AF 744 off runway at Montreal

[akerosid]

Just reported that an Air France 744, operating as AF 346, arriving from CDG, ran off runway 24R on landing; no reports of injuries.

[Jumbo744]

:confused: I'm heading to the airport right now! will try to take some pictures!

[CorkEICK]

Air France flight skids off runway in Montreal airport


Canwest News Service

Published: Tuesday, August 26, 2008
An Air France jet has skidded off the runway at Montreal's Trudeau International airport this afternoon, but there is no word yet on damage or injuries, Montreal police confirm.

Air France jumbo skids off Montreal runway (http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=ab9730df-3d8b-4e24-9cd7-e35ee27be4d3)

[akerosid]

Doesn't look tres serieuse; all pax (491!) are being evacuated by buses, rather than slides; no apparent damage to the avion.

Le phew!

Un boeing d'Air France fait une sortie de piste - LCN - Régional (http://lcn.canoe.ca/lcn/infos/regional/archives/2008/08/20080826-183432.html)

[nahsuD]

Fox News showing live footage. Does not look too bad. Reporting 500 PAX, sounds a bit high.

[alph2z]

I saw that plane over my house just before the outer marker while I was cooking juicy burgers. Everything normal; plane that is.

It's a plane hard to miss due to it's size and noise.

Landed at 148 kts gnd speed (flightaware)

Pics at:

Air France plane skidoff the runway? - Page 3 - YULAviation (http://www.yulaviation.com/vbb/showthread.php?p=106379)

MONTREAL - An Air France Boeing 747 arriving from Paris skidded off the runway at Montreal's Trudeau International airport after it landed Tuesday afternoon.

"The plane overshot the runway when it landed and got stuck in the grass," said Laurent Gingras of Montreal police. "There were no injuries."

Video of the airplane shows no signs of major damage.

Emergency vehicles surrounded the jumbo jet at the airport as crews worked around the aircraft, which was stuck in the grass beside the runway.

Some 500 passengers were on the large-bodied plane, and were being taken off the plane by emergency services.

The airport remains open and television footage showed planes continuing to take off and land.


© Canwest News Service 2008
.

[VAFFPAX]

Not quite AF358... but...

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f125/mamireault/AF_sortiedepiste.jpg

:-\

S.

[alph2z]

LiveATC, starts after 15:00,

(quick translation)
ATC "Westjet 204, clear landing 24R, traffic is being cleared"
ATC "AFR ...cleared 24R and B2, hold short 28 (ah ah)",
AFR "AFR, we have entered the grass, engines idling, call emergency services"
ATC "Westjest, pull-up climb 3000, traffic on runway"
AFR "AFR, do you see smoke (or fire)"
ATC "negative"
ATC "trucks on the way"

:
http://archive-server.liveatc.net/cyul/CYUL-Aug-26-2008-2130Z.mp3

(yulaviation)
.

[misd-agin]

Flight Detent - LOL!

Must have been the weather conditions - The dreaded 30 SM approaches.

YUL

270007 270000Z 26003KT 30SM FEW240 18/10 A3008 RMK CI0 SLP1
262307 262300Z 26004KT 30SM SCT240 21/10 A3007 RMK CI1 SLP1
262207 262200Z 27004KT 30SM FEW240 22/10 A3007 RMK CI1 SLP1
262107 262100Z 26008KT 30SM SCT240 21/10 A3007 RMK CI2 SLP1
261907 261900Z 28007KT 30SM BKN240 20/09 A3010 RMK CI2 SLP1
261807 261800Z 27008KT 30SM BKN240 19/09 A3010 RMK CI2 CONT
261707 261700Z 27009KT 30SM FEW210 BKN240 18/09 A3012 RMK C
261607 261600Z 29010KT 30SM FEW030 SCT240 18/09 A3013 RMK C
261511 261500Z 04002KT 30SM FEW035 SCT240 17/08 A3013 RMK C
261407 261400Z 35008KT 30SM FEW210 BKN240 16/08 A3013 RMK C

[buggaluggs]

Not the old hand mic cable jammed in the nws tiller trick..... :eek:

[J.O.]

