←back to thread

Preliminary report into Air India crash released

(www.bbc.co.uk)
293 points cjr | 2 comments | 11 Jul 25 20:23 UTC | HN request time: 0.557s | source
Show context
decimalenough ◴[11 Jul 25 21:24 UTC] No.44536914[source]▶
> 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.

So the fuel supply was cut off intentionally. The switches in question are also built so they cannot be triggered accidentally, they need to be unlocked first by pulling them out.

> In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff. The other pilot responded that he did not do so.

And both pilots deny doing it.

It's difficult to conclude anything other than murder-suicide.

replies(25): >>44536947 #>>44536950 #>>44536951 #>>44536962 #>>44536979 #>>44537027 #>>44537520 #>>44537554 #>>44538264 #>>44538281 #>>44538337 #>>44538692 #>>44538779 #>>44538814 #>>44538840 #>>44539178 #>>44539475 #>>44539507 #>>44539508 #>>44539530 #>>44539532 #>>44539749 #>>44539950 #>>44540178 #>>44541039 #
ceejayoz ◴[11 Jul 25 21:29 UTC] No.44536950[source]▶
> 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.

> As per the EAFR, the Engine 1 fuel cutoff switch transitioned from CUTOFF to RUN at about 08:08:52 UTC.

Damn. That's pretty quick to diagnose and take action.

Boeing's probably gonna have a big sigh of relief over this one.

replies(2): >>44538060 #>>44540077 #
1. dehrmann ◴[12 Jul 25 00:03 UTC] No.44538060[source]▶
> Boeing's probably gonna have a big sigh of relief over this one.

The 787 is 15 years old, and this particular plane was 10 years old. It always seemed unlikely to be a major, new issue. My money was actually on maintenance.

replies(1): >>44540258 #
2. sofixa ◴[12 Jul 25 08:17 UTC] No.44540258[source]▶
While unlikely, there have been issues before that took decades to surface (e.g. Aloha Airlines where a 737 manufactured more than a decade earlier became a cabriolet due to Boeing underestimating sea water corrosion and short flight cycles), or the 737 rudder issues where the planes were also 10+ years old.