Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Air India Plane Crash
Comments
-
cafcnick1992 said:As a general question - how different is a cockpit of a 737 from a 787 one? You'd think that boeing and airbus would want to keep them fairly similiar so they can re-use parts / reduce learning curve for pilots.
737-8Max
787 Dreamliner
Not actually that different. Don't actually know how long the conversion courses are if you're going from 737 to 787 as there's only 1 operator in the UK that flies both types (TUI) and I've never had any dealings with them, but they keep the philosophies of the flight deck fairly the same so that it's quite easy to do, think it's max 6 months with a lot of that spent in the sim instead of hour building on the aircraft itself. Same goes with Airbus, but it's much harder to go from Boeing to Airbus and vice versa!3 -
Literally my pain every time there's a 'cybersecurity' headline.Jints said:
You only realise just how poor news reporting is when they write about something you know a lot about.Sheepie1985 said:
Honestly the standards of reporting on this accident has been utterly dire across all the media. I watched ITV News last night and they had a report with someone who’s using a 737NG simulator, and tried to demonstrate how easy it is to knock the switches.. but it wasn’t reflective of real life at all and absolutely shouldn’t have been used as a comparison, in fact I hoped someone at Boeing saw it because it could be considered slanderous and a smear from how pathetic the reporting was.Edit my post.
Just after writing the above I watched BBC news. They said in the Report it states the fuel switch was closed for about 10 seconds before it was switched back to open.
What did make me go 🙄🤔 was interviews with people from the UK who lost family members & who had read the Report.
One basically said...." I dont understand what it means.. ."
No you twerp, because you are not an aviation expert & have no knowledge of cockpits or flying.The media and many aviation “experts” have completely got this one wrong, and really need to stop speculating because they’re just making it worse.0 -
Was saying to my dad only a matter of time before the debt or mental health report comes out. Which doenst make sense to me (to kill 300 other people) but who knows0
-
Hence the ongoing investigation…MuttleyCAFC said:I think there are still questions to be answered.2 -
Sadly it’s not unheard of. There’s a lot of speculation around the pilots but it seems no one is considering that there could have been someone in the jump seat. An off duty pilot or an engineer can sometimes sit in the jump seat if a flight’s full, or even a family member or friend.. if you tell them to not say a thing the CVR won’t pick up on someone being there..2121 said:Was saying to my dad only a matter of time before the debt or mental health report comes out. Which doenst make sense to me (to kill 300 other people) but who knows0 -
Yes, we know more about what caused the crash and less at the same time. It will come out in the end and in the meantime patience is required.SporadicAddick said:
Hence the ongoing investigation…MuttleyCAFC said:I think there are still questions to be answered.3 -
surely there’d be a noise from them at some point on the Cockpit Recorder in that case?Sheepie1985 said:
Sadly it’s not unheard of. There’s a lot of speculation around the pilots but it seems no one is considering that there could have been someone in the jump seat. An off duty pilot or an engineer can sometimes sit in the jump seat if a flight’s full, or even a family member or friend.. if you tell them to not say a thing the CVR won’t pick up on someone being there..2121 said:Was saying to my dad only a matter of time before the debt or mental health report comes out. Which doenst make sense to me (to kill 300 other people) but who knowsIf I was to speculate, I doubt we’ll ever know what happened with this one in terms of who did what etc., but I suspect there’ll be a recommendation to put cameras in the cockpit as a result, to add to the flightdeck recorder. That will open a lot of civil liberties issues and I guess that the Pilot’s Union will push back
