Would you fly on a Boeing 737 Max?

[scaramanga]

Or the people that perform (or don't) the servicing and maintenance on the equipment.

Or (as in the case of the 737 Max) the pilots who don't RTFM.

From my initial look at the report, looks like one or both of the above.

FAA suggested that the locking mechanism on the switches needs regular maintenance checks. It was only advisory, so Air India apparently decided it wasn't worth the bother.

Then FO FUs and everything goes to brick.

 

[Grays_1890]

From my initial look at the report, looks like one or both of the above.

FAA suggested that the locking mechanism on the switches needs regular maintenance checks. It was only advisory, so Air India apparently decided it wasn't worth the bother.

Then FO FUs and everything goes to brick.

Yeh likely to have contributed but like someone saying earlier that even if locking was not working that switches would unlikely be able to just turn them selves to the extent needed to switch off, sounding IMO like pilot error, but that could be wrong.......

 

[Kandi1977]

So, the initial reports suggest the air India crash was deliberate by at least one of the pilots. The fuel selectors had both been set to cut off, and never moved back to 'run' mode. And that isn't something that could accour accidentally. They are spring loaded switches that can only be moved on purpose. This action was done just before take off, which immediately triggered the deployment of the RAT. When you get a dual engine failure, procedure for going through the checklist will take around 60 seconds, which was about the total flight time in this horrible "accident", which now seems to be a criminal act by at least one of the pilots. Very sad.
We now know what happend, but we'll probably never know why.

 

[scaramanga]

So, the initial reports suggest the air India crash was deliberate by at least one of the pilots. The fuel selectors had both been set to cut off, and never moved back to 'run' mode. And that isn't something that could accour accidentally. They are spring loaded switches that can only be moved on purpose. This action was done just before take off, which immediately triggered the deployment of the RAT. When you get a dual engine failure, procedure for going through the checklist will take around 60 seconds, which was about the total flight time in this horrible "accident", which now seems to be a criminal act by at least one of the pilots. Very sad.
We now know what happend, but we'll probably never know why.

I certainly wouldn't say deliberate at this point.

Just have a search for how often flaps have been selected instead of gear, or vice versa. These things happen, they happen to very experienced pilots too. Although I don't think this has ever happened at low altitude before.

 

[Trixster]

So, the initial reports suggest the air India crash was deliberate by at least one of the pilots. The fuel selectors had both been set to cut off, and never moved back to 'run' mode. And that isn't something that could accour accidentally. They are spring loaded switches that can only be moved on purpose. This action was done just before take off, which immediately triggered the deployment of the RAT. When you get a dual engine failure, procedure for going through the checklist will take around 60 seconds, which was about the total flight time in this horrible "accident", which now seems to be a criminal act by at least one of the pilots. Very sad.
We now know what happend, but we'll probably never know why.

Yet media claims the conversation was "Why did you do cut-off" to which the reply was Ï didn't"- and then they were put back to run mode and the left engine had restarted and was regaining thrust and the right was spooling up. Too low to do anything meaningful unfortunately, but would not make it crystal clear that this is deliberate just yet.

 

[Kandi1977]

Yet media claims the conversation was "Why did you do cut-off" to which the reply was Ï didn't"- and then they were put back to run mode and the left engine had restarted and was regaining thrust and the right was spooling up. Too low to do anything meaningful unfortunately, but would not make it crystal clear that this is deliberate just yet.

The fuel selectors were, according to the sources I've seen, in the cut off position in the remains of the roosterpit. And they can't just go there by themselves. It has to be a deliberate action. There are scenarios where you put them in cut off, among them, engine failure, but only momentarily. You move them to cut off, then immediately put them back in run mode. The whole thing screams of a pilot with psychological problems and a death wish.

 

[scaramanga]

The fuel selectors were, according to the sources I've seen, in the cut off position in the remains of the roosterpit. And they can't just go there by themselves. It has to be a deliberate action. There are scenarios where you put them in cut off, among them, engine failure, but only momentarily. You move them to cut off, then immediately put them back in run mode. The whole thing screams of a pilot with psychological problems and a death wish.

They were in run at the time of the crash and are still in the photos that have been released. They're to the fore, which is run, with aft being cut.

Strangely, the throttles are all aft in the photos, but that may have been something done once there was no saving it - trying not to have jet engines on full burn as they hit a residential building.

 

[Kandi1977]

Two separate pilots view of the initial report. Both are of the opinion that this was a deliberate action from one of the two pilots.

 

[Silly McSilly Face]

Yeah the investigation team has established the "what":
- Shortly after V1/rotation both fuel switches were set to cut-off. This occurred left then right with a one-second interval which is consistent with human operation of the procedure to shut them off rather than a technical failure of the switches (although for completeness the report mentions the bulletin about incorrectly installed switches)
- The RAT deploys due to loss of thrust in both engines immediately after takeoff.
- One of the pilots asks the other why they cut the engines off to which the reply is that they didn't.
- The switches are then placed from cut off to run one after the other
- Both engines relit (can tell due to readings from exhaust emissions)
- Pilot put in a call to the tower with a mayday
- By the time of the crash the left engine had spooled up and was beginning to provide some thrust, the right engine had not finished spooling up.

A video I watched read out the list of experts that had been requested to join the full investigation team and it does appear as though establishing the "why" is going to be an investigation into the mental state of at least one of the pilots....

 

[scaramanga]

Yeah the investigation team has established the "what":
- Shortly after V1/rotation both fuel switches were set to cut-off. This occurred left then right with a one-second interval which is consistent with human operation of the procedure to shut them off rather than a technical failure of the switches (although for completeness the report mentions the bulletin about incorrectly installed switches)
- The RAT deploys due to loss of thrust in both engines immediately after takeoff.
- One of the pilots asks the other why they cut the engines off to which the reply is that they didn't.
- The switches are then placed from cut off to run one after the other
- Both engines relit (can tell due to readings from exhaust emissions)
- Pilot put in a call to the tower with a mayday
- By the time of the crash the left engine had spooled up and was beginning to provide some thrust, the right engine had not finished spooling up.

A video I watched read out the list of experts that had been requested to join the full investigation team and it does appear as though establishing the "why" is going to be an investigation into the mental state of at least one of the pilots....

It's not clear which pilot said what, but I'd assume the politeness of "Why did you do that?" means it's the First Officer asking the Captain, rather than the "WTF did you do that for" that would probably have been the other way around.

It's also very likely that the FO would have been the one flying, so wouldn't have a spare hand to move controls around at that time - it's about the most busy point in any flight for a pilot.

The bit I can't fathom is the 4 second gap between placing each switch back to run. It took a second to cut them, why so long to run them?

 

[Silly McSilly Face]

It's not clear which pilot said what, but I'd assume the politeness of "Why did you do that?" means it's the First Officer asking the Captain, rather than the "WTF did you do that for" that would probably have been the other way around.

It's also very likely that the FO would have been the one flying, so wouldn't have a spare hand to move controls around at that time - it's about the most busy point in any flight for a pilot.

The bit I can't fathom is the 4 second gap between placing each switch back to run. It took a second to cut them, why so long to run them?

Id imagine that if it was indeed the FO putting the switches back that its because hes juggling flying the plane and thinking about what the f*** to do. As you say is normally the FO flying and captain observing.

 

[Aldo]

Aeronautical experts with detailed knowledge of the mechanics of a Boeing 737 on a football forum. Who knew?

Oh yeah, AI knew.