I actually resent people defending Air France in a way to suggest that there record is acceptable and is due to external factors, and everybody critical is Xenophopic. When I apply for a job these days outside of my own country, I have to provide a certificate of no incidents or accidents to a potential employer. I firmly believe if as individuals we have to provide these to companies then in turn companies should provide certificates with a record of their accident or incidents to passengers.
To compare Air Frances long list of passenger fatalities and hull losses with Lufthansa's failed crosswind landing or the British airways 777 hull loss (which was entirely due to external factors), or the swiss fatal accident (again entirely due to external factors) is ridiculous. Whilst risk can not be removed entirely, it should be mitigated to the maximum, and clearly Air france have failed their customers from that point of view.
List to passengers:
1. 1985- Rio de janeiro 747-200 hull loss
2. 1988- Alsace A320 Hull loss- 3 fatalities- 50 injuries
3. 1994- A300- Hijack- Hull loss- 3 fatalities
4. 1996- 747- Turbulence- 1 fatality- 30 injuries
5. 1998- Bogota- Hull loss- 53 fatalities
6. 1999- Chennai-747-200- Hull loss
7. 2000- Paris- concorde- Hull loss-109 fatalities
8. 2005- Toronto-A340-300- Hull loss
9. 2009- Atlantic Ocean- A330- Hull Loss- 228 Fatalities
10. 2011- New York- A380- Aircraft damage
11. 2012- Washington Dulles-A380- Very hard landing- Aircraft damage
12. 2012- Damascus- unecessary diversion into a War zone
13. 2012- Sofia- Attempted departure from a Taxiway
This list is just from memory, and whilst external factors may have contributed to a number of the incidents, in its entirety this list is shocking and not at all comprehensive.
Last edited by kungfu panda; 28th Dec 2012 at 09:44.