Not the old hand mic cable jammed in the nws tiller trick.....

Or an improperly stowed window shade ...

[shogan1977]

AF seems to have problem landing in Canada !

[Phil1980's]

No It's spelt Vin-Rouge :)...How did the plane start turning into the grass...theres plenty of runway ahead :confused:

[fermented herring]

Friends,
here comes something completely off topic.

I enjoy reading Pprune, not only for the discussions, but also for the humor in many of the comments.

Earlier today this thread deviated into the difficulty with different languages at airports, totally irrelevant for the topic, as was commented by a number of posts:

One stating that the thread was of topic with the focus on language, and his wifes theory of what happened probably was the best so far, namely that he was turning to avoid a cat:)

This was followed by a post saying: Maybe it was a 'chat':ugh::):)

This more or less made my day, and I was digging in to pprune now to see what the follow up's of this would be. Of course the mod's were right to remove the of topic posts, but I would have liked the continuation of this.

Safe flying

FH

[nahsuD]

but I would have liked the continuation of this

Gone to JB "Yet another stupid Franco/English spotters party "

[nyt]

from YULAviation - View Single Post - Air France plane skidoff the runway? (http://www.yulaviation.com/vbb/showpost.php?p=106419&postcount=52)
http://photos-e.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-snc1/v313/241/112/507573206/n507573206_885372_9746.jpg
http://photos-d.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-snc1/v313/241/112/507573206/n507573206_885363_5831.jpg

[alph2z]

Anyone here a tire burning expert.

Maybe #4 engine reverse was stuck at full rev thrust and / or #1 stuck at high forward thrust ?

Also, looks like left-port side brakes were braking less than right side, and the nose wheel may have temporarily been stuck massively pointing right.

As if left brakes failed or the right brakes locked up.

Surprised we don`t see anti-skid pulses in the markings, maybe it failed.

Also note the nose wheel tracks are not identical, the port one is wider than the right-starboard.
.

[PaperTiger]

Wide-angle lens effect I think alph2z.

Trompe l'oeuil as they say.

[VAFFPAX]

That's no wide angle effect I'm afraid.

S.

[PJ2]

Also note the nose wheel tracks are not identical, the port one is wider than the right-starboard.

Port tire greater scrubbing due very high angle (turned to the right) of the nosewheel relative to the direction of the aircraft, I think.

[dawgweed]

Audio of incident already available at LiveATC

[ZAGORFLY]

maybe a malfunction on the Body main landing gear steering system ...

[D.Lamination]

Speculation:

Either No1 Thrust lever was "Stowed" instead of the speedbrake, leading to GA thrust on No. 1 Engine - only a couple of seconds at that thrust would be needed, or whilst stowing the speedbrake No.1 Thrust lever was caught on the long sleeve shirt/cufflinks of the pilot stowing the speedbrakes.

Some airlines have procedures whereby no "cleaning up the aircraft" is allowed until the aircraft is clear of the RWY, in contact with GND control and at taxi speed. The origin of these procedures was a similar incident.

Don't know if that policy applies in AF or not.

[Airbubba]

Either No1 Thrust lever was "Stowed" instead of the speedbrake, leading to GA thrust on No. 1 Engine - only a couple of seconds at that thrust would be needed, or whilst stowing the speedbrake No.1 Thrust lever was caught on the long sleeve shirt/cufflinks of the pilot stowing the speedbrakes.

Hmmm, definitely worth looking into. American had a recent incident of an engine failing to spool up in flight. It is thought that the FO inadvertantly blocked the left throttle with his sleeve while guarding the speedbrake.

Some airlines have procedures whereby no "cleaning up the aircraft" is allowed until the aircraft is clear of the RWY, in contact with GND control and at taxi speed. The origin of these procedures was a similar incident.

