AF A380 returns to New York…

Apparently the autopilot didn’t work, which meant they were not RVSM compliant. The autopilot not working can be due to several problems, I don’t think that “navigational issues” were the reason.

And they don´t bring to the headlines these serious events like this one.

http://avherald.com/h?article=42380873&opt=0

Again AF445 (formely 447). What´s going on in here?. Coincidence?. I have to fly in march to Brazil, and getting a bit uneasy. Does anyone know when these storms tend to happen in this Equator area?.

Frequently is the answer to your question, due to high temperatures and warm, moist surface air rising, cooling and condensing. The storms are convectional thunderstorms and tend to occur every afternoon and evening after daytime temperatures have risen.
I have the same thing on my regular jaunts Down Under about thirty minutes/one hour out of Singapore flying towards Australia. It can get a little bumpy to say the least and last time, my BA B777 had to thread its way around a number of nasty storms. And, this time, I’ll be doing a similar sector (Singapore-Brisbane) in a SIA A330, the very type lost in the Atlantic (but with a Goodrich rather than a Thales pitot head, one would imagine).
In all honesty, you don’t have anything to worry about. God knows what happened to AF447, but a number of other flights on the same route passed through those storms that night – a Lufthansa A340 and BA B777 (are the types correct?) – and experienced no problems other than turbulence.
Enjoy Brazil. It’s on my list of places to visit.

A minor navigational equipment error is what I read and also described as a “non event” by an AF spokeperson.

If it was a “non event” the flight would have continued.
At least, thats what the general public and reporters will think.

And they don´t bring to the headlines these serious events like this one.

http://avherald.com/h?article=42380873&opt=0

Again AF445 (formely 447). What´s going on in here?. Coincidence?. I have to fly in march to Brazil, and getting a bit uneasy. Does anyone know when these storms tend to happen in this Equator area?.

A380’s and AF are both more newsworthy because of newness/the Atlantic Ocean last June 1. Had it been, say, a United B777, few people would have been the least bit interested and the story would have gained little, if any, traction.
News organisations exist to make profits for their shareholders – nothing more, nothing less. In this case, Nirvana for them would be for someone to speculate that the A380’s pitot head had been sending false readings to the flight computer.
Mind you, as has already been suggested, it would be wise for AF to simply tell the truth. An absence of information will just feed the rumour mill.

I don’t disagree…but if you want to avoid media scrutiny I’d recommend giving a reason.
Given the fact that it’s Air France (no doubt still cautious over the A330 loss in the summer) and a new plane (both type and in hours) you’d think they’d be more open, especially if it was a non-event.

We’ve all read countless times about planes turing back…a cracked window, engine hiccup, clogged toilets, no coffee (wait that was just a commercial…:D) It stops the guessing and rumors.

Very well said…totally agree with you

I don’t disagree…but if you want to avoid media scrutiny I’d recommend giving a reason.
Given the fact that it’s Air France (no doubt still cautious over the A330 loss in the summer) and a new plane (both type and in hours) you’d think they’d be more open, especially if it was a non-event.

We’ve all read countless times about planes turing back…a cracked window, engine hiccup, clogged toilets, no coffee (wait that was just a commercial…:D) It stops the guessing and rumors.

I guess it also depends on what ‘paper’ you read. I read AF’s point of view on several online papers today before this thread or CNN’s opinion had made cyber-space. Whether or not you believe any of that is of course another matter. 😀

Maybe the big Airbus was just to dirty too travel…;)

Hundreds of planes are forced to go back to the airport, everyday and they are not subject to the media scrutiny.

I don’t disagree…but if you want to avoid media scrutiny I’d recommend giving a reason.
Given the fact that it’s Air France (no doubt still cautious over the A330 loss in the summer) and a new plane (both type and in hours) you’d think they’d be more open, especially if it was a non-event.

We’ve all read countless times about planes turing back…a cracked window, engine hiccup, clogged toilets, no coffee (wait that was just a commercial…:D) It stops the guessing and rumors.

Hundreds of planes are forced to go back to the airport, everyday and they are not subject to the media scrutiny.

A minor navigational equipment error is what I read and also described as a “non event” by an AF spokeperson. The print media will however have it as a “Terror at 40,000 ft” type story by morning editions…

bog? :diablo: