05 juillet 2009
Airbus AF447 : La France les a tués
(English version: AF 447 Airbus: France killed them)
En 1988, Norbert Jacquet était pilote de Boeing 747 à Air France, une des compagnies les plus sûres du monde. L'aviation française avait une excellente réputation et constituait un modèle pour de nombreux pays qui envoyaient des délégations en France pour s’informer. A cette époque, avec d'autres pilotes, Norbert Jacquet a toutefois commencé à s’inquiéter de certains dysfonctionnements apparaissant en matière de sécurité, notamment avec l'introduction de la "nouvelle technologie Airbus" (A 320). Il a créé un syndicat pour que ces pilotes puisent s’exprimer. Il en était le président. Il est à ce moment devenu la victime de méthodes incroyables et implacables pour le discréditer et briser sa vie. Il a été détruit. Mais les faits lui ont donné raison et ne cessent de lui donner raison. Et plus on le constate, plus l'acharnement dont il est victime de la part de l’administration et de la justice se renforce.
Les faits, les voici. Depuis 1988, Air France a connu cinq catastrophes. Quatre Airbus (Habsheim, Sainte-Odile, Toronto, Atlantique-Sud). Un Concorde (Gonesse-CDG). Des avions produits en France (Aerospatiale/EADS/Airbus) et certifiés et suivis en navigabilité par la France. Mais Air France n'a subi aucune catastrophe avec un Boeing. Des avions construits aux Etats-Unis et certifiés et suivis en navigabilité par les Etats-Unis. Sur la période, Air France a pourtant compté une activité très supérieure avec des Boeing, par rapport aux Airbus.
Un enfant de dix ans comprend. Mais, en France, on refuse de voir cette réalité. Airbus/ EADS est-il à ce point intouchable ? Faut-il attendre "le prochain" ?
Plus d’informations : site Jacquet et blog sur Airbus (et aussi "Norbert Jacquet" dans Google).
N’hésitez pas à demander au gouvernement français, à la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme ou à l’Agence européenne de sécurité aérienne ce qu’ils pensent de l’affaire Norbert Jacquet !
Update 15 juillet 2009. "Der Spiegel" 13/07/2009.
Update 19 octobre 2009. Reportage à voir sur "Bakchich".
Update 4 août 2010. Reportage de la télévision belge du 30 mai 2010 (extraits).
Update 8 décembre 2011. Le débat sur la sécurité des ailes françaises est maintenant sur la place publique. Norbert Jacquet a mis en ligne récemment un rappel de quelques faits "prémonitoires" qui laisse pantois (avec vidéo d'une émission de télévision).
(Fin de la note en français. La suite est la traduction en anglais.)
------------- ENGLISH VERSION ---------------
AF 447 AIRBUS: FRANCE KILLED THEM
In 1988, Norbert Jacquet was working for Air France as a Boeing 747 pilot. Air France was then one of the safest airlines in the world. The French aviation had an excellent reputation and was an example for many countries, which would send their representatives to get information. At that time, with some other pilots, Norbert Jacquet started to worry about a few dysfunctions appearing in air safety, particularly with the “Airbus new technology” introduction. He created a labour union in order for these pilots to express themselves. He was the leader. He then became a victim of an unusual and unrelenting campaign. Strong means have been used to throw discredit on him and ruin his life. But facts gave him right and never stopped to show he is right. And the more he is right, the more the French institutions (administration and justice) are dead set against him.
What are the facts? Since 1988 Air France had to go through five crashes. Four Airbus (Habsheim, Sainte-Odile, Toronto, South-Atlantic) and one Concorde (Gonesse-CDG). All those planes were built in France (Aerospatiale/EADS/Airbus) and certified by the French authorities. Mostly, their airworthiness is permanently watched and guaranteed by them. But Air France had no crash with a Boeing. Those planes are built in the USA and certified by the US authorities. Mostly, their airworthiness is permanently watched and guaranteed by them. Still, on this period, Air France had a more important activity with its Boeing planes compared to Airbus planes.
