Did not seem to affect the plane going in the opposite direction who saw a flash of light.
My theory is the plane was going too fast and the composite wings sheared from the cabin. The computer could not determine the right airspeed and kept accelerating until the failure.
BUT, I could be wrong!

>
> Subject: : Air France Accident: Smoking Gun Found
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Subject: Air France Accident: Smoking Gun Found
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ?
>
> A Brazilian Naval?unit?reportedly found the?complete vertical fin/rudder

assembly of the doomed aircraft floating some 30 miles from the main debris
field.?The search for the flight recorders goes on, but given the failure
history of the vertical fins on A300-series aircraft, an analysis of?its
structure at the point of failure will likely yield the primary cause factor in
the breakup of the aircraft, with the flight recorder data (if found) providing
only secondary contributing phenomena.

>
> ?
>
> The fin-failure-leading-to-breakup sequence is strongly suggested in the

attached (below) narrative report by George Larson, Editor emeritus of
Smithsonian Air & Space Magazine.

>
> ?
>
> It's regrettable that these aircraft are permitted to continue in routine

flight operations with this known structural defect. It appears that safety
finishes last within Airbus Industries, behind national pride and economics.?
Hopefully, this accident will force the issue to be addressed, requiring at a
minimum restricted operations of selected platforms, and grounding of some
high-time aircraft until a re-engineered (strengthened) vertical fin/rudder
attachment structure can be incorporated.

>
> ?
>
> Les
>
> ?
>
> --------------------------(George Larson's Report)---------------------
>
> ?
>
> This is an account of a discussion I had recently with a maintenance

professional?

>
> who salvages airliner airframes for a living.?He has been at it for a while,

dba BMI

>
> Salvage at Opa Locka Airport in Florida. In the process of stripping parts, he

sees

>
> things few others are able to see.? His observations confirm?prior assessments

of

>
> Airbus structural deficiencies within?our flight test and aero structures

communities

>
> by those who have seen the closely held reports of A3XX-series vertical fin

failures.

>
> ?
>
> His observations:
> ?
> "I ?have scrapped just about every type of transport aircraft from A-310,
> A-320, B-747, 727, 737, 707, DC-3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, MD-80, L-188, L1011
> and various Martin, Convair and KC-97 aircraft.
>
> Over a hundred of them.
>
> Airbus products are the flimsiest and most poorly designed as far as
> airframe structure is concerned by an almost obsession to utilize composite
> materials.?
>
> I have one A310 vertical fin on the?premises from a demonstration I just?
>
> performed.??It was pathetic to see the composite structure shatter as it did,
>
> something a Boeing product will not do.
>
> The vertical fin along with the composite hinges on rudder and elevators is
> the worst example of structural use of composites I have ever seen and I am
> not surprised by the current pictures of rescue crews recovering the
>
> complete Vertical fin and rudder assembly at some distance from the crash
>
> site.
> ?
> The Airbus line has a history of both multiple rudder losses and a vertical
> fin and rudder separation from the airframe as was the case in NY with AA.
>
>
> As an old non-radar equipped DC4 pilot who flew through many a thunderstorm
> in Africa along the equator, I am quite familiar with their ferocity.? It is

not

>
> difficult to understand how?such a storm might have stressed an aircraft
>
> structure to failure at its weakest point, and especially so in the presence

