Air France and Airbus Face Off in Court Over Pilots’ Role in AF447 Crash

The appeal trial concerning the crash of Flight AF447, which claimed the lives of 228 people in 2009, reached its final stage with a direct confrontation between Air France and Airbus, Reuters reported. During the last day of a process that lasted eight weeks, both companies defended their positions against accusations of involuntary manslaughter.

The case has once again put the Airbus A330 under scrutiny. The aircraft disappeared from radar mid-flight during an equatorial storm while flying from Rio de Janeiro to Paris. More than 16 years later, the victims’ families are still seeking answers and a judicial recognition that, according to them, has taken far too long.

Clash of Narratives in the Closing Arguments

Prosecution’s Position

On Wednesday, the Prosecution asked the Paris Court of Appeals to overturn the acquittal issued by a lower court. It requested the maximum fine of 225,000 euros for each company and accused both of having committed negligence prior to the accident. Prosecutor Rodolphe Juy-Birmann was particularly critical of Airbus, reproaching the company for providing information to the court in a fragmented manner.

Air France’s Stance

In its turn, Air France denied that the crew had received insufficient training to handle a loss of airspeed or a high-altitude emergency. The airline stated that the pilots were not responsible for the accident and maintained that it had always acted with respect towards the families. It also rejected the existence of an alleged non-aggression pact with Airbus.

Airbus’s Defense

Airbus, for its part, reiterated the conclusions of the French civil investigators, who questioned the pilots’ reaction to the loss of data caused by the freezing of the sensors. The company stated that it had always cooperated with the judiciary and had done everything possible to help the court understand the facts.

IAG Joins Bidding for TAP, Alongside Air France-KLM and Lufthansa

Technical Origin of the Accident and the Trial’s Lingering Questions

The official investigation, conducted after the black boxes were recovered two years after the crash, found that the pilots reacted incorrectly to the freezing of the Pitot tubes, a failure that prevented them from knowing the aircraft’s true airspeed. This chain of decisions led the plane to enter an aerodynamic stall without the crew identifying it in time.

However, the trial focused on prior failures in the sensors of the same model, as well as deficiencies in data communication and training programs. For the prosecutors, these factors indirectly influenced the outcome.

The court of first instance acknowledged negligence by both Air France and Airbus but concluded that there was no direct causal link with the accident. The Prosecution seeks to prove the opposite.

The hearings took place in a symbolic courtroom that has hosted key chapters of French judicial history, from the trial of collaborationist leader Philippe Pétain to the proceedings for the failed 1961 military coup. This time, it was the French aviation industry that found itself at the center of the stage.

During the prosecution’s closing argument, which lasted five hours, some family members experienced what they described as a cathartic moment. For Daniele Lamy, president of the victims’ association, it was the first time in 16 years that she felt treated with full respect and humanity.

What Lies Ahead for Air France, Airbus, and the Families

The judges will take months to deliver a verdict. Experts anticipate that, regardless of the outcome, there will be new appeals that could prolong the process for years. For the families, each development is another step towards the clarity they have been seeking since 2009.

The crash of Flight AF447 remains one of the most debated episodes in modern aviation. Today, with the defenses laid out and the accusations firm, a new stage begins in the search for accountability and in the long wait for justice.

Exit mobile version