(also hadn’t kept up to date on China Eastern Airlines Flight 5735 but given mention upthread - gave it a google. Shocking that the Chinese appear to be blocking the publication of a final report!)2 -
The Pilot’s Union may not like it, and could challenge it, but I doubt there’s any civil liberties issues. The pilots are employees, the cockpit is their workplace and I’m pretty sure employers can put cameras anywhere they want except bathrooms/changing rooms.allez les addicks said:
surely there’d be a noise from them at some point on the Cockpit Recorder in that case?Sheepie1985 said:
Sadly it’s not unheard of. There’s a lot of speculation around the pilots but it seems no one is considering that there could have been someone in the jump seat. An off duty pilot or an engineer can sometimes sit in the jump seat if a flight’s full, or even a family member or friend.. if you tell them to not say a thing the CVR won’t pick up on someone being there..2121 said:Was saying to my dad only a matter of time before the debt or mental health report comes out. Which doenst make sense to me (to kill 300 other people) but who knowsIf I was to speculate, I doubt we’ll ever know what happened with this one in terms of who did what etc., but I suspect there’ll be a recommendation to put cameras in the cockpit as a result, to add to the flightdeck recorder. That will open a lot of civil liberties issues and I guess that the Pilot’s Union will push back
(also hadn’t kept up to date on China Eastern Airlines Flight 5735 but given mention upthread - gave it a google. Shocking that the Chinese appear to be blocking the publication of a final report!)0 -
Very sad, one pilot was nearing retirement and the other 2 months away from his wedding.ValleyGary said:0 - Sponsored links:
-
to be honest I think we're at the point where it's needed to be honest. There's been some absolute crazy stories of what some pilots have gotten up to in the flight deck over the last few months that The Sun would have a field day over if it heard about them. The problem is that flight crew are worried that the use of such cameras would be used to monitor them and push the argument of single pilot flights (which is a very very VERY bad idea, but airlines are looking to save money and are starting to consider this avenue..)SomervilleAddick said:
The Pilot’s Union may not like it, and could challenge it, but I doubt there’s any civil liberties issues. The pilots are employees, the cockpit is their workplace and I’m pretty sure employers can put cameras anywhere they want except bathrooms/changing rooms.allez les addicks said:
surely there’d be a noise from them at some point on the Cockpit Recorder in that case?Sheepie1985 said:
Sadly it’s not unheard of. There’s a lot of speculation around the pilots but it seems no one is considering that there could have been someone in the jump seat. An off duty pilot or an engineer can sometimes sit in the jump seat if a flight’s full, or even a family member or friend.. if you tell them to not say a thing the CVR won’t pick up on someone being there..2121 said:Was saying to my dad only a matter of time before the debt or mental health report comes out. Which doenst make sense to me (to kill 300 other people) but who knowsIf I was to speculate, I doubt we’ll ever know what happened with this one in terms of who did what etc., but I suspect there’ll be a recommendation to put cameras in the cockpit as a result, to add to the flightdeck recorder. That will open a lot of civil liberties issues and I guess that the Pilot’s Union will push back
(also hadn’t kept up to date on China Eastern Airlines Flight 5735 but given mention upthread - gave it a google. Shocking that the Chinese appear to be blocking the publication of a final report!)2 -
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.1 -
My friend who is a Boeing mechanic said there is a known defect with the chip that controls the fuel cutoff switches, It has to be changed every couple of thousand hours or so or the cutoff will be automatic in some cases.