The feds are pushing that procedure even more in the last year or two with the recent attention on runway incursions. I can remember years ago as an FE watching the FO with his head buried in the cockpit getting the flaps, trim, speedbrake and transponder while the captain had his head buried watching the FO making sure he didn't raise the gear or something.

Those few seconds when you transition to nosewheel steering and turn off the runway are a little awkward in a widebody, you want to keep rolling to make sure your tail is clear of the runway but you try not to commit to a particular taxiway until you are sure that's what the controllers want you to do.

[alph2z]

Interesting D.Lamination,

Assuming the pilot's desire to keep the aircraft on the runway it is weird that there are starboard main-gear tire marks.

I guess they wanted to stop the plane asap by applying all brakes, and worried less about the nose going right.

My reflex would have been to keep the plane on the runway, ... but i wasn't there.
.

[misd-agin]

Flaps are up so they did part of the after landing check on the runway...unless they did a flaps up landing. :eek:

[Flintstone]

Or perhaps the flaps were retracted in the shut down checks? :rolleyes:

[Carnage Matey!]

Interesting. My airline requires the handling pilot to stow the speedbrake after landing before the non-handling pilot starts the after landing checks. As P2 it's quite a stretch to stow the speedbrake whilst operating the tiller, and would be quite easy to advance #1 throttle. Perhaps I can look forward to a change in SOPs?

[misd-agin]

My airline - CA does speedbrakes, FO does flaps. No reaching across throttles, etc, etc, by either pilot.

[Poof in Boots]

Air France wrote off a 747-200 some years ago in Rio de Janeiro when the aircraft did a ground loop.

Accident Air France Flight B747 F-GCBC - Airfleets (http://www.airfleets.net/crash/crash_report_Air%20France_F-GCBC.htm)


Perhaps the French government should should ban Air France from its own airspace, considering the hull losses and accidents their ariline has had over recent years?

[reversegreen]

Air France SOP s are no" cleaning up " of airplane until clear of the runway and at normal taxi speed

[boaclhryul]

Air France wrote off a 747-200 some years ago in Rio de Janeiro when the aircraft did a ground loop.

[link] Accident Air France Flight B747 F-GCBC - Airfleets

Probable cause: SLF in control...

"People on board 273 (273 Passengers et 0 crew members)"

[Captain Airclues]

Could this be a repeat of the Tahiti incident?

AirDisaster.Com: Accident Photo: Air France F-GITA (http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/f-gita/photo.shtml)

Note #1 engine in forward thrust and the others in reverse.

Dave

[CAT II]

In over 8000 hrs on the same type I have never seen a hint of the #1 thrust lever being mistaken for the spoiler handle (speed brake). That doesn't mean it hasn't happened, just never seen it myself. What I do know is that a very good friend of mine landed in SEA on the same type and as they were approaching taxi speed they encountered an uncommanded full deflection of the body gear steering. He jumped on the binders but could not stop the aircraft from exiting the side of the runway. Fortunatley there was a hi-speed turnoff right there and he stopped on hard surface. That was at least 5 years ago and still haven't heard the reason. Boeing joined our company maintenance in the investigation. Witnesses (pax) reported sudden braking....sounds familiar.

[Piollotte Erreur]

Rio, Tahiti et maintenant YUL. est-il une problem seulement avec air france?

[nahsuD]

est-il une problem seulement avec air france?

At the risk of being sent off to JB, oui, I blame the French!:eek:

But on a serious note, maybe the AF SOP??

[icarus sun]

Air France has had many crashes in the past few years. More so than its competitors or similar size airlines. Something is wrong but being French will be covered up.:ooh:

[Airbubba]

Air France has had many crashes in the past few years. More so than its competitors or similar size airlines.


It is odd that some carriers seem to have hull losses every two or three years, regular as clockwork, while others go decades without losing a plane. American probably had the longest safe streak ever in number of operations from the DC-10 engine separation at ORD in 1979 to the Cali 757 crash in 1995.

