stickstirrer
July 11, 2025, 21:25:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919827

Switch Moovement

Are there any switches that would normally be selected/ moved immediately after take off? The suggestion being that if they were moved due to a conscious act, the wrong switches were selected inadvertently. I am not suggesting that the switches might not still have moved for other reasons eg wear, not properly gated? But for both switches to move from Run to Cut Off within a few seconds of each other suggests a deliberate, if accidental, selection? God forbid if it was a deliberate, intentional action😞 For a member of the crew to identify, so quickly, that the two switches had been moved and then reinstated them was, I would suggest, miraculous\x85..unless the incorrect switch selections had been observed\x85\x85\x85

5 users liked this post.

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

digits_
July 11, 2025, 21:48:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919851

Quote:

Originally Posted by GroundedSpanner

With a one second gap between them?

Again, you can not conclude that from the report.

Different inputs are sampled at different rates. Some very basic info here: https://scaledanalytics.com/2023/04/...uses-767-data/

It's highly likely switch positions are only sampled at 1Hz, and not at 100 Hz. For engine parameters you'll likely want a higher sample rate, as the whole engine could go from perfectly fine to exploded in less than a second.

If you had something like:

08:08:42.96 UTC: cut off switch 1
08:08:43.01 UTC: cut off switch 2

It would likely be recorded as:

08:08:42 UTC: cut off switch 1
08:08:43 UTC: cut off switch 2

Leading you to believe there was one second between these 2 actions, whereas it was actually only 50ms.

19 users liked this post.

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

Right Engine
July 11, 2025, 21:48:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919852

The Fuel Cut Off switches on a 787 have to be pulled up (out of \x91run\x92) and whilst held up, they are then moved backwards to the \x91cut off\x92 position. They are designed this way so loose objects can not move them to cut off. They can only be selected to cut-off by pulling and moving rearward in the same movement.

7 users liked this post.

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

BrogulT
July 11, 2025, 21:48:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919853

Quote:

Originally Posted by KSINGH

I doubt you\x92d have got such immediate positive intervention from most line crews faced with the same circumstances and time

I think most line pilots, upon noticing that the fuel levers were in cutoff right after rotation, would immediately turn them back on. I don't think it would take 10 seconds--or even 5--to get that handled as I imagine most professional pilots would quickly grasp the seriousness of the problem. The only explanation I can think of for even that short delay--one that may have made a big difference--is the authority gradient between Captain and FO. But the preliminary report doesn't give us the level of detail we'd all like to have so it probably isn't possible to 100% support any specific conclusion just yet.

8 users liked this post.

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

PPRuNeUser548247
July 11, 2025, 21:50:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919854

Agreed, it's most unfortunate that that the preliminary report hasn’t closed off speculation, it's simply created opportunity for more.

It confirms that both fuel cutoff switches were moved to OFF at Vr, within a one second interval which is as extreme and inexplicable as it gets. Then it gives us a CVR quote that’s so neutered, "Why did you cut off?” / “I didn’t”, that it raises more questions than it answers. If the goal was to reassure or clarify, it’s had the opposite effect.

5 users liked this post.

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

Engineless
July 11, 2025, 21:51:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919857

Quote:

Originally Posted by mh370rip

The phrase in the report is "switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position".
Does the FDR actually have some input of the physical position of the switches or is it just measuring the output signal voltage
which might be changed by a momentary short from liquid or swarf.
Both signals go to cutoff within 1 second but then one recovers four seconds after the other.
Surely a pilot discovering a turned off switch would have both back on in less than four seconds.

That's a very good question.

5 users liked this post.

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

Diff Tail Shim
July 11, 2025, 21:52:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919860

Actually, why are switches that are only really required on the ground or in an engine shut down event where they are? Embraer's have the switches out of the way on an overhead panel and as well as detent locked, have a protective guard, one has to physically lift. If the PF had to physically carry out the engine shut down on an Embraer, he would have to raise his arm. Would be obvious to the PnF.

Last edited by Saab Dastard; 11th July 2025 at 21:55 . Reason: Deleted post quote removed

8 users liked this post.

