Air Worthiness Directives Page: 4 of 4

B2N2
July 16, 2025, 15:13:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11923752

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dani

I really don't get it why you oppose to the thought it could happen on any Boeing aircraft. Since they are all very similar switches. Maybe it's even possible to interchange some of them. There are so many errors a maintenance organization can make. Fake parts?
What really frightens me is that you and others resolutely block even to think about the possibility. Because, let's be honest, the probability is not zero (and I would say nearer to 1 than to 0).

I have never moved such a switch, since I fly Airbus.
Let me ask you your question differently: How many times have you moved a faulty switch?
I know, that you and many others would immediatly identify such a bad switch and would render the aircraft as not airworthy. This is not the question. The question is: Has the Air India crew on that day identified the fault. And if yes, have they continued the flight preparation.
You don't need a suicide theory to explain such a simple course of action.

Dani

What are the chances of both switches going bad on the same flight?
As stated many times previously the throttle quadrant was replaced well after the 2018 SB.
Quadrants can be replaced for a myriad of reasons, according to the report none that had anything to do with the switches.

If there was even a remote suspicion of the switches being at fault an emergency AD would already have been issued.

Subjects Air Worthiness Directives

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

1 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

za9ra22
July 16, 2025, 15:25:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11923764

Quote:

Originally Posted by B2N2

If there was even a remote suspicion of the switches being at fault an emergency AD would already have been issued.

This is certainly true, and as the preliminary report states in the 'progress of investigation' summary:
"At this stage of investigation, there are no recommended actions to B787-8 and/or GE GEnx-1B engine operators and manufacturers."

While possible (just) that the switches were so badly damaged that it was not possible to determine they would operate properly otherwise, it's a very long stretch to think the investigation would miss a potential fault in what is the singular focus of the entire incident.

I don't see any supportable basis on which it can be credibly argued these switches are causative.

Subjects Air Worthiness Directives Preliminary Report

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

5 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

1stspotter
July 16, 2025, 15:49:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11923781

Quote:

Originally Posted by B2N2

Everything in the preliminary report suggest one of the pilots moved both switches seconds after the liftoff to the CUTOFF position.
If there was a 0,0001 percent chance the switches were faulty and could have moved because of gravity of an object hitting is, there would be a safety bulletin released to all B787 operators

There has not been such a bulletin.

The reason why the report does not mention which of the pilots ask " why did you cutoff ? " is unknown. We also do not know why it was written the switches ' transitioned' instead of ' moved' .
My guess it was either for political reasons or because of a possible criminal investigation.

For a pilot there is no reason to set both switches to cutoff without any reason. There was no engine fire. There was no discussion in the cockpit about using the switches.
Nothing. A mistake is extremely unlikely. There is no reason why the hands of a pilot needs to be near the switches. I do not believe in a brain fart.

Subjects Action slip Air Worthiness Directives Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Switches Pilot "Why did you cut off" Preliminary Report RUN/CUTOFF

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

1 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

JustusW
February 02, 2026, 16:32:00 GMT
permalink Post: 12031183

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mb194dc

Very unusual events do occur sometimes. There can't be an easily repeatable problem with 787 cut off switches. Or wee see it often given 1175 of them are in service. That doesn't mean there isn't some ultra edge case problem though...

What odds a falling sun visor will shut an engine down, but that happened in December on 737 max 8.

Well actually... There was a common problem with those switches. It was the topic of a rather old Airworthiness Directive and discussed extensively. Going off memory alone it was possible for the detents to be misaligned or otherwise damaged preventing the switches from correctly latching into either locked position.
As per the AD they _should_ have been replaced. It _should_ have been impossible for any switches with the issue to still be used on an aircraft over a decade after the AD. But maybe Air India just decided to not follow that AD? Or maybe there is a small subset of 787's where they didn't? And what the hell did they check last year when they supposedly went over all their 787's and inspected that very set of switches?!
I'm baffled and a bit speechless right now...

