Air India plane crash

Inverted said:
Same. Although I knew it wasn't a Boeing issue, I think most did. That initial BS ChatGPT report saying that water from the GPU was ingested and fried both FADECs was so crazy but lots of people bought into it. Hell, half of my VX new hire chat group argued with me that this was for sure the issue and AI was figuring out how to soften the blow against Boeing so they could get discounts on aircraft orders lol.
Click to expand...
I hate this timeline

I flew with a captain who swore ChatGPT had told him everything about why the airflow in the max sucks, down to the ducting size. I just looked out the window.
 
BobDDuck said:
Laughs in CRJ where the thrust levels ARE the fuel cut off switches.
Click to expand...

Same in every other turbine airplane I've flown prior to the 737/transport category aircraft. Extraordinarily uncommon, but I do know at least one person who managed to lift both of the throttle guards/lifts and shut both engines down while starting an idle enroute descent. But in that case, they had like 15,000 ft remaining to get them relit :oops:
 
When the AAIB says the cutoff/run switches transitioned, do they mean the switches were physically moved, or did they "transition" internally?
 
///AMG said:
Same in every other turbine airplane I've flown prior to the 737/transport category aircraft. Extraordinarily uncommon, but I do know at least one person who managed to lift both of the throttle guards/lifts and shut both engines down while starting an idle enroute descent. But in that case, they had like 15,000 ft remaining to get them relit :oops:
Click to expand...
It takes a very positive and distinct movement to get the thrust lever into SHUT OFF.
 
I'll sadly admit I was wrong about the landing gear tilt theory. Although it did cause me to go on a deep dive about how the system works on my plane so I guess I learned something in the process. On one hand the data in the report so far paints a much sadder picture about the incident, but it's also kind of comforting to know there isn't a freak systems failure scenario that would cause something like that.
 
Old Boeing Driver said:
When the AAIB says the cutoff/run switches transitioned, do they mean the switches were physically moved, or did they "transition" internally?
Click to expand...
If the 787 is like other Boeings, the switch signal is the presence or absence of 28VDC that gets interpreted by the EECs. It is almost-certainly either that voltage or the digitized value from the EECs that is indicated on the EAFR. There is nothing measuring the mechanical position of the switches. OH GOD I'M MAKING THE NEXT ROUND OF A.I. GARBAGE BETTER!
 
Old Boeing Driver said:
When the AAIB says the cutoff/run switches transitioned, do they mean the switches were physically moved, or did they "transition" internally?
Click to expand...

That’s probably the 500 million dollar question they are trying to figure out.

One pilot asked the other one why they did that, and that pilot responded “they didn’t”. So wether they “thought” they didn’t do it, while doing something else is plausible or they were lying.

The CVR might pick up the sound depending on what other noises were happening.

If they thought it was an internal issue, I’m pretty sure a bigger deal would be being made of this. I.E. inspections of all 787 fuel control switches
 
///AMG said:
Same in every other turbine airplane I've flown prior to the 737/transport category aircraft. Extraordinarily uncommon, but I do know at least one person who managed to lift both of the throttle guards/lifts and shut both engines down while starting an idle enroute descent. But in that case, they had like 15,000 ft remaining to get them relit :oops:
Click to expand...
Didn’t Delta do this over SFO bay in the late 80’s/early 90’s, and they barely got one burning before it splashed?
 
///AMG said:
Same in every other turbine airplane I've flown prior to the 737/transport category aircraft. Extraordinarily uncommon, but I do know at least one person who managed to lift both of the throttle guards/lifts and shut both engines down while starting an idle enroute descent. But in that case, they had like 15,000 ft remaining to get them relit :oops:
Click to expand...

Every tactical jet I know of is this way. Throttles aft to idle, over a detent to cutoff. On aircraft much older than you, the T-38 is a good example, they had to be retrofitted with a “throttle gate guard.” Basically the idle to cutoff detent was so worn down on these jets, that it was very easy when going back to idle, to slide past the worn-down detent into the cutoff range. The throttle gate installation was a fold-up mechanism attached to the throttle quadrant, that snapped into place and physically blocked going into cut-off. It was engaged after engine start when both throttles were in idle, and disengaged after pulling into chocks just prior to shutdown (or airborne if needing to make a shutdown for an EP).

Speaking of idle detent, some aircraft has some interesting operations of the throttles. The A-10, for example, if you had an engine issue such as failure/fire, you stood the throttle up, once identified, to midway instead of initially going to idle, and then shut it down with the fire t-handle if needed for fire, or right over the detent to cutoff if normal shutdown. Because any loss of thrust condition, if the throttle was brought to idle, the fuel control automatically attempts an engine restart.