FedEx on the other hand has had several widebody hull losses in the past fifteen years. The cause is not low pay and poor maintenance, they are probably the highest paid pilots in the world right now and the company is consistently profitable. Fortunately, they fly freight and there have been no fatalities on the mainline (the feeder casualty rate is horrific from what I read).

[PJ2]

Airbubba;
American probably had the longest safe streak ever in number of operations from the DC-10 engine separation at ORD in 1979 to the Cali 757 crash in 1995.
Air Canada has gone over 25 years without a fatal accident...

[ahaines]

Anyhoo, it sure takes some steam out of AF's sails for their lawsuit against everyone they could think of re the YYZ overrun...

[Basil]

I used to pooh-pooh the suggestion that long sleeve shirts should not be worn on the flight deck.
I'm now beginning to wonder if this would be a good idea after all.

[suninmyeyes]

Does anyone know how long the plane was stuck for (hours or days), and when it finally left YUL? I presume it would not have been too difficult as I know the 747 Classic typically only had between 6 and 12 tonnes on the nose gear.

Methods of retrieval:

I doubt reverse thrust was used to get it out unless they wanted to wreck the engines. Was it an airbag job, or did they put something solid down in the trench and use a tug which may well have got stuck in the grass too?

It's a shame Jo Patroni would have retired by now!

[Airbubba]

Air Canada has gone over 25 years without a fatal accident...

I'm aware of that, congratulations, maybe memorizing all those drills is a good idea after all! However American is a much larger airline and I was talking in terms of hours or number of operations, i.e. takeoffs and landings. Sadly, American's run of luck was destined to end and, after a fatal crash in LIT in 1999, they lost hundreds of pax and three aircraft in 2001 to terrorist activity and the A306 tail separation. And, as I mentioned, FedEx has never had a fatal accident although they have had several widebody hull losses in recent years. Are these statistical blips in an ever lower accident rate? Or do some companies do it right while others operate under a black cloud? I don't claim to know but we've all seen these runs of luck, good and bad, in this business.

My airline requires the handling pilot to stow the speedbrake after landing before the non-handling pilot starts the after landing checks. As P2 it's quite a stretch to stow the speedbrake whilst operating the tiller, and would be quite easy to advance #1 throttle.

There are a lot of variations on this from what I've observed. As you know, many airlines don't allow the P2 to operate the tiller at all these days, in the U.S. even widebodies often have the right tiller removed. The FO operating the speedbrake is like the captain operating the flaps, you have to look and reach around two or more throttles (a lot of us have done two, three and four over the years). I've bumped a throttle before reaching for flaps, autothrottles are usually engaged and you catch the error pretty quickly in the air. However, I could sure see where a throttle bump at the wrong moment on rollout could sure do you dirty in a big plane.

[CAT II]

Not only a good idea but also a Boeing recommendation...

[Taildragger67]

Airclues,

Photos 6 (http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/f-gita/6.shtml) & 10 (http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/f-gita/10.shtml) of the F-GITA at Faaa sequence would suggest #1 TR open.

[misd-agin]

Long sleeved shirts.
Not only a good idea but also a Boeing recommendation...


*******************************

Boeing recommended to use, or not use, long sleeve shirts?

Do you have a reference?

[Captain Airclues]

Taildragger67

I believe that the engine was in forward thrust when it left the runway. Just wondering if something similar could have happened at Montreal.

ASN Aircraft accident Boeing 747-428 F-GITA Papeete-Faaa Airport (PPT), Tahiti (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19930912-1)

Dave

[BRE]

Non-stabilized approach in Tahiti. Now, that could be down to airline culture.



