Air France Flight 447
Airbus A330-203 · Entered high-altitude stall, impacted ocean
From Rio de Janeiro Galeão – Tom Jobim International Airport (GIG) to Charles de Gaulle International Airport (CDG)
Event
- NTSB case
- DCA09RA052
- Event typeAccident: someone killed or seriously injured, or the aircraft substantially damaged (NTSB definition). Incident: an occurrence that affected or could have affected safety, short of that. Glossary
- Accident
- InvestigationHow far the investigation had got when the record was published: preliminary, ongoing, final or completed. Unknown where the source does not say. Glossary
- Final
- Event fatalities
- 228 · all aircraft and ground
- Ground fatalities
- Unknown
- Occupants
- 228
- Survivors
- 0
- InjuriesFatal: death within 30 days. Serious: over 48 hours in hospital within a week, most broken bones, severe bleeding, nerve or organ damage, or serious burns. Minor: anything less. Glossary
- 0 serious · 0 minor (NTSB)
- OperationWhat kind of flying it was, grouped by the rules it flew under: airline (US Part 121), air taxi and commuter (Part 135), general aviation (Part 91 and similar), military or government. Glossary
- Airline
- WeatherVisual meteorological conditions (VMC): good enough to fly by looking outside. Instrument conditions (IMC): cloud or low visibility, flying by instruments. Glossary
- Not recorded
Airbus A330-203
- Flight
- AF447
- Aircraft type
- Airbus A330
- Category
- Airplane
- RegistrationThe aircraft's tail number, such as N12345 or G-ABCD. Registrations are reissued, so the same one years apart can be a different aircraft. Glossary
- F-GZCP
- Operator
- Air France
- Onboard fatalities
- 228
- Route
- From Rio de Janeiro Galeão – Tom Jobim International Airport (GIG)To Charles de Gaulle International Airport (CDG)
- Aircraft age
- Not recorded
- Flight rulesThe regulations the flight operated under: in the US, Part 91 (general aviation), Part 121 (airlines), Part 135 (air taxi and commuter) and others; for flights abroad, the NTSB's coarser commercial or non-commercial code. Glossary
- Non-U.S., Commercial
- Phase of flightThe stage of the flight when things started to go wrong: standing, taxi, takeoff, initial climb, en route, maneuvering, approach or landing. Glossary
- Not recorded
- Defining eventThe single coded event the NTSB judges best describes what happened (records from 2008 on). Older records name the first occurrence in the sequence instead. Glossary
- Not recorded
- DamageDestroyed: beyond practical repair. Substantial: damage that affects the structure, performance or handling and normally needs major repair. Minor: less than that. Glossary
- Destroyed
Cause areas
- Aircraft › Aircraft systems
- Environmental issues › Conditions/weather/phenomena
- Personnel issues › Task performance
- Personnel issues › Psychological
- Personnel issues › Experience/knowledge
- Personnel issues › Miscellaneous
- Environmental issues › Task environment
- Aircraft › Aircraft oper/perf/capability
From the investigation findings the Wikipedia article reports, sorted into the NTSB's cause areas with AI assistance.
Approximate · Coordinates from the Wikipedia article; not checked against an investigation report.
From the Wikipedia article
Air France Flight 447 was a scheduled international transatlantic passenger flight from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport, France, that crashed into the mid-Atlantic Ocean on 1 June 2009, killing all 228 passengers and crew on board. The incident, which occurred on an Airbus A330, happened because inconsistent airspeed indications and resulting miscommunication between the pilots led to an unrecoverable stall. The Brazilian Navy recovered the first major wreckage and two bodies from the sea within five days of the crash. The aircraft's flight recorders were not recovered from the ocean floor until May 2011, nearly two years after the accident.
France's Bureau of Enquiry and Analysis for Civil Aviation Safety final report, released at a press conference on 5 July 2012, concluded that the aircraft suffered temporary inconsistencies between the airspeed measurements—likely resulting from ice crystals obstructing the aircraft's pitot tubes—which caused the autopilot to disconnect. The crew reacted incorrectly to this, causing the aircraft to enter an aerodynamic stall which the pilots failed to correct. The accident is the deadliest in the history of Air France, as well as the deadliest aviation accident involving the Airbus A330.