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

alexmclean
July 11, 2025, 21:54:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919862

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kraftstoffvondesibel

So, yes, switches.
either
1/deliberately cut off by someone in the cockpit, or
2/placed in an intermediate gate position possible due to wear or wrong installation, happens during engine start, and then vibrates or bumps to cut-off during the take off roll or
3/some kind of liquid or other contamination in the LRU shorting both and cycling them after 8 seconds brought them electrically back to RUN.

Anyone got other ideas?

In the case of (2) or (3), would the expected response be "Why did you cutoff"?

I would have thought a pilot would notice the engines spooling down, and comment on that. To immediately jump to the cutoff switches as the cause rather implies something drew attention to the switches.

Then there is a 10+ second gap before the switches are set to run again. I can't think of any good reason why the PNF would have taken so long to correct an accidental or deliberate manipulation of the switches.

7 users liked this post.

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

PPRuNeUser548247
July 11, 2025, 21:55:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919864

Quote:

Originally Posted by GroundedSpanner

One item in the report is the position of the LG Lever - Down.
Given the lack of a full transcript, and in trying to defend the crewmembers intentions , Is it possible that at the point of "Positive Rate - Gear Up" - PM Brain farted, and performed a different muscle memory action? Thus they would deny moving the Switches - and take a few seconds to compute what they just did?

The landing gear lever is forward and up on the centre instrument panel, adjacent to the PFD. The two fuel control switches are aft and low, on the thrust pedestal. There's no reasonable way to confuse one for the other in terms of position, hand movement or 'muscle memory'.

6 users liked this post.

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

Kraftstoffvondesibel
July 11, 2025, 21:57:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919867

Quote:

Originally Posted by Engineless

That's a very good question.

It can only know their electrical, not mechanical positions. Think about it, how would that work?

Would love to see some kind of accelerometer reading of the moment the switches went to cut off. Or even cockpit area audio.

They will figure it out.

2 users liked this post.

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

za9ra22
July 11, 2025, 22:00:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919868

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brigadier

Agreed, it's most unfortunate that that the preliminary report hasn\x92t closed off speculation, it's simply created opportunity for more.

It confirms that both fuel cutoff switches were moved to OFF at Vr, within a one second interval which is as extreme and inexplicable as it gets. Then it gives us a CVR quote that\x92s so neutered, "Why did you cut off?\x94 / \x93I didn\x92t\x94, that it raises more questions than it answers. If the goal was to reassure or clarify, it\x92s had the opposite effect.

Neither pilot was likely speaking in order to be recorded for posterity, so that 'conversation' makes perfect sense in a situation where there is high stress and a great deal of confusion.

As to the report not closing off speculation, that isn't it's purpose. It is there to report the facts as they are found. It must also be said that speculation is not in any place but the eye of the beholder.

6 users liked this post.

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

KSINGH
July 11, 2025, 22:04:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919872

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brigadier

I\x92m not saying this applies to this situation but it has been discussed extensively previously that despite their different positions and tactile features flaps have been raised when gear up has been commanded and vice versa

3 users liked this post.

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

Mrshed
July 11, 2025, 22:04:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919873

Quote:

Originally Posted by mh370rip

The phrase in the report is "switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position".
Does the FDR actually have some input of the physical position of the switches or is it just measuring the output signal voltage
which might be changed by a momentary short from liquid or swarf.
Both signals go to cutoff within 1 second but then one recovers four seconds after the other.
Surely a pilot discovering a turned off switch would have both back on in less than four seconds.

The fact that one of the pilots verbally asked why they were off, presumably from visually observing this (?), would seem to rule out a short?

11 users liked this post.

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

Diff Tail Shim
July 11, 2025, 22:04:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919874

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brigadier

The landing gear lever is forward and up on the centre instrument panel, adjacent to the PFD. The fuel control switches are aft and low, on the thrust pedestal. There's no reasonable way to confuse one for the other in terms of position, hand movement or 'muscle memory'.

No there is not. Further investigation will likely see if the locking detents were in a decent state or not. TBQH, such a switch should be properly guarded. Like a Embraer is, like other types that one sees with switches one has to lift a guard to operate and is locked on with the guard in position. Boeing designers found out again in not making processes fool proof?

3 users liked this post.

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

Kraftstoffvondesibel
July 11, 2025, 22:04:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919875

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diff Tail Shim

I raised this on one of the other threads, they are supposed to be isolated systems, and I am sure they are according to electromechanical tradition, but for both human factors and electromechanical reasons, should\x92nt they be off to each side of the cockpit to be considered isolated?