"L'accident est dû à une approche non stabilisée et à la mise en forte poussée positive du moteur 1 à l'atterrissage, conséquences d'une particularité du système automatique de vol entraînant le passage en mode remise de gaz à un point de la trajectoire correspondant à la hauteur de décision.
Ceci a entraîné :
- le toucher long avec une vitesse excessive
- la déviation de la trajectoire vers la droite et la sortie latérale de piste.
Le non respect des procédures opérationnelles concernant les vérifications et les annonces en approche et à l'atterrissage, ainsi que le manque de communication entre les pilotes ont été des facteurs fortement contributifs à l'accident. Notamment les écarts supérieurs aux tolérances de plusieurs paramètres de vol auraient dû conduire à remettre les gaz.
L'absence d'information du constructeur vers les exploitants et les équipages sur cette particularité du système automatique de vol est également un facteur contributif à l'accident."

[Lemurian]

Non-stabilized approach in Tahiti. Now, that could be down to airline culture.
Harsh words backed by very ittle facts, hey ?
Then a two paragaphs out of a 75 page report... If a newspaper had published your post, you'd have the whole population of this site on your back, claiming "journo blabber".
As with most incidents/accidents, the causes are a-plenty :

An unknown feature of the 744 VNAV/VOR auto flight system which triggers GA thrust when the aircraft goes under the MDA, even on manual/FD approach. That Go Around is only identified by a "Thrust Ref" FMA annunciation.
That feature, at that time was unknown by the flightv deck population, including Boeing instructors.
A very poorly managed crew communication : the handling pilot, fighting the throttles didn't convey his problem to his colleague...
When the throttles were released after touch-down, the handling pilot only managed reverse on #2, 3 and 4, while the #1 escaped him and went full thrust (107 % N1). That was only identified as "no reverse on #1". Again, a CRM concern.
No spoiler and no auto-brake due to the #1 throttle position
The airplane veered right out of the runway at 60 kt and stopped in the water...The #2, 3 and 4 engines were flooded and stopped. #1 couldn't be cut off due to loss of electrical power.

On the subject of un-stabilised approaches, AF recorded at the time a rate of 3.38 % on all approaches with rather stringent criteria for the definition.
It is also to be noted that the incident happened when the population of three different airlines (Air France, Air Inter and UTA) had to be integrated and that the catastrophic economical situation of the new AF wasn't the best for serene aircrews...
Back to the topic .
Looking at the pictures of the latest incident, as the aircraft came to a stop just past of the high-speed turn-off B2 and that only the nose gear was in the grass, my opinion is about a tiller problem. Nothing more and I bet a beer on it.

[PJ2]

Lemurian;
Looking at the pictures of the latest incident, as the aircraft came to a stop just past of the high-speed turn-off B2 and that only the nose gear was in the grass, my opinion is about a tiller problem. Nothing more and I bet a beer on it.
Exactly...won't be the first time - happened recently on a 777...

[Pugilistic Animus]

but you try not to commit to a particular taxiway until you are sure that's what the controllers want you to do.



why not ask?

[FXchick]

(quote)Does anyone know how long the plane was stuck for (hours or days), and when it finally left YUL? I presume it would not have been too difficult as I know the 747 Classic typically only had between 6 and 12 tonnes on the nose gear. (unquote)

It departed 2 days later around 1 pm local time- empty of both pax and freight - I watched it go - it was removed from the side of the runway the same night after they unloaded pax and cargo according to people I know in the know.

No one answered the question so I thought I might.

Sorry bout th lack of ability to quote properly, I tried.

[Airbubba]

An unknown feature of the 744 VNAV/VOR auto flight system which triggers GA thrust when the aircraft goes under the MDA, even on manual/FD approach. That Go Around is only identified by a "Thrust Ref" FMA annunciation.
That feature, at that time was unknown by the flightv deck population, including Boeing instructors.

This 'feature' has been known on 75's and 76's for some time now, it's a real gotcha if you're shooting a non-precision approach without a runway waypoint in the FMS database and the missed approach point is past the runway threshold. You get to minimums, see the runway, get an altitude capture and all hell breaks loose unless you immediately set the missed approach altitude in the window. Or, so they tell me.:)

[Mariner]

Long sleeved shirts.
Not only a good idea but also a Boeing recommendation...