A ten year-old child would easily understand what is all about. But, in France, this reality is not accepted yet. Could EADS/Airbus be so untouchable? Do we have to wait for the next crash?
More: Norbert Jacquet's Website (English/French, with many newspaper articles and TV shows) and Blog about Airbus (French). Also click "Norbert Jacquet" with Google.
Don’t hesitate to ask the French government, the European court of human rights or the European aviation safety agency about Norbert Jacquet!
Update, July 15, 2009. "Der Spiegel" July 13, 2009.
10:28 | Lien permanent | Commentaires (15)
Commentaires
5/March/1999: An Air France Boeing 747 crashes and is written off
4/March/1999: An Air France Boeing 737 crashes and is written off
12/Sept/1993: An Air France Boeing 747 crashes and suffers substantial damage
24/July/1988: An Air France Boeing 747 crashes and suffers substantial damage
Air France fleet has less Boeing than Airbus models, and many Boeing are being use for cargo.
Sanint-Odile accident was and "Air Inter", not an "Air France"
The fatalities in the other Airbus accidents you are mentioning are:
Toronto: 0 fatalities
Habsheim (an airshow): 3 fatalities
South-Atlantic (flight 8969, hijacked): fatalities 7 (3 passengers, 4 hijackers)
The number of fatalities for Airbus per million flights is lower than for Boeing.
About four engine airplanes:
Nobody has died in a Airbus 340 accident, 3,732 people have died in Boeing 747 accidents (this is horrifying if you do not take into account the time this beauty has been fliying: It is so easy to twist numbers)
Please do not try to fool ten year old kids :-)
Écrit par : Against nonsense | 22 juillet 2009
Mr "Against nonsense",
- "5/March/1999: B747". It was a freighter. Passengers don't fly in freighters.
- "4/March/1999: B737". Which one? Never heard.
- "12/Sept/1993: B747": Not a crash.
- "24/July/1988: B747". Never heard. Not a crash.
- You said: "Air France fleet has less Boeing than Airbus models". We said, and we were right: ... ON THIS PERIOD [1988 - 2009], Air France had a more important activity with its Boeing planes compared to Airbus planes.
- You said: "Saint-Odile accident was and Air Inter, not an Air France". Air Inter changed his name in Air France.
- You said: "The fatalities in the other Airbus accidents you are mentioning are: [...] South-Atlantic (flight 8969, hijacked)". We didn't mention the 8969 flight.
- You said: "The number of fatalities for Airbus per million flights is lower than for Boeing". 1) You are a funny guy! Boeing was created at the beginning of the 19th century. Airbus was created in the 70's. 2) We are speaking about the AF 447 crash and about what happens in France. What you said is irrelevant.
- You said: "Nobody has died in a Airbus 340 accident, 3,732 people have died in Boeing 747 accidents". 1) 3,732 is wrong. 2) How many flights each, funny guy! 3) The B747 is an old generation aircraft, first commercial flight in 1970. 4) We are speaking about the AF 447 crash and about what happens in France. What you said is irrelevant.
Mr "Against nonsense", please!
-
Écrit par : veritas, manager of this blog | 23 juillet 2009
Just a side note, the Concorde crash was the only one ever, and it was part built in the United Kingdom and had to be certified under their airworthyness laws too. Also it was caused by a faulty part on an American Boeing aeroplane.
As for Airbus, they are just as safe as Boeing and the statistics for global representation show this.
Écrit par : Matt | 24 juillet 2009
Matt,
The Concorde was partly built in the UK but it was also certified in France and it's airworthiness was also watched and guaranteed by France. That's the matter.
We don't know if the Concorde's crash was partly caused by a Continental Airlines DC 10 titanium strip. We don't know if Concorde ran over the strip.
Concorde's statistics are not significant. Not enought flights.
