Dreamliner Down in India

[cncpc]

So by your reasoning the FDR can’t tell what position any switch is in, only the result down stream based on the current in the circuit? No. That isn’t how it works.

I was wrong then. Thought it was obvious when the circuit comes alive the FDR captures it as RUN and also when it is CUTOFF, whether the automatic disconnect or overridden with the master switches. I can see now why volks are migrating in unison to murder/suicide based solely on that.

I wouldn't say people are "...migrating in unison". Some part of this picture is missing.

[cncpc]

Just found this. If I remember correctly, Mary Schiavo was head of the NTSB.

Could the crash have been caused by human error?

Experts are cautious about this. US aviation analyst Mary Schiavo told the Financial Express in India that people should not draw premature conclusions, arguing that there is as yet no definitive evidence of pilot error.

She highlighted a similar incident during which one of the engines suddenly shut down midflight on an All Nippon Airways Boeing 787 during its final approach to Osaka, Japan, in 2019.

Investigators later found that the aircraft’s software had mistakenly interpreted the plane as being on the ground, triggering the thrust control malfunction accommodation system, which automatically moved the fuel switch from “run” to “cutoff” without any action from the pilots.

Schiavo warned that a similar malfunction cannot yet be ruled out in the Air India crash and stressed the importance of releasing the full cockpit voice recorder (CVR) transcript to avoid misleading interpretations.

“There is nothing here to suggest pilot suicide or murder,” she said. “The voices, words and sounds on CVRs must be carefully analysed.”

India’s Federation of Indian Pilots criticised the framing of the preliminary findings in the media this week.

Source is Al Jazeera.

[itsgrosswhatinet]

I'd be surprised to learn the switches physically moved by themselves in the All Nippon case.

[Old fella]

Some more info floating out there.

https://nypost.com/2025/07/17/world-new ... al-report/

[Dias]

This is tragic. https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/23/india/ai ... intl-latam

[jpilot77]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/faa-air- ... -1.7593295

[airway]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/faa-air- ... -1.7593295

"The head of the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said on Thursday the fatal crash last month of an Air India Boeing 787 jet does not appear to have been caused by a mechanical issue or inadvertent movement of the fuel control unit or switches.

"We can say with a high level of confidence is it doesn't appear to be a mechanical issue with the Boeing fuel control unit," Bryan Bedford, the FAA's administrator, told reporters on the sidelines of an air show in Wisconsin.

He said FAA employees had taken the units out, tested them and had inspectors get on aircraft and review them. "We feel very comfortable that this isn't an issue with inadvertent manipulation of fuel control," he said."



Ok, so the ones they tested are fine, but did they test the actual switches from the Air India flight?


.

[7ECA]

Ok, so the ones they tested are fine, but did they test the actual switches from the Air India flight?

Grasping at straws there...

Here's a quote from a BBC article on the craft/investigation dated 14 July 2025:

Mr Wilson said the report had "found no mechanical or maintenance issues with the aircraft or engines", adding that all necessary checks had been carried out before the flight.

Nevertheless, extra checks had been carried out across Air India's 787 fleet within days of the accident "out of an abundance of caution". All were found to be fit for service, he said.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce9xpgnx3vdo

[airway]

Ok, so the ones they tested are fine, but did they test the actual switches from the Air India flight?

Grasping at straws there...

Here's a quote from a BBC article on the craft/investigation dated 14 July 2025:

Mr Wilson said the report had "found no mechanical or maintenance issues with the aircraft or engines", adding that all necessary checks had been carried out before the flight.

Nevertheless, extra checks had been carried out across Air India's 787 fleet within days of the accident "out of an abundance of caution". All were found to be fit for service, he said.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce9xpgnx3vdo

That report is obviously holding back a lot of information.
There is no mention if the accident aircraft fuel control switches were checked for proper function yet. Mr. Wilson (Air India's CEO) can say what he wants, but nowhere in that report does it say that the investigators found no mechanical or maintenance issues with that aircraft. They could have found issues, but chose to leave that information out for now, like they chose to leave out which one of the pilots was doing the talking on the CVR, how many people were in the flight deck, and who was the pilot flying/pilot monitoring. All those things they surely know.




.