*******************************

Boeing recommended to use, or not use, long sleeve shirts?

Do you have a reference?

unquote

From a recent [aug 23 2007] Boeing bulletin about landing on slippery runways (and I'm sure it is in more of their publications):

Reverse Thrust Operation
Awareness of the position of the forward and reverse thrust levers must be maintained
during the landing phase. Improper seat position as well as the wearing of long jacket or
shirt sleeves may cause inadvertent advancement of the forward thrust levers, preventing
movement of the reverse thrust levers.

[alph2z]

Hard to find document. A bug in CADORS of TSB.

Date: 2008/08/28
Further Action Required: Yes
O.P.I.: International Aviation

Narrative: Update #1: According to the TSB #A08Q0171: The Boeing 747-428 operated by Air France AFR346 landed on 24R at Montreal/Trudeau (CYUL). During rollout and approaching BRAVO 2 taxiway, the nose gear deflected to the right. The crew applied maximum braking and the aircraft stopped with the nose gear on the grass about 26 feet on the right hand side of the runway. The main gear remained on the runway. There were no injuries and passengers were deplaned using passenger transfer vehicles. No evidence of damage was noted on the aircraft. Two TSB investigators deployed to the scene.


alph2z: .......and the nose wheel may have temporarily been stuck massively pointing right.

Looks like I owe myself a beer. :}
.

[Lemurian]

QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM

[GlobalExpressDriver]

As a personal preference, I always wear long sleeve 100% cotton shirts. However, they are buttoned at the wrist.

I flew 744's ... :)

[BRE]

Airbubba:
It is odd that some carriers seem to have hull losses every two or three years, regular as clockwork, while others go decades without losing a plane. American probably had the longest safe streak ever in number of operations from the DC-10 engine separation at ORD in 1979 to the Cali 757 crash in 1995.



Lemurian:
On the subject of un-stabilised approaches, AF recorded at the time a rate of 3.38 % on all approaches with rather stringent criteria for the definition.
It is also to be noted that the incident happened when the population of three different airlines (Air France, Air Inter and UTA) had to be integrated and that the catastrophic economical situation of the new AF wasn't the best for serene aircrews...
Lemurian, my post was in response to airbubba's musings. The unstabilized approach certainly wasn't the single cause for the Papete overrun, but maybe it would have been a non-event if procedures had been followed.

You can probably get away with not doing things by the book 99.9% of the time, but when something else does not work as it should, you may be sorry.

Looking at three more recent accidents (Gonesse, Pearson, Pau) that happened in better economic times, there was always an element of procedures not adhered to that in combination with other expected events contributed to the accident. So one might be tempted to speculate whether this is down to culture.

Also, by your argument, will United and USAir be excused from having a hull loss a year because their crews aren't the most serene due to the economic situation of their airlines?

Fortunately, there is no evidence of anything procedural in the Dorval runway excursion.

[Lemurian]

Looking at three more recent accidents (Gonesse, Pearson, Pau) that happened in better economic times, there was always an element of procedures not adhered to that in combination with other expected events contributed to the accident. So one might be tempted to speculate whether this is down to culture.

Gonesse ?... I presume you mean the Concorde crash ? What "non-adherence to procedures" are you referring to ?
Pau ? What ? when ? where ? I can't find any instance there .
In every accident, there is always an element of human factor involved. So what's your point ?

Also, by your argument, will United and USAir be excused from having a hull loss a year because their crews aren't the most serene due to the economic situation of their airlines?

Far from it. Consider that as an addition to the previous paragraph about integration of three airlines'cultures into the AF way of doing things, plus the fact that on the Faa incident, the crew was made up with one ex-top mangement pilot from UTA captaining a demoted Commander from AeroMaritime (by the way, that makes it FOUR airlines under integration). That cockpit adheres closely to the definition of "particular cockpit".