The comparison between all aircrafts, Airbus and Boeing, is a nonsense. Boeing was created at the beginning of the 19th century. Airbus was created in the 70's.
And we say again: we are speaking about the AF 447 crash and about what happens in France, concerning EADS, French authorities (DGAC, BEA...) and French Airlines (that mean Air France). What happens with Tuvalu Airlines doesn't matter.
-
Écrit par : veritas, manager of this blog | 24 juillet 2009
Mr. Veritas
Do you really think I am the funny one?:
Of course "5/March/1999: B747" was a freighter. Just wonder why it was being used as freighter. Probably beacause it was a safer plane than an Airbus and there is a great plot to kill people :-).
You never heard of "4/March/1999: B737"?. Then I wonder on wich data are you basing the statistics for your coments. It was Flight 7638 landing at Biarritz' runway 27. Exactly the 80th loss of a Boeing 737-200.
About the accident in South-Atlantic. It is simple, then you are commenting about the very last crash. Sorry I thought you were mentioning previous crashes.
Saint-Odile accident was in 1992. Air Inter was absorbed into Air France in 1 April 1997. But for sure Air France is responsible for all the previous history of Air Inter :-).
About the number of fatalities per million flights, lets be more specific about the number of fatalities corresponding to a full airplane for modern aircraft:
- Airbus 320/319/321 (first flight 1987) -> fatalities: 0.13 full airplanes per million flights
- Boeing 737-300/400/500 (first flight 1984) -> fatalities: 0.20 full airplanes per million flights
Statistic is a cruel bitch with high heels (current as of 31 December 2007)
You say that 3,732 people dying in Boeing 747 accidents is not a correct number. May be we have a different concept about what is an accident. I fully respect your concept so I will further specify for any one to judge:
Boeing 747:
Hull-loss Accidents: 39 with a total of 2850 fatalities
Criminal occurences (hull-loss, excl. hijackings): 4 with a total of 857 fatalities
Hijackings: 31 with a total of 25 fatalities
Actually, aviation safety is not an issue to make fun about. But please, be fair, otherwise reality is going to evidence your bias
Écrit par : Against nonsense | 25 juillet 2009
Mr "Against nonsense",
We change nothing. Only two remarks:
- The Boeing that went out of the runway at Biarritz was not a crash. The plane was not destroyed. It was not repaired because it was an old 737-200 (16 year old) and because Air France was changing it's B737 fleet to A320.
- Your comparison between B737-300/400/500 and A320 is amazing: B737-300/400/500 are out of production since 1999! Ten years!! What about the "Next Generation": B737-600/700/800/900?
MOREOVER WE REPEAT: we are speaking about the AF 447 crash and about what happens in FRANCE, concerning FRENCH authorities (DGAC, BEA...) and FRENCH AirlineS (with an "S"), that mean UTA, Air Inter, Air France, now AIR FRANCE (and Transavia). WHAT HAPPENS WITH OTHER AIRLINES ALL AROUND THE WORLD DOESN'T MATTER.
Mr "Against nonsense", all what you said is wrong and/or irrelevant. Please, stop it!
-
Écrit par : veritas, manager of this blog | 25 juillet 2009
As you wish:
"Next Generation": B737-800 against older A320/321/319.
This time I do not have the number of flights, but the number of Airplanes sold is a good enough aproximation to the flying volume and always in favor of the more recent airplane :-)
Boeing 737-800 (first flight 1997, airplanes sold: more than 1513)-> 0.183 fatalities/airplane sold
Airbus 320/319/321 (first flight 1987, airplanes sold: more than 3791)-> 0.168 fatalities/airplane sold
Écrit par : Against nonsense | 25 juillet 2009
"Against nonsense",
The B737 "Next Generation" is not only the B737-800. You forgot -600/700/900. Please, stop it!
MOREOVER WE REPEAT: we are speaking about the AF 447 crash and about what happens in FRANCE, concerning FRENCH authorities (DGAC, BEA...) and FRENCH Airlines. WHAT HAPPENS WITH OTHER AIRLINES ALL AROUND THE WORLD IS IRRELEVANT.
