Let's see. US$ 1,000,000 per person would be fair but unrealistic. So, 228 x US$100,000 ... more likely times 1.0137 coefficient adjustment ... don't ask. 228 x US$25,000 ... compensation package and good PR. plus US$ 175,000,000 give or take for a new A330-200 plus US$ 20,000,000 rescue and investigation. total US$223,812,360 or US$224,000,000 give or take. Right in the ballpark!!! Divided among AF/KLM, Airbus, EU, France, Engine Manufacturer if they can = Peanuts. No Airline will be finished because of it. It is part of doing busyness. Cruel or maybe too cold??? Welcome to the planet of the humans.IMHO,MAB

Let's see. US$ 1,000,000 per person would be fair but unrealistic. So, 228 x US$100,000 ... more likely times 1.0137 coefficient adjustment ... don't ask. 228 x US$25,000 ... compensation package and good PR. plus US$ 175,000,000 give or take for a new A330-200 plus US$ 20,000,000 rescue and investigation. total US$223,812,360 or US$224,000,000 give or take. Right in the ballpark!!! Divided among AF/KLM, Airbus, EU, France, Engine Manufacturer if they can = Peanuts. No Airline will be finished because of it. It is part of doing busyness. Cruel or maybe too cold??? Welcome to the planet of the humans.IMHO,MAB

In fact quite a number of airlines both private and public have gone out of business following serious accidents: PanAm, TWA, SAS etc etc. Financially Air Chance are in the same boat as BA

In fact quite a number of airlines both private and public have gone out of business following serious accidents: PanAm, TWA, SAS etc etc. Financially Air Chance are in the same boat as BA.The French government wouldn't let it happen. I do not think SAS should have been in your list. Maybe you menst Swissair.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavian_Airlines_SystemCheers,MAB

More misinformation.

If pilot error is proven then the lawyers will have a field day and Air Chance will be finished!!

Air France's liability doesn't depend on whether there was pilot error.The person or persons filing the wrongful death claim must show that the death resulted from negligence or willful actions by the airline. http://www.personal-injury-information.com..._accidents.htmlThe accepted legal definition of medical negligence in the UK is:A doctor is not guilty of negligence if he acts in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a reasonable, responsible and respectable body of medical men skilled in that particular art.http://www.radcliffe-oxford.com/books/samp...53f4a380rdz.pdfSubstitute "pilot" for "doctor" and it is obvious that pilot error is not necessarily negligent.

In fact quite a number of airlines both private and public have gone out of business following serious accidents: PanAm, TWA, SAS etc etc. Financially Air Chance are in the same boat as BA

SAS never went out of business.PanAm was in financial trouble beginning in the 1970s. This was exacerbated by over-expansions and recession. It paid too much for National Airlines in 1980 and then failed to integrate their operations. Itm began seling off assets through the 1980s to try to stay afloat - but was still operating at a loss. In 1985, PanAm sold its entire Pacific Division to United. All this occured before the Flight 103 disaster in 1988.Similarly, TWA went out of business because it was mismanaged. It fell into the hands of a corporate raider in 1985 who asset-stripped it for his own benefit, resulting in bankruptcy in 1992. TWA found itself in a deal giving another firm the right to buy TWA tickets at a 45% discount and then resell them. It was estimated TWA made a loss of US$150M/year on this deal and it went back into bankruptcy in 1995. All this occured before Flight 800 in 1996. Neither PanAm or TWA managed to cope with the de-tegulation of the airline business in the USA.

Hello,http://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2009/07/...n-local-shores/Regards.Gus.

Keeping it alive.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/ar...7.html?ITO=1490Cheers,MAB

I probably think the DFDR locators have expired by now, so therefore there is still no hard evidence into why, how and where exactly AFR447 crashed, and until the DFDRs are found, this will remain a mystery. Despite calls for AFR pilots to boycott A330 and A340 aircraft until their pitot tubes are replaced, the BEA reminded that there was not yet any evidence suggesting the pitot tube to be behind the crash.

I probably think the DFDR locators have expired by now, so therefore there is still no hard evidence into why, how and where exactly AFR447 crashed, and until the DFDRs are found, this will remain a mystery. Despite calls for AFR pilots to boycott A330 and A340 aircraft until their pitot tubes are replaced, the BEA reminded that there was not yet any evidence suggesting the pitot tube to be behind the crash.

Well, something's broken on the A330. You have the TAM airlines, Qantas, and Air France all within a short period.