[BRE]

wikipediaAlternative theories

British investigators and former French Concorde pilots looked at several other possibilities that the report ignored, including an unbalanced weight distribution in the fuel tanks and loose landing gear. They came to the conclusion that the Concorde veered course on the runway, which reduced take-off speed below the crucial minimum. The aircraft had veered very close to a Boeing 747 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_747) known to be carrying French President Jacques Chirac (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Chirac).[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_4590#cite_note-7)
They argued that the Concorde was in trouble before takeoff, as it was overweight for the given conditions, with an excessively aft center of gravity and taking off downwind. When it stood at the end of the runway, ready to roll, it was more than six tonnes over its approved maximum takeoff weight for the given conditions.[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_4590#cite_note-autogenerated1-8)
Moreover, it was missing the crucial spacer from the left main landing-gear beam that would have made for a snug-fitting pivot. This compromised the alignment of the landing gear and the wobbling beam and gears allowing three degrees of movement possible in any direction. The uneven load on the left leg’s three remaining tires skewed the landing gear disastrously, with the scuff marks of four tires on the runway showing that the plane was skidding out of control.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_4590#cite_note-9)
Finally, Brian Trubshaw and John Cochrane, Concorde's two test pilots when the aircraft was being developed in the early 1970s, set the aft operating limit at 54 per cent - beyond that, they found, it risked becoming uncontrollable, likely to rear up backwards and crash, exactly as Flight 4590 did in its final moments over Gonesse. However, Flight 4590's centre of gravity went beyond 54 per cent, with the BEA stating a figure of 54.2 per cent, while a senior industry source said that the true figure may have been worse: with the extra fuel and bags, it may have been up to 54.6 per cent.[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_4590#cite_note-autogenerated1-8)
These investigators were frustrated by the lack of cooperation from French authorities, including an unwillingness to share data and the immediate resurfacing of the Concorde's takeoff runway after the crash. They alleged that the BEA was determined to place the sole blame of the accident on the titanium strip to show that the Concorde itself was not at fault. The piece of metal from the DC-10 was found 7 meters forward, and 37 meters to the right of where the Concorde's tyre blew.[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_4590#cite_note-10)
The BEA's interim report maintained that the leftward yaw was caused not by incorrectly assembled landing gear but by loss of thrust from the number 1 and 2 engines. Data from the Flight Data Recorder Black Box (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Box_%28transportation%29) indicates that the aircraft was centred on the runway and accelerating normally up until the point where the tyre burst occurred. The instantaneous wind speed at the closest anemometer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anemometer) to the take-off point was recorded as zero knots.[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_4590#cite_note-11)


BEA did their best to discredit this (which wasn't much). Even if you give them credit, it still was a non-adherence to precedures that didn't help the situation.

[BRE]

Pau? where?

en Pyréneés-Atlantiques...

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20070125-0

admittely, only Régional, but operating as AF7775: we don't need no de-ice!

[BRE]

Airline integration: so what should we expect if the Delta - NW merger goes through? same non-event as America West - USAir was?

[Lemurian]

The title of your source tells it all : "Wiki Alternative theories", especially telling when one knows the qualities of some of W 's contributions...
Your credibility rating is zero.
And a flight number doesn't tell an airline... AF culture on a regional jet ?
Sort of posts worthy of radio coco !
Pathetic!
Don't bother to answer, your posts will be transparent to me from now on.
Bonsoir.

[BRE]

Right, regarding your arguments, I can rest my case now. Why would a reputable mainline take any interest in the doings of a lowly regional carrier that happens to be a wholly owned subsidiary doing business in the name of AF?

[None]

This 'feature' has been known on 75's and 76's for some time now, it's a real gotcha if you're shooting a non-precision approach without a runway waypoint in the FMS database and the missed approach point is past the runway threshold. You get to minimums, see the runway, get an altitude capture and all hell breaks loose unless you immediately set the missed approach altitude in the window. Or, so they tell me.

If you happen to be flying a 757 or 767, and you do not like what the autoflight is doing, you may click off the A/P and click off the A/Ts and just fly the jet.