Subjects Air Worthiness Directives Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Switches Fuel Cutoff Switches (detent)

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

4 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

B2N2 July 16, 2025, 15:13:00 GMT permalink Post: 11923752	Quote: Originally Posted by Dani I really don't get it why you oppose to the thought it could happen on any Boeing aircraft. Since they are all very similar switches. Maybe it's even possible to interchange some of them. There are so many errors a maintenance organization can make. Fake parts? What really frightens me is that you and others resolutely block even to think about the possibility. Because, let's be honest, the probability is not zero (and I would say nearer to 1 than to 0). I have never moved such a switch, since I fly Airbus. Let me ask you your question differently: How many times have you moved a faulty switch? I know, that you and many others would immediatly identify such a bad switch and would render the aircraft as not airworthy. This is not the question. The question is: Has the Air India crew on that day identified the fault. And if yes, have they continued the flight preparation. You don't need a suicide theory to explain such a simple course of action. Dani What are the chances of both switches going bad on the same flight? As stated many times previously the throttle quadrant was replaced well after the 2018 SB. Quadrants can be replaced for a myriad of reasons, according to the report none that had anything to do with the switches. If there was even a remote suspicion of the switches being at fault an emergency AD would already have been issued. Subjects Air Worthiness Directives Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. 1 recorded likes for this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
za9ra22 July 16, 2025, 15:25:00 GMT permalink Post: 11923764	Quote: Originally Posted by B2N2 If there was even a remote suspicion of the switches being at fault an emergency AD would already have been issued. This is certainly true, and as the preliminary report states in the 'progress of investigation' summary: "At this stage of investigation, there are no recommended actions to B787-8 and/or GE GEnx-1B engine operators and manufacturers." While possible (just) that the switches were so badly damaged that it was not possible to determine they would operate properly otherwise, it's a very long stretch to think the investigation would miss a potential fault in what is the singular focus of the entire incident. I don't see any supportable basis on which it can be credibly argued these switches are causative. Subjects Air Worthiness Directives Preliminary Report Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. 5 recorded likes for this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
1stspotter July 16, 2025, 15:49:00 GMT permalink Post: 11923781	Quote: Originally Posted by B2N2 What are the chances of both switches going bad on the same flight? As stated many times previously the throttle quadrant was replaced well after the 2018 SB. Quadrants can be replaced for a myriad of reasons, according to the report none that had anything to do with the switches. If there was even a remote suspicion of the switches being at fault an emergency AD would already have been issued. Everything in the preliminary report suggest one of the pilots moved both switches seconds after the liftoff to the CUTOFF position. If there was a 0,0001 percent chance the switches were faulty and could have moved because of gravity of an object hitting is, there would be a safety bulletin released to all B787 operators There has not been such a bulletin. The reason why the report does not mention which of the pilots ask " why did you cutoff ? " is unknown. We also do not know why it was written the switches ' transitioned' instead of ' moved' . My guess it was either for political reasons or because of a possible criminal investigation. For a pilot there is no reason to set both switches to cutoff without any reason. There was no engine fire. There was no discussion in the cockpit about using the switches. Nothing. A mistake is extremely unlikely. There is no reason why the hands of a pilot needs to be near the switches. I do not believe in a brain fart. Subjects Action slip Air Worthiness Directives Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Switches Pilot "Why did you cut off" Preliminary Report RUN/CUTOFF Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. 1 recorded likes for this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
JustusW February 02, 2026, 16:32:00 GMT permalink Post: 12031183	Quote: Originally Posted by Mb194dc Very unusual events do occur sometimes. There can't be an easily repeatable problem with 787 cut off switches. Or wee see it often given 1175 of them are in service. That doesn't mean there isn't some ultra edge case problem though... What odds a falling sun visor will shut an engine down, but that happened in December on 737 max 8. Well actually... There was a common problem with those switches. It was the topic of a rather old Airworthiness Directive and discussed extensively. Going off memory alone it was possible for the detents to be misaligned or otherwise damaged preventing the switches from correctly latching into either locked position. As per the AD they _should_ have been replaced. It _should_ have been impossible for any switches with the issue to still be used on an aircraft over a decade after the AD. But maybe Air India just decided to not follow that AD? Or maybe there is a small subset of 787's where they didn't? And what the hell did they check last year when they supposedly went over all their 787's and inspected that very set of switches?! I'm baffled and a bit speechless right now... Subjects Air Worthiness Directives Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Switches Fuel Cutoff Switches (detent) Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. 4 recorded likes for this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Posts about: "Air Worthiness Directives" [Posts: 64 Page: 4 of 4]¶