4 users liked this post.

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

GroundedSpanner
July 11, 2025, 22:05:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919876

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brigadier

Understood - Absolutely no way of 'confusing' the two very different items in very different places. I'm suggesting more of a 'why did I just put my car keys in the fridge? issue.

17 users liked this post.

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

Mrshed
July 11, 2025, 22:06:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919877

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexmclean

Exactly right.

You need to take the audio together with the switch data, not in isolation.

The two combined would appear to rule out a lot of options that the data alone would leave possible.

4 users liked this post.

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

eagle21
July 11, 2025, 22:06:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919878

Out of interest, hypothetically if the captain was an instructor, is there a possibility that any kind of muscle memory from simulated failures in the simulator may have been triggered?

Let\x92s say that you are having to retrain another pilot on v1 cut handling whilst you occupy the P1 seat. Temptation may be to use the fuel cut off switches to save time rather than going back to the sim operator panel to reprogram the failure.

2 users liked this post.

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

Engineless
July 11, 2025, 22:07:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919881

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kraftstoffvondesibel

It can only know their electrical, not mechanical positions. Think about it, how would that work?

Would love to see some kind of accelerometer reading of the moment the switches went to cut off. Or even cockpit area audio.

They will figure it out.

A douple-pole switch. One pole used for FDR signal for the physcial switch position. The other pole for the electrical switching circuit.

3 users liked this post.

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

EnerJi
July 11, 2025, 22:08:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11919884

I know it's not a popular opinion around here but it seems like a flight deck camera would be quite useful right about now to determine whether either pilot's hands strayed near the fuel cutoff switches at the recorded time.

21 users liked this post.