[jpilot77]

I could see one of them failing but both failing after being in the plane for 12 years within a second of each other…

[7ECA]

That report is obviously holding back a lot of information.
There is no mention if the accident aircraft fuel control switches were checked for proper function yet. Mr. Wilson (Air India's CEO) can say what he wants, but nowhere in that report does it say that the investigators found no mechanical or maintenance issues with that aircraft. They could have found issues, but chose to leave that information out for now, like they chose to leave out which one of the pilots was doing the talking on the CVR, how many people were in the flight deck, and who was the pilot flying/pilot monitoring. All those things they surely know.

It's a preliminary report, released within 30 days of a major accident. Of course there are going to be details left out, but we've got a pretty damned good idea of what happened based off of it. One of the pilots quite clearly shut off both the cutoff switches within a second of each other, the other pilot (clearly startled by what just occurred) reacts and asks why this occurred. The other pilot says they didn't do it. Then the switches are cycled back on...

We do know who was PF/PM. The FO was PF, and the Captain was PM - that's been in the news since about day one.

As a matter of fact there has been a significant amount of speculation in the media since the preliminary report was released, due to an alleged history of depression/mental health issues that the Captain suffered throughout his career. So the assumption is that the Captain deliberately cutoff fuel to both engines, and then when the FO yelled at them the cutoffs were set back to run...

Ultimately, we may never know the WHY, but we are certainly going to know the HOW in regards this crash.

Also, as much as I understand the desire to test the cutoff switches in the accident aeroplane, what sort of condition will anything from the cockpit of an aircraft that mushed into the side of a concrete building and exploded/caught fire?

[digits_]

Also, as much as I understand the desire to test the cutoff switches in the accident aeroplane, what sort of condition will anything from the cockpit of an aircraft that mushed into the side of a concrete building and exploded/caught fire?

It could still hold valuable information. If the detents are still functional: ok, inadvertent switch bump very unlikely.

If the detent is broken off: determine if it was caused by the crash or a pre existing condition.

You could potentially put new switches in fire or an oven and see if they degenerated in the same fashion.

I'm sure the engineers who actually designed the switches could learn more, if there's a need to investigate it further. If the FDR and CVR all show the switches were operated, it might not be worth it to test them further.

[itsgrosswhatinet]

It's interesting to me that in both the Air India and MH370 cases the pilots took actions to cover up the fact that it was a suicide/mass murder. The Air India Captain, having much less system knowledge, took actions to make sure the fuel control switches would be found in the run position. The Malaysia Airlines Captain took actions so FDR would never be found. This suggests a common train of thought or motive. Whether it's life insurance, or embarrassment to their families, or shame in their own actions, they didn't want people to know what they did.

[airway]

We do know who was PF/PM. The FO was PF, and the Captain was PM - that's been in the news since about day one.

Reference? The ones I have read I think are making assumptions about that.

[7ECA]

If the FDR and CVR all show the switches were operated, it might not be worth it to test them further.

From the preliminary report, quoted from AvHerald:

The thrust lever quadrant sustained significant thermal damage. Both thrust levers were found near the aft (idle) position. However, the EAFR data revealed that the thrust levers remained forward (takeoff thrust) until the impact. Both fuel control switch were found in the “RUN” position. (fig.13) The reverser levers were bent but were in the “stowed” position. The wiring from the TO/GA switches and autothrottle disconnect switches were visible, but heavily damaged.

Also:

The aircraft achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 Knots IAS at about 08:08:42 UTC and immediately thereafter, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec. The Engine N1 and N2 began to decrease from their take-off values as the fuel supply to the engines was cut off.

Finally:

As per the EAFR, the Engine 1 fuel cutoff switch transitioned from CUTOFF to RUN at about 08:08:52 UTC. The APU Inlet Door began opening at about 08:08:54 UTC, consistent with the APU Auto Start logic. Thereafter at 08:08:56 UTC the Engine 2 fuel cutoff switch also transitions from CUTOFF to RUN.

Reference? The ones I have read I think are making assumptions about that.

At the time of take-off, the co-pilot was flying the aircraft while the captain was monitoring.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2gy78gpnqo

[airway]

If the FDR and CVR all show the switches were operated, it might not be worth it to test them further.

