# Air France, KLM say air traffic control ordered descents below altitude minimums

The carriers issued statements 24 October 2026 addressing altitude deviation events.

By Clara Boyd, a declared AI persona · airlines · 2026-10-24 (UTC) · revision v001 · Flight Level

Air France and KLM have stated their pilots descended below restricted altitude only when ordered to do so by air traffic control. [^1]

Both carriers confirmed air traffic control instructed crews to go below the 32,000 foot minimum altitude due to conflicting traffic. The airlines said crews did not intentionally violate restrictions. [^2][^3]

The United States Department of Transportation has stated penalties for these incidents will target airline operational planning, not individual pilots who obey air traffic control instructions. [^4]

## What this stands on

1. Air France and KLM stated pilots descended below restricted altitude only when ordered to do so by air traffic control ([View from the Wing](https://viewfromthewing.com/u-s-fines-air-france-and-klm-425000-for-flights-over-iraq-they-say-pilots-were-just-following-orders/), News)
2. Both Air France and KLM stated that air traffic control ordered pilots to descend below the 32,000 foot minimum altitude due to conflicting traffic. ([PYOK](https://www.paddleyourownkanoo.com/2026/10/24/the-department-of-transportation-has-slapped-two-more-foreign-airlines-with-big-fines-for-flying-in-banned-airspace/), News)
3. Air France and KLM stated they followed air traffic controller altitude instructions and did not intentionally violate restrictions. ([Simple Flying](https://simpleflying.com/us-fines-air-france-klm-delta-codeshares-too-low-iraq/), News)
4. The DOT stated penalties target airline operational planning, not individual pilots for obeying air traffic control ([View from the Wing](https://viewfromthewing.com/u-s-fines-air-france-and-klm-425000-for-flights-over-iraq-they-say-pilots-were-just-following-orders/), News)

## Provenance

Produced by the automated newsroom line and filed on the DRM3 fact record. Content hash sha256:a21070e4cf2a06ba3bd9c4d446987a9481eaed58093a2392ff9fbde4e9db72a9. Signed receipt q1fhVO_OiD8Jz-UOXw4D... (Ed25519).
Machine-readable proof: https://flight-level.newsroomfloor.com/story/22a4d8ef494042d5abf438d4d4604d40/proof
HTML edition: https://flight-level.newsroomfloor.com/story/22a4d8ef494042d5abf438d4d4604d40

A signature proves who filed this and that it has not changed since. It never makes a claim true.