of

>
> instrumentation problems.
> ?
> I replied with this:
> ?
> "I'm watching very carefully the orchestration of the inquiry by French
> officials and Airbus. I think I can smell a concerted effort to steer
> discussion away from structural issues and onto sensors, etc.? Now Air
> France, at the behest of their pilots' union, is replacing all the air data
> sensors on the Airbus fleet, which creates a distraction and shifts the
>
> media's focus away from the real problem.
>
>
> It's difficult to delve into the structural issue without wading into the
> Boeing vs. Airbus swamp, where any observation is instantly tainted by its
> origin. Americans noting any Airbus structural issues (A380 early failure
> of wing in static test; loss of vertical surfaces in Canadian fleet prior to
> AA A300, e.g.) will be attacked by the other side as partisan, biased, etc.?"
>
>
> His follow-up:
> ?
> One gets a really unique insight into structural issues when one has
> first-hand experience in the dismantling process.
> ?
> I am an A&P, FEJ and an ATP with 7000 flight hours and I was absolutely
> stunned, flabbergasted when I realized that the majority of internal
> airframe structural supports on the A 310 which appear to be aluminum are
> actually rolled composite material with aluminum rod ends. They shattered.
> ?
> Three years ago we had a storm come through, with gusts up to 60-70 kts.,
>
> catching several A320s tied down on the line, out in the open.
>
> ?
>
> The A320 elevators and rudder hinges whose actuators had been
>
> removed shattered and the rudder and elevators came off.
> ?
> Upon closer inspection I realized that not only were the rear spars
> composite but so were the hinges.??While Boeing also uses composite
>
> material in its airfoil structures, the actual attach fittings for the

elevators,

>
> rudder, vertical and horizontal stabilizers are all of?machined aluminum."?
>
> -----------------(end of narrative)---------------

This is an eMail I got from a friend.

"
The Times of London reports that a similar "incoherent cocktail of alarms" occurred six times on Air France flights since February 2008. Though pilots eventually regained control in those instances, one situation became so dire that the pilot issued a mayday call. In each case, the emergency appeared to be linked to Pitot tubes that malfunctioned in stormy weather, The Times concludes.

Airbus had suggested replacing Pitot tubes on its A330 aircraft. Air France had begun the work, but had not replaced the tubes on Flight 447.

The French Bureau of Investigations and Analyses, however, has refused to blame the Pitot sensors. Experts, too, caution against inferring a certain line of cause and effect while so much crucial information is still unknown. "

That bit from an article that is fairly reflective of all the articles that can be found on the web.
The same article reported that the auto emergency messages from the plane reported a series of electronic failures.

Some more from the article:
"That message was accompanied by a burst of others between 2:10 and 2:14 a.m. Greenwich Mean Time:

- The autopilot was turned off, though it is not clear if this was done by pilots or the computer.

- Gyroscopes needed to keep the plane flying level failed.

- The computers entered the plane into "alternate flight law" a sort of "safe mode" intended to prevent the pilots from making any drastic mistakes.

- The rudder limiter reported problems. The rudder limiter prevents pilots from turning the tail rudder too wildly at high speeds – an act that could shear the entire rear stabilizer off the plane.

This, in particular, is a curious clue, because the rear stabilizer has been found torn from the plane – the very thing the computer was trying to prevent.

- The primary, secondary, and flight-management computers failed.
"

The flight time of these messages was just after 2:10 AM GMT. The East Coast USA is -5GMT and Brasília is -3GMT. Local time was therefore 11:10PM
This nearly eliminates the possibility of a solar flare frying the avionics system even if it could make it past the faraday.

They were flying into a storm. But whatever happened happened fast, as the wreckage has shown that the pilots seats were down.

"What appears clear, though, is that the trouble mounted quickly. Flight 447's pilots made no mayday or emergency transmission, and photos of the crew's seats show them folded, meaning the crew had not yet returned to them in response to an emergency. "

Whatever happened, happened fast. While the Pitot tubes have been suspect, it doesn't account for all the known events. The Gyroscopes
(http://www.gyroscopes.org/uses.asp ) failed. These are magnetic independent on aircraft. That is the part that bothers me.

To my knowledge, the only way that can happen is a total loss of power in the aircraft. However; the onboard computers were still up and running and switched the plane into safe mode. A few events later and the computers failed as well.

In all previously recorded events related to the pitot tubes, I cannot find anywhere a mention of the gyro's failing. Short of total power loss, the only other thing that could have caused it is a catastrophic impact.

The powers that be are dismissing foul play. I am not.

You are correct about the anomaly. I've been following that myself as well. I don't think it was the cause of this particular crash, but I can see the potential as that condition worsens. It has changed storm patterns in the region, and elsewhere so it may be indirectly responsible from that standpoint, but I still stuck on the gyro's going out before the power did. The bodies may not be burned or have shrapnel, but the kind of impact I am suggesting (kinetic) would not.

Thats my two cents worth.
Regards,
Gerald