Home / Crash Investigations / Automation

Automation-Related Accidents

4 investigationsFrom the official reportsUpdated Sep 2026

Automation has made airline flying safer and more efficient: flight management systems, autopilots and autothrust now fly most of every flight. Accident reports show the other side.

Crews lost track of the active mode, did not notice when the automation disconnected or changed mode by itself, or relied on it for so long that their manual flying and monitoring skills had faded. A report on flight path management published by the FAA in 2013 found that pilots sometimes depended too much on automated systems and could be reluctant to intervene. The lessons run through the investigations below: know which mode is engaged and what it will do next, call out mode changes, check the flight mode annunciator after every selection, and take over manually, or at a lower level of automation, as soon as the aircraft does not do what you expect. Many operators now train these points explicitly, together with regular manual flying practice to keep handling skills current.

The investigations

The Boeing 767 freighter N1217A.
NTSB · 2019

Atlas Air Flight 3591

· Boeing 767-375BCF (converted freighter)
A 767 freighter's go-around mode engaged by accident in turbulence; the first officer, disoriented, pushed the aeroplane into a steep dive, and 32 seconds after the mode change it struck the bay.
Loss of controlSpatial disorientationAutomationCRMHuman factors
An Asiana Airlines Boeing 777-200ER, registration HL7742.
NTSB · 2013

Asiana Airlines Flight 214

· Boeing 777-200ER
A 777 crew on a visual approach to San Francisco unintentionally left the autothrottle in HOLD at idle, noticed the decaying airspeed only at about 200 ft and struck the seawall after a late go-around.
Approach and landingAutomationCRMFatigueHuman factors
An Air France Airbus A330-200, registration F-GZCP, on the ground at Paris Charles de Gaulle airport.
BEA · 2009

Air France Flight 447

· Airbus A330-203
A temporary loss of airspeed indications at FL350 led to inappropriate control inputs, a stall that the crew never identified and the loss of all 228 people on board.
Loss of controlStallAir dataAutomationCRM
The Qantas Airbus A330-303 registered VH-QPA.
ATSB · 2008

Qantas Flight 72

· Airbus A330-303
Faulty angle of attack spikes from one of three air data units, and a rare gap in the flight control software, made an A330 pitch down twice in cruise, injuring many unbelted occupants.
Air dataFlight controlsAutomationSurvival

The theory in the Library

More investigations

Picture credits

  1. Atlas Air Flight 3591: Orlando Suarez · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons
  2. Asiana Airlines Flight 214: Tomás Del Coro from Las Vegas, Nevada, USA · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons
  3. Air France Flight 447: Pawel Kierzkowski · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons
  4. Qantas Flight 72: Hawkeye UK · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons

Crash Investigations pages summarise official investigation reports for study and exam preparation. The investigating body's report is the authoritative account and prevails wherever it differs from this page. Under ICAO Annex 13, an investigation exists to prevent accidents, not to apportion blame or liability.