Maybe Air India overlooked this on its last matinence check,
He also said he had looked at the preliminary report which stated both switches were cutoff simultaneously witch is not possible
They are most probably trying to blame Air India or the pilots to deflect blame in lieu of recalls or lawsuits.0 -
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.1 -
How do you know that they were cutoff by someone and not a chip error?.Do you work for Boeing?.Sheepie1985 said:
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.2 -
This 3rd person in the cockpit sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. What evidence is there? More voices on the recording? no? An extra corpse in the cockpit? none reported. Would 2 pilots not comment if someone got out of seat and reached in-between them an turned the 2 switches off?Sheepie1985 said:
Sadly it’s not unheard of. There’s a lot of speculation around the pilots but it seems no one is considering that there could have been someone in the jump seat. An off duty pilot or an engineer can sometimes sit in the jump seat if a flight’s full, or even a family member or friend.. if you tell them to not say a thing the CVR won’t pick up on someone being there..2121 said:Was saying to my dad only a matter of time before the debt or mental health report comes out. Which doenst make sense to me (to kill 300 other people) but who knows
Highly recommend "Mentour" you tube channel for explanations and learnings from plane incidents , he usually waits for final reports before issuing a video. However he has put one out with a colleague discussing the normal practice and safety procedures around the fuel switches . I've found them fascinating as a non expert, you can see how his meticulous attention to details would make him an excellent pilot, trainer etc
0 -
I fix the darn things for a living.Indianaaddick said:
How do you know that they were cutoff by someone and not a chip error?.Do you work for Boeing?.Sheepie1985 said:
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.22 -
It’s virtually impossible for one to be activated accidentally and certainly absolutely impossible that could happen to both at the same time.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
"It's a really important switch and therefore it's one that's protected against somebody just brushing against it," explains Graham Braithwaite, director of Aerospace and Aviation at Cranfield University.eastterrace6168 said:Would love to know where the fuel switches are located in the cockpit and if they could be used accidentally, maybe @Sheepie1985 could help us with his apparent knowledge 🤔In order for a pilot to move the switch, "they've got to lift it and move it very positively to the position".
1 -
Sheepie1985 said:Indianaaddick said:
How do you know that they were cutoff by someone and not a chip error?.Do you work for BoeingSheepie1985 said:Sheepie1985 said:
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.
So in your. Wealth of knowledge on this model of aircraft you would know about the chip defect, would you like me to forward the manual update of the 787 fuel cutoff chips?.
I fix the darn things for a living.Indianaaddick said:
How do you know that they were cutoff by someone and not a chip error?.Do you work for Boeing?.Sheepie1985 said:
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.2 -
Ok that being the case you are am sure aware of the fuel cutoff chip update on the 787 model.Sheepie1985 said:
I fix the darn things for a living.Indianaaddick said:
How do you know that they were cutoff by someone and not a chip error?.Do you work for Boeing?.Sheepie1985 said:
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.
I can forward the update to you from the manual if you like this way this possibility cannot be ruled out.4 - Sponsored links:
-
Whereas the switches were physically at some point switched to off…….. a faulty chip would not automatically turn the switches to an off position that has to be done manually…..it’s a fail safe physical action that’s needed.Indianaaddick said:My friend who is a Boeing mechanic said there is a known defect with the chip that controls the fuel cutoff switches, It has to be changed every couple of thousand hours or so or the cutoff will be automatic in some cases.
Maybe Air India overlooked this on its last matinence check,
He also said he had looked at the preliminary report which stated both switches were cutoff simultaneously witch is not possible
They are most probably trying to blame Air India or the pilots to deflect blame in lieu of recalls or lawsuits.
0 -
I agree just bothers me it was done 1 sec apart whoever did it if that was the case must have been pretty fast.SoundAsa£ said:
Whereas the switches were physically at some point switched to off…….. a faulty chip would not automatically turn the switches to an off position that has to be done manually…..it’s a fail safe physical action that’s needed.Indianaaddick said:My friend who is a Boeing mechanic said there is a known defect with the chip that controls the fuel cutoff switches, It has to be changed every couple of thousand hours or so or the cutoff will be automatic in some cases.