Well, something's broken on the A330. You have the TAM airlines, Qantas, and Air France all within a short period.

I believe they may all be linked, although the make of the ADIRU on AFR447 is Honeywell whilst Qantas' is Northrop Grumman. I don't know about TAM though, but if the ADIRU was at fault on AFR447, the weather, plus the electrical faults that have have been reported on ACARS may have exacerbated the crash.

My feeling is that the "fly by wire" computer programming does not include parameters for flying through a 50,000ft tropical storm as that would be regarded as beyond the airframe tollerances and something that a pilot would "should!" avoid. So once the fly by wire dropped out the pilot had little if any control as probably the computer would not accept his inputs being that they were "excessive" and beyond the programmers vision of how a plane should be flown. So Pilot error! did he decide to fly through the storm? Did he know it was there? Did he know that such a storm was beyond the physical and computer capabilities of his a/c? If the black boxes are ever found Air Chance is doomed and possibly even Airbus. The French are always coy when there is an air accident investigation. They never like to admit fault (see the ATR accidents) and there is a definate smell of trying to protect their backs. All that came out of the preliminary findings was "It crashed into the sea!"

My feeling is that the "fly by wire" computer programming does not include parameters for flying through a 50,000ft tropical storm as that would be regarded as beyond the airframe tollerances and something that a pilot would "should!" avoid. So once the fly by wire dropped out the pilot had little if any control as probably the computer would not accept his inputs being that they were "excessive" and beyond the programmers vision of how a plane should be flown. So Pilot error! did he decide to fly through the storm? Did he know it was there? Did he know that such a storm was beyond the physical and computer capabilities of his a/c? If the black boxes are ever found Air Chance is doomed and possibly even Airbus. The French are always coy when there is an air accident investigation. They never like to admit fault (see the ATR accidents) and there is a definate smell of trying to protect their backs. All that came out of the preliminary findings was "It crashed into the sea!"

You should notify the NTSB and BEA of your findings! :( :(

Hello,Images over 200K file size deleted

My feeling is that the "fly by wire" computer programming does not include parameters for flying through a 50,000ft tropical storm as that would be regarded as beyond the airframe tollerances and something that a pilot would "should!" avoid. So once the fly by wire dropped out the pilot had little if any control as probably the computer would not accept his inputs being that they were "excessive" and beyond the programmers vision of how a plane should be flown.

Please can you read again carefully the preliminary BEA report.I have the feeling you miss something about the reason(s) why fly by wire (or more accurately the autopilot .. the FBW never dropped in the actual know events sequence) dropped.Remind .. even in full manual .. the A330-200 still a FBW plane.It's no more commands possible when all the sources of electricity have vanished (and this is batteries and a extra windmill generator as emergency sources)Regards.Gus.

Hello,Please can you read again carefully the preliminary BEA report.I have the feeling you miss something about the reason(s) why fly by wire (or more accurately the autopilot .. the FBW never dropped in the actual know events sequence) dropped.Remind .. even in full manual .. the A330-200 still a FBW plane.It's no more commands possible when all the sources of electricity have vanished (and this is batteries and a extra windmill generator as emergency sources)Regards.Gus.

There's so many other interesting "coincidental" bugs in this plane that have been made apparent in the past few months, it's chilling. It's too bad some regulations/standards are written in blood.

I believe that BSing about fly-by-wire after so many years in service is just that, BS. But what I can't understand is who in God's name approved that piece of junk software (not all the software) that when the PC's loose the Pitot Information the Laws are changed and the crew, all of the sudden, is left to fix it??? I understand that the PC are not completely off but still. If it is written in the Airbus manual how to respond in a situation like this, how come the PC's can't do it by themselves and of course then warn the crew of what is happening??? If the Auto-Pilot program can't handle turbulence, at least at the onset, then: Huston, we have a problem. A best guess by a computer of how to proceed is a whole lot faster than any human specially when unexpectedly. Another one, Pitot Tubes were not invented for the A330 or the A340 families of jets. Why all of the sudden they get plugged by ICE??? Before these models other model planes flew at the same hight, speed, weather with guess what??? Right, Pitot Tubes. What's up with that??? = AIRBUS computers must have a bug with creeps up in Turbulence weather. And that is a big boo-boo. If so, kiss the A350 goodbye by 2012. Why now??? This is not the inaugural year for the A330. Weird!!! It just doesn't add up,Cheers,MAB

Let's all go back to Airbus school or like me for the first time:http://www.airbusdriver.net/airbus_fltlaws.htmCheers,MAB