On 21 May 2026, Airbus and Air France were both found guilty of corporate manslaughter. Each company was sentenced to pay the maximum fine of €225,000 ($261,112).
Accident
The aircraft departed Rio de Janeiro–Galeão International Airport on 31 May 2009 at 19:29 Brazilian Standard Time (22:29 UTC), with a scheduled arrival at Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport of 11:03 Central European Summer Time (09:03 UTC) the following day (estimated flight time of 10:34). Voice contact with the aircraft was lost around 01:35 UTC, 3 hours and 6 minutes after departure. The last message reported that the aircraft had passed waypoint INTOL, located 565 km from Natal, on Brazil's northeastern coast. The aircraft left Brazilian Atlantic radar surveillance at 01:49 UTC, and entered a communication dead zone.
The Airbus A330 is designed to be flown by two pilots, but the 13-hour "duty time" (the total flight duration, as well as preflight and post flight duties) exceeded the 10 hours permitted before a pilot had to take a rest, as dictated by Air France's procedures. To comply with these procedures, Flight 447 was crewed by three pilots: a captain and two first officers. With three pilots on board, each pilot could take a break in the A330's crew rest compartment, located behind the cockpit.
In accordance with common practice, Captain Dubois sent First Officer Robert for the first rest period with the intention of taking the second break himself. At 01:55 UTC, he woke up First Officer Robert and said, "... he's going to take my place". After attending the briefing between the two co-pilots, the captain left the cockpit to rest at 02:01:46 UTC. At 02:06 UTC, the pilot warned the cabin crew that they were about to enter an area of turbulence. About two to three minutes later, the aircraft encountered icing conditions. The cockpit voice recorder (CVR) recorded sounds akin to hail or graupel on the outside of the aircraft and ice crystals began to accumulate in the pitot tubes, which measure airspeed. Bonin, the pilot flying, turned the aircraft slightly to the left and decreased its speed from Mach 0.82 to 0.80, which was the recommended speed to penetrate turbulence. The engine anti-ice system was also turned on.
At 02:10:05 UTC, the autopilot disengaged, most likely because the pitot tubes had iced over, and the aircraft transitioned from "normal law" to "alternate law 2 (ALT2)" due to the lack of reliable flight data. The engines' autothrust systems disengaged three seconds later. The autopilot disconnect warning was heard on the CVR.
Bonin took manual control of the aircraft. Without the autopilot, turbulence caused the aircraft to start to roll to the right, and Bonin reacted by deflecting his side-stick to the left. One consequence of the change to ALT2 was the removal of both the dampeners to control inputs, as well as maximum limitations to the A330's safe pitch, yaw and bank angles. Due to this increase in the aircraft's sensitivity to roll, the pilot overcorrected. During the next 30 seconds, the aircraft rolled alternately left and right as he adjusted to the altered handling characteristics of the aircraft. At the same time, he abruptly pulled back on his side-stick, raising the nose. This action was unnecessary and excessive under the circumstances. The aircraft's stall warning briefly sounded twice because the angle of attack tolerance was exceeded, and the aircraft's indicated airspeed dropped sharply from 274 to 52 kn. The aircraft's angle of attack increased, and the aircraft subsequently began to climb above its cruising altitude of 35,000 ft (FL350). During this ascent, the aircraft attained vertical speeds well in excess of the typical rate of climb for the Airbus A330, which usually ascends at rates no greater than 2,000 feet per minute (10 m/s; 37 km/h). The aircraft experienced a peak vertical speed close to 7000 ft/min, which occurred as Bonin brought the rolling movements under control.
At 02:10:34 UTC, after displaying incorrectly for half a minute, the left-side instruments recorded a sharp rise in airspeed to 223 kn, as did the integrated standby instrument system (ISIS) 33 seconds later. The right-side instruments were not recorded by the flight data recorder. The icing event had lasted for just over a minute, yet Bonin continued to make nose-up inputs. The trimmable horizontal stabilizer (THS) moved from 3 to 13° nose-up in about one minute, and remained in the latter position until the end of the flight.