Maybe Air India overlooked this on its last matinence check,
He also said he had looked at the preliminary report which stated both switches were cutoff simultaneously witch is not possible
They are most probably trying to blame Air India or the pilots to deflect blame in lieu of recalls or lawsuits.0 -
Definitely not obvious candidates for pilot-suicide based on that description but I guess the investigators will be going through their phones and computers for any hint of depression.ME14addick said:
Very sad, one pilot was nearing retirement and the other 2 months away from his wedding.ValleyGary said:The alternative scenario of a system fault cutting fuel, although looking unlikely based on the preliminary report, is even more scary in my mind.0 -
Could you please have a look at my at Sopwith Camel, it’s making a funny noise.Sheepie1985 said:
I fix the darn things for a living.Indianaaddick said:
How do you know that they were cutoff by someone and not a chip error?.Do you work for Boeing?.Sheepie1985 said:
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.5 -
Yup that'll definitely be a computer chip issue.usetobunkin said:
Could you please have a look at my at Sopwith Camel, it’s making a funny noise.Sheepie1985 said:
I fix the darn things for a living.Indianaaddick said:
How do you know that they were cutoff by someone and not a chip error?.Do you work for Boeing?.Sheepie1985 said:
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.1 -
Indianaaddick said:
Ok that being the case you are am sure aware of the fuel cutoff chip update on the 787 model.Sheepie1985 said:
I fix the darn things for a living.Indianaaddick said:
How do you know that they were cutoff by someone and not a chip error?.Do you work for Boeing?.Sheepie1985 said:
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.
I can forward the update to you from the manual if you like this way this possibility cannot be ruled out.
30 -
Disclaimer: I know nothing and do not fix these planes for a living.Indianaaddick said:
Ok that being the case you are am sure aware of the fuel cutoff chip update on the 787 model.Sheepie1985 said:
I fix the darn things for a living.Indianaaddick said:
How do you know that they were cutoff by someone and not a chip error?.Do you work for Boeing?.Sheepie1985 said:
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.
I can forward the update to you from the manual if you like this way this possibility cannot be ruled out.
I think the point Sheepie is making, is that the flight recorder is based upon the movement of the cutoff switches, which require to be pulled up and then down.
The chip you are referring to is maybe not able to physically move those actual switches up and then down and therefore would not show in this way on the flight recorder?
Just my interpretation of the comments above.7 -
Certain parts of the American media are now briefing that the older pilot who was about to retire had had depression after his mother died, so seem to be pointing the finger in that direction (no doubt based on Boeing sources)0
-
Yes I understand the point Sheepie was making and totally.agree with what he said,Was just pointing out that there was a ongoing problem with those chips.balham red said:
Disclaimer: I know nothing and do not fix these planes for a living.Indianaaddick said:
Ok that being the case you are am sure aware of the fuel cutoff chip update on the 787 model.Sheepie1985 said:
I fix the darn things for a living.Indianaaddick said:
How do you know that they were cutoff by someone and not a chip error?.Do you work for Boeing?.Sheepie1985 said:
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.
I can forward the update to you from the manual if you like this way this possibility cannot be ruled out.
I think the point Sheepie is making, is that the flight recorder is based upon the movement of the cutoff switches, which require to be pulled up and then down.
The chip you are referring to is maybe not able to physically move those actual switches up and then down and therefore would not show in this way on the flight recorder?
Just my interpretation of the comments above.
While we have all agreed it was a pilot input to cause the resulting catastrophy I hope there is a new failsafe setup for future models of planes were both pilots have to switch off the cutoff switches.
On previous note I saw on Piers Morgan that colleagues of the pilot said he was very distraught at losing a parent and quote "I'll be joining them in a few weeks" so pilot suicide cannot be ruled out.
0 -
I think you’ve misunderstood what I’m saying. The fact is the fuel switches are recorded as being cut off by someone. What I’m saying is that recording could be a result of a computer bug, not that the cutoff itself was the result of a bug.Sheepie1985 said:
In this instance it’s not the case at all. The preliminary report is to produce facts, and at the end of the day the fact is the fuel switches were cut off by someone. That’s it. There’s no speculation in the preliminary.AddicksAddict said:
If any part of that thread of cause and effect has a computer involved, there is always the possibility of a bug in the software.Sheepie1985 said:We know the physical positions they were in. It takes the mechanical movement of the switches to be picked up by EAFR data.
0