Itchy said:
Didn’t Delta do this over SFO bay in the late 80’s/early 90’s, and they barely got one burning before it splashed?
Click to expand...

UAL had the dual engine flameout in 1986 departing SFO on takeoff. Got them restarted and returned for landing.

Delta had the one a year later in 1987, LAX to CVG. Flameout of both engines on takeoff crossing the shoreline at about 2000 or so MSL. Got them restarted at about 600 feet above the ocean, resumed climb and continued on to CVG, I guess because captain knew he had been the cause of it.
 
I don't know much about sparky's domain, but the switch model is Honeywell 4TL837-3D

Data sheet:

Based on 2018 FAA SAIB NM-18-33, a whole bunch of aircraft from multiple manufacturers use the same switch model for this application. The SAIB was issued because it was found the switch was installed on some 737 MAX aircraft with its locking feature disengaged (??).

Dynamic Regulatory System

drs.faa.gov drs.faa.gov

Reading through the datasheet and considering the photo of the recovered control switches, I suspect it should be possible to disassemble them and determine if the locking mechanism was configured correctly.
 
Last edited:
I’m curious if it’s known that the switch was initially physically moved prior to the engine rollbacks, or if an electrical anomaly….even something as simple as a short or corrosion….emulated the same signal the switches would have sent had they been manipulated. Worth looking at, as it’s been seen before.
 
MikeD said:
I’m curious if it’s known that the switch was initially physically moved prior to the engine rollbacks, or if an electrical anomaly….even something as simple as a short or corrosion….emulated the same signal the switches would have sent had they been manipulated. Worth looking at, as it’s been seen before.
Click to expand...
I thought that as well, but the CVR question of “why did you do that” or something to that effect would indicate otherwise I think
 
Kingairer said:
I thought that as well, but the CVR question of “why did you do that” or something to that effect would indicate otherwise I think
Click to expand...

The response to that question was something to the effect of “I didnt”. Which makes me wonder if the question was asked based on what the FO physically saw, or was it asked because that was the first thing suspected since he was flying?

And if it was physically moved by the CA, was it intentional to do that to cut off fuel, or did the CA think he was moving something else (like the Deltal 767/LAX) and that’s why he answered that he didn’t?
 
MikeD said:
The response to that question was something to the effect of “I didnt”. Which makes me wonder if the question was asked based on what the FO physically saw, or was it asked because that was the first thing suspected since he was flying?

And if it was physically moved by the CA, was it intentional to do that to cut off fuel, or did the CA think he was moving something else (like the Deltal 767/LAX) and that’s why he answered that he didn’t?
Click to expand...
Are there any aircraft that have anything else there that would be needed during takeoff that the pilot thought they were doing instead?
 
MikeD said:
The response to that question was something to the effect of “I didnt”. Which makes me wonder if the question was asked based on what the FO physically saw, or was it asked because that was the first thing suspected since he was flying?

And if it was physically moved by the CA, was it intentional to do that to cut off fuel, or did the CA think he was moving something else (like the Deltal 767/LAX) and that’s why he answered that he didn’t?
Click to expand...
I'm going to take a WAG about a 787 but I suspect that throttle quadrant probably has at least four or eight 56 or 128 pin connectors (could be more, could be less) hooked to them. The connectors do give a physical and visual indication that they've been positively connected and are in fact locked. It's just another box with a bunch of transducers, a few connectors and some cam locks to ensure it stays put. When you get to one of those big connectors you need to be very aware of a couple of things, first you have to make sure you're trying to plug it into the right hole, second once you find the right hole when you seat it it needs to be straight because the little pins are about as stout as a marshmallow dripping and will fall over if you single them out and cuss at them loud enough. I'm just saying there's a lot points of possible failure other than the pilots. I'm giving you monkeys the benefit of the doubt, don't attack me.
 
MikeD said:
The response to that question was something to the effect of “I didnt”. Which makes me wonder if the question was asked based on what the FO physically saw, or was it asked because that was the first thing suspected since he was flying?

And if it was physically moved by the CA, was it intentional to do that to cut off fuel, or did the CA think he was moving something else (like the Deltal 767/LAX) and that’s why he answered that he didn’t?
Click to expand...

I mean, a guy committing suicide is not gonna say “cause I want to die” in the flight deck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top