-
Écrit par : veritas, manager of this blog | 26 juillet 2009
Dear blog manager.
You say: "WHAT HAPPENS WITH OTHER AIRLINES ALL AROUND THE WORLD DOESN'T MATTER."
So how do you judge if Frenchs are doing good or bad??!!
Écrit par : Jean | 26 juillet 2009
Dear Jean,
We only answered "Against nonsense". We never said that France is setting the standards. We speak about a business concerning France. If you speak about good or bad school results of YOUR children, and ONLY YOUR children, nobody asks you "so how do you judge if your children are doing good or bad??!!" when you say "what happens with other children doesn't matter" ("that hardly concerns me").
-
Écrit par : veritas, manager of this blog | 26 juillet 2009
Dear blog manager.
I see the data exposed by "Matt" and "Against nonsense" clear and detailed. They lets us judge giving the details on what they are reporting.
Dont you feel out of place having to say:
"What you said is irrelevant"
"Mr "Against nonsense", please, stop it!"
"What happens with Tuvalu Airlines doesn't matter"
"We change nothing"
"Mr "Against nonsense", all what you said is wrong and/or irrelevant. Please, stop it!"
Even in the last comparison of a brand new Boeing model of 1997 against older models from Airbus of 1987 in the line you asked, your answer is
"Please, stop it!"
??!!
I find the data they are giving interesting.
Please, do not take it as personal, but are you managing a blog or closing it?!
Écrit par : Jean | 26 juillet 2009
Dear Jean,
1) We see the data exposed by "Matt" and "Against nonsense" not clear (and not true). But it doesn't matter, because...
2) The title of this blog is "AF 447".
Not "air safety in the world".
Not "Airbus vs Boeing".
Nothing else.
Could you understand that? Not "air safety in the world". Not "Airbus vs Boeing". The title is "AF 447". Is it clear?
We find the data given by "Against nonsense" and "Matt" not interesting, because they are OUT OF PLACE (and not true). Is it clear?
WE REPEAT: we are speaking about the AF 447 crash and about what happens in FRANCE, concerning FRENCH authorities (DGAC, BEA...) and FRENCH Airlines.
(Please, don't take it as personal, but, if you want to speak about airsafety in the world or Airbus vs Boeing... open a blog! We promise not to come to speak about the AF 447 crash there)
-
Écrit par : veritas, manager of this blog | 26 juillet 2009
Veritas:
You are a tiny bit acid with each single person posting here. Just to comment your last answer to Jane:
1. The title of this blog is not "AF 447".
2. The title is: "AF 447 AIRBUS: FRANCE KILLED THEM"
If you want to discuss if it is an accident or a killing, you have to face any comment on "air safety in the world".
In adition you say that the data of the messages above is not true. Can you specify wich data is not true und give the "correct" numbers?
Écrit par : amazed | 27 juillet 2009
Amazed,
The blog's title is "Crash Airbus Air France AF 447 Rio-Paris". Please have a look at the top of this page. Maybe it's written to big?
The title of this post is "AF 447: France killed them". Why? We gave the facts and the explanations. Please, read again our post. And read the links we gave: http://jacno.com/za-an-inmo.htm (English/French, with many newspaper articles and TV shows, also in English) and http://antipour.com/airbus-20minutes-blogs/ (sorry, in French). And we added: click "Norbert Jacquet" with Google.
Concerning Airbus and Boeing crashes in the world, each of us gave his opinion. Now it's over because it's irrelevant. Thank you.
-
Écrit par : veritas, manager of this blog | 27 juillet 2009
En attendant aussi longtemps les boîtes noires sont devenues muettes, les chercheurs sont donc à peu près sûrs de ne rien trouver ..
Écrit par : jupe | 28 avril 2010
Les commentaires sont maintenant fermés