At 02:11:10 UTC, the aircraft had climbed to its maximum altitude around 38000 ft. At this point, the aircraft's angle of attack was 16°, and the engine thrust levers were in the fully forward takeoff/go-around (TOGA) detent. As the aircraft began to descend, the angle of attack rapidly increased toward 30°. A second consequence of the reconfiguration into ALT2 was that the stall protection no longer operated, whereas in normal law, the aircraft's flight-management computers would have acted to prevent such a high angle of attack. The wings lost lift and the aircraft began to stall.
Confused, Bonin exclaimed, "I don't have control of the aircraft any more now", and two seconds later, "I don't have control of the aircraft at all!" Robert responded to this by saying, "controls to the left", and took over control of the aircraft. He pushed his side-stick forward to lower the nose and recover from the stall; however, Bonin was still pulling his side-stick back. The inputs cancelled each other out and triggered an audible "dual input" warning.
At 02:11:40 UTC, Dubois re-entered the cockpit after being summoned by Robert. The angle of attack had then reached 40°, and the aircraft had descended to 35000 ft with the engines running at almost 100% N1 (the rotational speed of the front intake fan, which delivers most of a turbofan engine's thrust). The stall warnings stopped, as all airspeed indications were now considered invalid by the aircraft's computer because of the high angle of attack. The aircraft had its nose above the horizon, but was descending steeply.
Roughly 20 seconds later, at 02:12 UTC, Bonin decreased the aircraft's pitch slightly. Airspeed indications became valid, and the stall warning sounded again; it then sounded intermittently for the remaining duration of the flight, stopping only when the pilots increased the aircraft's nose-up pitch. From there until the end of the flight, the angle of attack never dropped below 35°. From the time the aircraft stalled until its impact with the ocean, the engines were primarily developing either 100% N1 or TOGA thrust, though they were briefly spooled down to about 50% N1 on two occasions. The engines always responded to commands and were developing in excess of 100% N1 when the flight ended. Robert responded to Dubois by saying, "We've lost all control of the aeroplane, we don't understand anything, we've tried everything". Soon after this, Robert said to himself, "climb" four consecutive times. Bonin heard this and replied, "But I've been at maximum nose-up for a while!" When Dubois heard this, he realized Bonin was causing the stall, and shouted, "No no no, don't climb! No No No!" When Robert heard this, he told Bonin to give him control of the aircraft, and Bonin initially obliged.
The aircraft was now too low to recover from the stall. Robert pushed his side-stick forward to try to regain lift in order to get out of the stall; however, shortly thereafter, the ground proximity warning system sounded a "sink rate" alarm followed by "pull up" alarms. In response, Bonin (without informing his colleagues) pulled his side-stick all the way back again, and said, "We're going to crash! This can't be true. But what's happening?" The last recording on the CVR was Dubois saying, "(ten) degrees pitch attitude."
Both flight recorders stopped recording at 02:14:28 UTC, 3 hours and 45 minutes after takeoff. At that point, the aircraft's ground speed was recorded as 107 kn, and the aircraft was descending at 10912 ft/min, a vertical speed of 108 kn. Its pitch was 16.2° nose-up, with a roll angle of 5.3° to the left. During its descent, the aircraft had turned more than 180° to the right to a compass heading of 270°. The aircraft remained stalled during its entire 3-minute-30-second descent from 38000 ft. The aircraft struck the ocean belly-first at a speed of 152 kn, comprising vertical and horizontal components of 108 kn and 107 kn, respectively. All 228 passengers and crew on board died on impact from extreme trauma and the aircraft was destroyed.
Investigation and cause
Investigation and safety improvements
The French authorities opened two investigations.
A criminal investigation for manslaughter began on 5 June 2009, under the supervision of Investigating Magistrate Sylvie Zimmerman from the Paris High Court (Tribunal de Grande Instance). The judge gave the investigation to the National Gendarmerie (Gendarmerie nationale), which would conduct it through its aerial transportation division (Air transport police, Gendarmerie des transports aériens or GTA) and its forensic research institute (the National Gendarmerie Institute for Criminal Research, Institut de recherche criminelle de la gendarmerie nationale). As part of the criminal investigation, the DGSE (the external French intelligence agency) examined the names of passengers on board for any possible links to terrorist groups. In March 2011, a French judge filed preliminary manslaughter charges against Air France and Airbus over the crash. The cases against Air France and Airbus were dropped in 2019 and 2021 respectively.