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

stickstirrer July 11, 2025, 21:25:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919827	Switch Moovement Are there any switches that would normally be selected/ moved immediately after take off? The suggestion being that if they were moved due to a conscious act, the wrong switches were selected inadvertently. I am not suggesting that the switches might not still have moved for other reasons eg wear, not properly gated? But for both switches to move from Run to Cut Off within a few seconds of each other suggests a deliberate, if accidental, selection? God forbid if it was a deliberate, intentional action😞 For a member of the crew to identify, so quickly, that the two switches had been moved and then reinstated them was, I would suggest, miraculous\x85..unless the incorrect switch selections had been observed\x85\x85\x85 5 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
digits_ July 11, 2025, 21:48:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919851	Quote: Originally Posted by GroundedSpanner With a one second gap between them? Again, you can not conclude that from the report. Different inputs are sampled at different rates. Some very basic info here: https://scaledanalytics.com/2023/04/...uses-767-data/ It's highly likely switch positions are only sampled at 1Hz, and not at 100 Hz. For engine parameters you'll likely want a higher sample rate, as the whole engine could go from perfectly fine to exploded in less than a second. If you had something like: 08:08:42.96 UTC: cut off switch 1 08:08:43.01 UTC: cut off switch 2 It would likely be recorded as: 08:08:42 UTC: cut off switch 1 08:08:43 UTC: cut off switch 2 Leading you to believe there was one second between these 2 actions, whereas it was actually only 50ms. 19 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Right Engine July 11, 2025, 21:48:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919852	The Fuel Cut Off switches on a 787 have to be pulled up (out of \x91run\x92) and whilst held up, they are then moved backwards to the \x91cut off\x92 position. They are designed this way so loose objects can not move them to cut off. They can only be selected to cut-off by pulling and moving rearward in the same movement. 7 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
BrogulT July 11, 2025, 21:48:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919853	Quote: Originally Posted by KSINGH I doubt you\x92d have got such immediate positive intervention from most line crews faced with the same circumstances and time I think most line pilots, upon noticing that the fuel levers were in cutoff right after rotation, would immediately turn them back on. I don't think it would take 10 seconds--or even 5--to get that handled as I imagine most professional pilots would quickly grasp the seriousness of the problem. The only explanation I can think of for even that short delay--one that may have made a big difference--is the authority gradient between Captain and FO. But the preliminary report doesn't give us the level of detail we'd all like to have so it probably isn't possible to 100% support any specific conclusion just yet. 8 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
PPRuNeUser548247 July 11, 2025, 21:50:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919854	Agreed, it's most unfortunate that that the preliminary report hasn’t closed off speculation, it's simply created opportunity for more. It confirms that both fuel cutoff switches were moved to OFF at Vr, within a one second interval which is as extreme and inexplicable as it gets. Then it gives us a CVR quote that’s so neutered, "Why did you cut off?” / “I didn’t”, that it raises more questions than it answers. If the goal was to reassure or clarify, it’s had the opposite effect. 5 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Engineless July 11, 2025, 21:51:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919857	Quote: Originally Posted by mh370rip The phrase in the report is "switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position". Does the FDR actually have some input of the physical position of the switches or is it just measuring the output signal voltage which might be changed by a momentary short from liquid or swarf. Both signals go to cutoff within 1 second but then one recovers four seconds after the other. Surely a pilot discovering a turned off switch would have both back on in less than four seconds. That's a very good question. 5 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Diff Tail Shim July 11, 2025, 21:52:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919860	Actually, why are switches that are only really required on the ground or in an engine shut down event where they are? Embraer's have the switches out of the way on an overhead panel and as well as detent locked, have a protective guard, one has to physically lift. If the PF had to physically carry out the engine shut down on an Embraer, he would have to raise his arm. Would be obvious to the PnF. Last edited by Saab Dastard; 11th July 2025 at 21:55 . Reason: Deleted post quote removed 8 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
alexmclean July 11, 2025, 21:54:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919862	Quote: Originally Posted by Kraftstoffvondesibel So, yes, switches. either 1/deliberately cut off by someone in the cockpit, or 2/placed in an intermediate gate position possible due to wear or wrong installation, happens during engine start, and then vibrates or bumps to cut-off during the take off roll or 3/some kind of liquid or other contamination in the LRU shorting both and cycling them after 8 seconds brought them electrically back to RUN. Anyone got other ideas? In the case of (2) or (3), would the expected response be "Why did you cutoff"? I would have thought a pilot would notice the engines spooling down, and comment on that. To immediately jump to the cutoff switches as the cause rather implies something drew attention to the switches. Then there is a 10+ second gap before the switches are set to run again. I can't think of any good reason why the PNF would have taken so long to correct an accidental or deliberate manipulation of the switches. 7 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
PPRuNeUser548247 July 11, 2025, 21:55:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919864	Quote: Originally Posted by GroundedSpanner One item in the report is the position of the LG Lever - Down. Given the lack of a full transcript, and in trying to defend the crewmembers intentions , Is it possible that at the point of "Positive Rate - Gear Up" - PM Brain farted, and performed a different muscle memory action? Thus they would deny moving the Switches - and take a few seconds to compute what they just did? The landing gear lever is forward and up on the centre instrument panel, adjacent to the PFD. The two fuel control switches are aft and low, on the thrust pedestal. There's no reasonable way to confuse one for the other in terms of position, hand movement or 'muscle memory'. 6 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Kraftstoffvondesibel July 11, 2025, 21:57:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919867	Quote: Originally Posted by Engineless That's a very good question. It can only know their electrical, not mechanical positions. Think about it, how would that work? Would love to see some kind of accelerometer reading of the moment the switches went to cut off. Or even cockpit area audio. They will figure it out. 2 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
