems to me, that the logistics of having ALL data recorders,on ALL planes, ALL over the world, ALL of the time,transmitting ALL of their data to a remote location would be somewhat of a daunting task.
Perhaps not impossible though. I'd like to hear an INFORMED discussion on that topic.
The information we have now seems sketchy to me.I agree that inflated life jackets suggests they were expecting a water landing. It seems odd to me,that there were so many bodies intact if the tragedy occurred as suddenly and violently as is suggested.
To this amateur,the intact bodies suggest a less violent end,while the life jackets being uninflated suggests they were not preparing for a water landing.
Keep working. We need more information.
Steve in Ottawa
0
said
0
Ron
0
said
0
King Malcolm
0
said
0
Airbus in Trouble
0
said
0
This time it was a A310.
Indian Ocean.
Something wrong with Airbus?
Ben - Calgary
0
said
0
Aircraft Tech
0
said
0
Prof. Pye Chartt
0
said
0
About what, I'm not sure. I just enjoy posting an intelligent comment on a story for which FACTS remain elusive and worthless speculation is, evidently, rampant. It's fun to challenge a theory, or fabricate one of my own, when the "story" is weak and irrelevant to the truth. I can pretend to be an aviation expert specializing in commercial airline disasters.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got to get my Star Trek costume together for the convention.
John
0
said
0
Mike Macdonald - Winnipeg
0
said
0
Ê.Ìatroskin
0
said
0
RVH
0
said
0
debbie
0
said
0
Narin, Montreal.
0
said
0
G. Gravelle, Ottawa, Ontario
0
said
0
Wait until the documentary
0
said
0
You want a cover up. What about the Russian A300 that crashed in 1994 killing all onboard because the pilot let his 15 year old kid at the controls. He accidently disengaged the autopilot and put the plane into a tight turn. The centrifical force became so great that nobody could get the kid out of the seat and take control.
Wants the truth
0
said
0
Tom from Halifax
0
said
0
Peter D
0
said
0
from Kitchener
0
said
0
No to Tinfoil
0
said
0