Posts about: "Fuel Cutoff Switches" [Posts: 904 Page: 46 of 46]¶

Originally Posted by Magplug

I am not aware of a spate of pilots purposely (or even accidentally) moving both fuel switches to cut-off at rotate that would require the investment of an interlock to prevent it. In fact, the very presence of such an interlock might introduce it's owns risks.

The chances of a centre fuel tank exploding in flight killing everybody on board may now be less that one in ten million. (It happened once so designs were modified). The chances of a pilot wishing to commit suicide may also be one in ten million. If he is denied the fuel cut-off switches then there are plenty of other options. If a pilot decides to execute a half-roll and pull-through on final approach, or some other non-recoverable manouvre then there is not a lot to prevent him.... not even the bloke sat next to him. (Please don't lecture me on Airbus AOB protections - You get my point)

For all you heating engineers with pet theories on how to design bad stuff out of aeroplanes, and all you wannabe airline pilots and CRM instructors let me tell you..... When I turn up for a trip, very often the other guy/gal is a complete stranger to me. I might have heard good things about them or they might have a bit of a reputation. As a Captain I have a limited amount of time to gauge this guy/gal before I get locked in the inner sanctum and I have to vest my TOTAL trust in them. TBH I have only ever flown with one guy who I would not trust alone in the flight deck, he was hyper-religious and just plain odd. I took my concerns to the adults and learnt I was not the first Captain making the same observation. I don't know what happened to him but our paths never crossed again.

The message here is simple.... Occasionally there are those amongst us who have their demons. It is the responsibility of us all to make sure they get the help they need before they hit rock-bottom and do something stupid.... oblivious to the 350 innocent souls sat behind the door.

Originally Posted by Magplug

Iam not aware of a spate of pilots purposely (or even accidentally) moving both fuel switches to cut-off at rotatethat would require the investment of an interlock to prevent it. In fact, the very presence of such an interlock might introduce it's owns risks.
That's is though, the scenario that many on here seem to think is the most likely cause of the 'accident'

The chances of a pilot wishing to commit suicide may also be one in ten million. If he is denied the fuel cut-off switches then there are plenty of other options. If a pilot decides to execute a half-roll and pull-through on final approach, or some other non-recoverablemanouvre then there is not a lot to prevent him.... not even the bloke sat next to him. (Please don't lecture me on Airbus AOB protections - You get my point)

Yes, not a lot to prevent that, although it would be easily identified for what it was. With the incident in question, it's the insidious nature of the event, that so far, is preventing it being positively identified as an act of malice.

For all you heating engineers with pet theories on how to design bad stuff out of aeroplanes, and all you wannabe airline pilots and CRM instructors let me tell you..... When I turn up for a trip, very often the other guy/gal is a complete stranger to me. I might have heard good things about them or they might have a bit of a reputation. As a Captain I have a limited amount of time to gauge this guy/gal before I get locked in the inner sanctum and I have to vest my TOTAL trust in them. TBH I have only ever flown with one guy who I would not trust alone in the flight deck, he was hyper-religious and just plain odd. I took my concerns to the adults and learnt I was not the first Captain making the same observation. I don't know what happened to him but our paths never crossed again.

Captain Magplug,
use lowercase when referring to the position generally .

With reference to your tone in the first sentence of the above paragraph. Hopefully this is not a personality trait, certainly not something desirable for someone in your profession.

The message here is simple.... Occasionally there are those amongst us who have their demons. It is the responsibility of us all to make sure they get the help they need before they hit rock-bottom and do something stupid.... oblivious to the 350 innocent souls sat behind the door.

Yes, there have been occasional demonic acts in recent years, and those responsible for identifying such cases might have hoped to be more effective. Sadly, it is entirely possible it could happen again, unless something changes.

Originally Posted by Chernobyl

The problem with your stated concern is how do you prevent it? Simple, you say: interlock it with the thrust levers and/or radio alt and/or baro alt in some combination to ensure you can ONLY switch to cutoff if not below 400' ft or at takeoff thrust. But what happens if this new logic fails in a novel way in the future preventing an engine shutdown when it really IS needed? Any new complexity adds potential unintended consequences and hence risks. Is the cure worse than the disease? Right now, the switch design is entirely consistent with Boeing standard practice: flight crew actions are the final say.