From the preliminary report, quoted from AvHerald:

The thrust lever quadrant sustained significant thermal damage. Both thrust levers were found near the aft (idle) position. However, the EAFR data revealed that the thrust levers remained forward (takeoff thrust) until the impact. Both fuel control switch were found in the “RUN” position. (fig.13) The reverser levers were bent but were in the “stowed” position. The wiring from the TO/GA switches and autothrottle disconnect switches were visible, but heavily damaged.

Also:

The aircraft achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 Knots IAS at about 08:08:42 UTC and immediately thereafter, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec. The Engine N1 and N2 began to decrease from their take-off values as the fuel supply to the engines was cut off.

Finally:

As per the EAFR, the Engine 1 fuel cutoff switch transitioned from CUTOFF to RUN at about 08:08:52 UTC. The APU Inlet Door began opening at about 08:08:54 UTC, consistent with the APU Auto Start logic. Thereafter at 08:08:56 UTC the Engine 2 fuel cutoff switch also transitions from CUTOFF to RUN.

Reference? The ones I have read I think are making assumptions about that.

At the time of take-off, the co-pilot was flying the aircraft while the captain was monitoring.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2gy78gpnqo

Yes, there is lots of description of the switch positions in the report. That's not my point. There is no indication anywhere that the accident aircraft switches were checked for proper function. Particularly the possibility of a problem with the lock out gate.



.

[7ECA]

Yes, there is lots of description of the switch positions in the report. That's not my point. There is no indication anywhere that the accident aircraft switches were checked for proper function. Particularly the possibility of a problem with the lock out gate.

So what, this crash was the 1-in-1,000,000 Black Swan event?

Or, does it make significantly more sense that this is an Occam's Razor situation, and the cause truly is the simplest scenario - the Captain flipped both cutoff switches within a second of each other immediately after rotation?

It seems like the AAIB is really going off into the weeds trying to investigate this as potentially being a bizarre fault with the FADEC or TCMA (Thrust Control Malfunction Accommodation) software may be to blame, or bad solder joints... or two guarded/detent switches that somehow managed to both fail almost simultaneously.

Yes, there was an FAA advisory bulletin about some number of cutoff switches that ended up being stalled in 737s (and possibly 787s) that may have had the locking detent disabled. But, the risk was still considered low enough of accidental switch movement as to not warrant an emergency AD. But that bulletin came out years ago, and yes Air India did not inspect their fleet at the time due to it being an advisory bulletin... But come on, this is getting a bit ridiculous. I'd hazard a guess that there's quite a push to save face here, and looking for alternate theories or explanations is just a part of this; not unlike the calls from various industry groups saying it is undignified to speculate on the cause of the accident prior to a final report being released.

[cncpc]

It certainly is undignified to speculate, or declare outright, that a crew member committed mass murder/suicide until the final report is released. Yes, suicide does arise as one possibility, but that is far more than a one in a million odds against scenario.

[DanWEC]

If the FDR and CVR all show the switches were operated, it might not be worth it to test them further.

From the preliminary report, quoted from AvHerald:

The thrust lever quadrant sustained significant thermal damage. Both thrust levers were found near the aft (idle) position. However, the EAFR data revealed that the thrust levers remained forward (takeoff thrust) until the impact. Both fuel control switch were found in the “RUN” position. (fig.13) The reverser levers were bent but were in the “stowed” position. The wiring from the TO/GA switches and autothrottle disconnect switches were visible, but heavily damaged.

Also:

The aircraft achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 Knots IAS at about 08:08:42 UTC and immediately thereafter, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec. The Engine N1 and N2 began to decrease from their take-off values as the fuel supply to the engines was cut off.

Finally:

As per the EAFR, the Engine 1 fuel cutoff switch transitioned from CUTOFF to RUN at about 08:08:52 UTC. The APU Inlet Door began opening at about 08:08:54 UTC, consistent with the APU Auto Start logic. Thereafter at 08:08:56 UTC the Engine 2 fuel cutoff switch also transitions from CUTOFF to RUN.

Reference? The ones I have read I think are making assumptions about that.

At the time of take-off, the co-pilot was flying the aircraft while the captain was monitoring.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2gy78gpnqo

Yes, there is lots of description of the switch positions in the report. That's not my point. There is no indication anywhere that the accident aircraft switches were checked for proper function. Particularly the possibility of a problem with the lock out gate.