za9ra22 July 11, 2025, 22:00:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919868	Quote: Originally Posted by The Brigadier Agreed, it's most unfortunate that that the preliminary report hasn\x92t closed off speculation, it's simply created opportunity for more. It confirms that both fuel cutoff switches were moved to OFF at Vr, within a one second interval which is as extreme and inexplicable as it gets. Then it gives us a CVR quote that\x92s so neutered, "Why did you cut off?\x94 / \x93I didn\x92t\x94, that it raises more questions than it answers. If the goal was to reassure or clarify, it\x92s had the opposite effect. Neither pilot was likely speaking in order to be recorded for posterity, so that 'conversation' makes perfect sense in a situation where there is high stress and a great deal of confusion. As to the report not closing off speculation, that isn't it's purpose. It is there to report the facts as they are found. It must also be said that speculation is not in any place but the eye of the beholder. 6 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
KSINGH July 11, 2025, 22:04:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919872	Quote: Originally Posted by The Brigadier The landing gear lever is forward and up on the centre instrument panel, adjacent to the PFD. The two fuel control switches are aft and low, on the thrust pedestal. There's no reasonable way to confuse one for the other in terms of position, hand movement or 'muscle memory'. I\x92m not saying this applies to this situation but it has been discussed extensively previously that despite their different positions and tactile features flaps have been raised when gear up has been commanded and vice versa 3 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Mrshed July 11, 2025, 22:04:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919873	Quote: Originally Posted by mh370rip The phrase in the report is "switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position". Does the FDR actually have some input of the physical position of the switches or is it just measuring the output signal voltage which might be changed by a momentary short from liquid or swarf. Both signals go to cutoff within 1 second but then one recovers four seconds after the other. Surely a pilot discovering a turned off switch would have both back on in less than four seconds. The fact that one of the pilots verbally asked why they were off, presumably from visually observing this (?), would seem to rule out a short? 11 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Diff Tail Shim July 11, 2025, 22:04:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919874	Quote: Originally Posted by The Brigadier The landing gear lever is forward and up on the centre instrument panel, adjacent to the PFD. The fuel control switches are aft and low, on the thrust pedestal. There's no reasonable way to confuse one for the other in terms of position, hand movement or 'muscle memory'. No there is not. Further investigation will likely see if the locking detents were in a decent state or not. TBQH, such a switch should be properly guarded. Like a Embraer is, like other types that one sees with switches one has to lift a guard to operate and is locked on with the guard in position. Boeing designers found out again in not making processes fool proof? 3 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Kraftstoffvondesibel July 11, 2025, 22:04:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919875	Quote: Originally Posted by Diff Tail Shim Actually, why are switches that are only really required on the ground or in an engine shut down event where they are? Embraer's have the switches out of the way on an overhead panel and as well as detent locked, have a protective guard, one has to physically lift. If the PF had to physically carry out the engine shut down on an Embraer, he would have to raise his arm. Would be obvious to the PnF. I raised this on one of the other threads, they are supposed to be isolated systems, and I am sure they are according to electromechanical tradition, but for both human factors and electromechanical reasons, should\x92nt they be off to each side of the cockpit to be considered isolated? 4 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
GroundedSpanner July 11, 2025, 22:05:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919876	Quote: Originally Posted by The Brigadier The landing gear lever is forward and up on the centre instrument panel, adjacent to the PFD. The two fuel control switches are aft and low, on the thrust pedestal. There's no reasonable way to confuse one for the other in terms of position, hand movement or 'muscle memory'. Understood - Absolutely no way of 'confusing' the two very different items in very different places. I'm suggesting more of a 'why did I just put my car keys in the fridge? issue. 17 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Mrshed July 11, 2025, 22:06:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919877	Quote: Originally Posted by alexmclean In the case of (2) or (3), would the expected response be "Why did you cutoff"? I would have thought a pilot would notice the engines spooling down, and comment on that. To immediately jump to the cutoff switches as the cause rather implies something drew attention to the switches. Then there is a 10+ second gap before the switches are set to run again. I can't think of any good reason why the PNF would have taken so long to correct an accidental or deliberate manipulation of the switches. Exactly right. You need to take the audio together with the switch data, not in isolation. The two combined would appear to rule out a lot of options that the data alone would leave possible. 4 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
eagle21 July 11, 2025, 22:06:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919878	Out of interest, hypothetically if the captain was an instructor, is there a possibility that any kind of muscle memory from simulated failures in the simulator may have been triggered? Let\x92s say that you are having to retrain another pilot on v1 cut handling whilst you occupy the P1 seat. Temptation may be to use the fuel cut off switches to save time rather than going back to the sim operator panel to reprogram the failure. 2 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Engineless July 11, 2025, 22:07:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919881	Quote: Originally Posted by Kraftstoffvondesibel It can only know their electrical, not mechanical positions. Think about it, how would that work? Would love to see some kind of accelerometer reading of the moment the switches went to cut off. Or even cockpit area audio. They will figure it out. A douple-pole switch. One pole used for FDR signal for the physcial switch position. The other pole for the electrical switching circuit. 3 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
EnerJi July 11, 2025, 22:08:00 GMT permalink Post: 11919884	I know it's not a popular opinion around here but it seems like a flight deck camera would be quite useful right about now to determine whether either pilot's hands strayed near the fuel cutoff switches at the recorded time. 21 users liked this post. Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Posts about: "Fuel Cutoff Switches" [Posts: 827 Pages: 42]