A technical investigation was started, the goal of which was to enhance the safety of future flights. In accordance with the provisions of ICAO Annex 13, the BEA participated in the investigation as representative for the state (country) of manufacture of the Airbus. The Brazilian Air Force's Aeronautical Accidents Investigation and Prevention Center (CENIPA), the German Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation (BFU), the UK's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), and the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) also became involved in accordance with these provisions; the NTSB became involved as the representative of the state of manufacture of the General Electric turbine engines installed on the aircraft, and the other representatives could supply important information. The People's Republic of China, Croatia, Hungary, Republic of Ireland, Italy, Lebanon, Morocco, Norway, South Korea, Russia, South Africa, and Switzerland appointed observers, since citizens of those countries were on board.
On 5 June 2009, the BEA cautioned against premature speculation as to the cause of the crash. At that time, the investigation had established only two facts—the weather near the aircraft's planned route included significant convective cells typical of the equatorial regions, and the speeds measured by the three pitot tubes differed from each other during the last few minutes of the flight.
On 2 July 2009, the BEA released an intermediate report, which described all known facts, and a summary of the visual examination of the rudder and the other parts of the aircraft that had been recovered at that time. According to the BEA, this examination showed:
The airliner was likely to have struck the surface of the sea in a normal flight attitude, with a high rate of descent;
No signs of any fires or explosions were found.
The airliner did not break up in flight. The report also stresses that the BEA had not had access to the post mortem reports at the time of its writing.
On 16 May 2011, Le Figaro reported that the BEA investigators had ruled out an aircraft malfunction as the cause of the crash, according to preliminary information extracted from the FDR. The following day, the BEA issued a press release explicitly describing the Le Figaro report as a "sensationalist publication of non-validated information". The BEA stated that no conclusions had been made, investigations were continuing, and no interim report was expected before the summer. On 18 May, the head of the investigation further stated no major malfunction of the aircraft had been found so far in the data from the flight data recorder, but that minor malfunctions had not been ruled out.
Findings from the flight data recorder
On 27 May 2011, the BEA released an update on its investigation describing the history of the flight as recorded by the FDR. This confirmed what had previously been concluded from post mortem examination of the bodies and debris recovered from the ocean surface; the aircraft had not broken up at altitude, but had fallen into the ocean intact. The FDRs also revealed that the aircraft's descent into the sea was not due to mechanical failure or the aircraft being overwhelmed by the weather, but because the flight crew had raised the aircraft's nose, reducing its speed until it entered an aerodynamic stall.
While the inconsistent airspeed data caused the disengagement of the autopilot, the reason the pilots lost control of the aircraft had remained a mystery, in particular because pilots would normally try to lower the nose in the event of a stall. Multiple sensors provide the pitch information and no indication was given that any of them were malfunctioning. One factor may be that since the A330 does not normally accept control inputs that would cause a stall, the pilots were unaware that a stall could happen when the aircraft switched to an alternative mode because of failure of the airspeed indication.
In October 2011, a transcript of the CVR was leaked and published in the book Erreurs de Pilotage (Pilot Errors) by Jean Pierre Otelli. The BEA and Air France both condemned the release of this information, with Air France calling it "sensationalized and unverifiable information" that "impairs the memory of the crew and passengers who lost their lives." The BEA subsequently released its final report on the accident, and Appendix 1 contained an official CVR transcript that did not include groups of words deemed to have no bearing on flight.
Final report
On 5 July 2012, the BEA released its final report on the accident. This confirmed the findings of the preliminary reports and provided additional details and recommendations to improve safety. According to the final report, the accident resulted from this succession of major events:
Temporary inconsistency between the measured speeds, likely as a result of the obstruction of the pitot tubes by ice crystals, caused autopilot disconnection and [flight control mode] reconfiguration to "alternate law (ALT)".
The crew made inappropriate control inputs that destabilized the flight path.
The crew failed to follow appropriate procedure for loss of displayed airspeed information.
The crew were late in identifying and correcting the deviation from the flight path.
The crew lacked understanding of the approach to stall.
The crew failed to recognize the aircraft had stalled, and consequently did not make inputs that would have made recovering from the stall possible.