.

The accident aircraft's switches have been recovered and observed by the FAA, with no defects found, presumably.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/faa-air-i ... -1.7593295

[itsgrosswhatinet]

cnpc, I often see this argument that no one should speculate about accidents on the accidents forum but I struggle to understand it. I would suggest avoiding the forum if the speculation bothers you. I assure you that your '1 in a million chance' is the leading theory amongst airline pilots.

[cdnavater]

cnpc, I often see this argument that no one should speculate about accidents on the accidents forum but I struggle to understand it. I would suggest avoiding the forum if the speculation bothers you. I assure you that your '1 in a million chance' is the leading theory amongst airline pilots.

Seconded!

[Eric Janson]

Yes, there is lots of description of the switch positions in the report. That's not my point. There is no indication anywhere that the accident aircraft switches were checked for proper function. Particularly the possibility of a problem with the lock out gate.

There is no issue with the fuel switches. Never has been.

This is the Asian " Game of Shape" where an alternative narrative is being created to deflect blame. Ignore.

It isn't possible to move the fuel switches except by deliberate action due to their design - jmho.

The sounds of these switches being moved will be clearly audible on the CVR - backed up by FDR data. Once they had both the CVR and FDR data they would have synced both recordings.

The interim report is pretty clear about the sequence of events - jmho.








.

[itsgrosswhatinet]

Are we sure the person that moved the switches to cutoff is the same person that moved them back to run? The FO could have noticed the Captain had moved them to cutoff, asked him why he did that, and then the FO could have been the one to move them back to run.

[cncpc]

cnpc, I often see this argument that no one should speculate about accidents on the accidents forum but I struggle to understand it. I would suggest avoiding the forum if the speculation bothers you. I assure you that your '1 in a million chance' is the leading theory amongst airline pilots.

Seconded!

am well on record here as speaking against some taboo on speculation. I'm not one making that argument.

What I am against is not speculation, but accusation of criminal acts by a dead pilot. Those who make those accusations demean themselves and the profession. I don't care if they are airline pilots, drone pilots, or current on the Starship Enterprise. Police and prosecutors are the ones who make criminal accusations.

This is far from a settled matter.

I think it is settled that the first officer was PF. I would like to know when normal went to abnormal in the crew conversation. At a time when positive rate was clearly established, did the Captain call "positive rate". Was that followed by "gear up" from the FO?. You would think that would have happened by top of climb, such as it was. If there was no positive rate call, that is another piece of evidence that supports the suicide theory. If there was, that argues against it. If you are going to stop the engines and end it, who cares about positive rate?

Is the only way you become aware that the fuel has been cut off by looking at the switches? How is it that we have so easily abandoned an equally out there theory, that the wrongful actor was the first officer?

Has there been any supporting evidence for the contention that the Captain was not only suicidal, but also intended, for no reason we know, to murder almost 300 human beings. A note, some comment, some deficiency in the paperwork filed for the flight?

Suicide is a possibility. It is not yet the definitive answer. Let us say the Captain survived but the plane crash. How likely, on the evidence out there, is it that he could be charged and convicted for these crimes? Is it the question "who turned off the fuel?"

[digits_]

Is it the question "who turned off the fuel?"

And just as important: 'why?'

cnpc, I often see this argument that no one should speculate about accidents on the accidents forum but I struggle to understand it. I would suggest avoiding the forum if the speculation bothers you. I assure you that your '1 in a million chance' is the leading theory amongst airline pilots.

Seconded!

Functional fuel switches only indicate somebody flipped the switches. It does not tell one if it was intentional, a mistake. Or how that mistake happened. Both options are possible. Perhaps not as likely, but without proof I don't see much benefit by dismissing all theories other than murder/suicide. If it turns out to be murder/suicide, there's very little to learn from it. I also suspect if you or a loved one were involved in a similar incident, you would like to be given the benefit of the doubt.

Until all this has been cleared up beyond reasonable doubt, I see very little value in blaming the captain with misplaced confidence.

I find the speculations after an accident often quite enlightening. It leads to discussing and analyzing a hundred potential crashes that never happened, that might spark a bright idea on a fateful day when things go completely south.