These events resulted from these major factors in combination:
Feedback mechanisms between all those involved (the report identifies manufacturers, operators, flight crews, and regulatory agencies), which made it impossible to identify repeated non-application of the loss of airspeed information procedure, and to ensure that crews were trained in icing of the pitot probes and its consequences.
The crew's lack of practical training in manually handling the aircraft both at high altitude and in the event of anomalies of speed indication.
The weakening of the two co-pilots' task sharing, both by incomprehension of the situation at the time of autopilot disconnection and by poor management of the "startle effect", leaving them in an emotionally charged state.
The cockpit's lack of a clear display of the inconsistencies in airspeed readings identified by the flight computers.
The crew's lack of response to the stall warning, whether due to a failure to identify the aural warning, to the transience of the stall warnings that could have been considered spurious, to the absence of any visual information that could confirm that the aircraft was approaching stall after losing the characteristic speeds, to confusing stall-related buffet for overspeed-related buffet, to the indications by the flight director that might have confirmed the crew's mistaken view of their actions, or to difficulty in identifying and understanding the implications of the switch to alternate law, which does not protect the angle of attack.
Text from the Wikipedia article “Air France Flight 447” (revision 1374714978, retrieved 2026-09-18) by its authors, under CC BY-SA 4.0. Extracted as plain text: references, tables, images and some sections are left out. Read the article
NTSB narrative
At approximately 0214 UTC Air France flight 447, an Airbus 330, registration F-GZCP, en route from Rio de Janerio, Brazil to Paris, France lost contact with ATC over the Atlantic Ocean. Automatic maintenance messages were recieved, and some wreckage has been recovered. Strong convective weather was in the vicinity. The investigation is being led by the French Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses (BEA) The US NTSB is participating as the State of Manufacture of the General Electric engines.
For information see http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol.af.447/vol.af.447.php
Verbatim NTSB analysis from the NTSB dataset
Sources
Wikipedia article: Air France Flight 447
- Article
- Air France Flight 447
- Revision
- 1374714978 · 2026-09-13 · retrieved 2026-09-18
- Wikidata
- Q185380
- Licence
- Text CC BY-SA 4.0, by the article's authors; Wikidata CC0; town positions GeoNames (CC BY 4.0)
NTSB record DCA09RA052
- Event ID
- 20090601X72555
- Case number
- DCA09RA052
- Dataset
- full-current
- Source SHA-256
- 5cf380f0061817c0331a6b2d8cc7e0ee3a79bea469a1001dc5c10e56f35f5ab3
Where each value comes from
- Record
- Wikipedia article "Air France Flight 447" (page 23042123, revision 1374714978); merged with NTSB case DCA09RA052 (events / aircraft)
- Date
- Wikipedia infobox: date; matches the Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses pour la sécurité de l'aviation civile (BEA), France final report
- Place and country
- Wikipedia infobox: site; country from NTSB record DCA09RA052
- Map position
- Wikipedia: Wikipedia article coordinates
- Aircraft, operator and route
- Wikipedia infobox: aircraft type, registration, operator, origin and destination; route airports from the linked airport articles' Wikidata codes (OurAirports); gaps and aircraft details from NTSB record DCA09RA052
- Operation
- airline flight number in the infobox
- Fatalities
- Wikipedia: Wikipedia infobox: aircraft fatalities; matches the Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses pour la sécurité de l'aviation civile (BEA), France final report
- Ground fatalities
- Wikipedia: not stated in the Wikipedia infobox
- Summary
- Wikipedia infobox: summary
Source notes (3)
- One occurrence in two sources, merged: the Wikipedia article "Air France Flight 447" and NTSB case DCA09RA052, matched by the same aircraft registration and date. For this event outside the United States Wikipedia's values are used where the two differ; each value names its source.
- No bulk values were replaced by the NTSB case API.
- Compared with the Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses pour la sécurité de l'aviation civile (BEA), France final report (2012-07-05) on 2026-09-18. No values are taken from it: its terms don't allow commercial reuse without a licence. The report states the same date, flight number, fatalities, registration, operator, departure, destination and damage. The report states a value this record doesn't have for ground fatalities; it isn't shown. Not checked: place, crash-site coordinates, aircraft type and type of operation.