Capn Bloggs
June 21, 2025, 15:06:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11907827

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabenaboy

I was wondering what the cockpit jumpseat policy in Air India is? Is it known if someone was flying along in the cockpit?

Quote:

Originally Posted by T28B

Were there another person, one expects that evidence will be found as the CVR data is deciphered by the investigating team.

And it should be on the loadsheet.

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): CVR Jump Seat

Capn Bloggs
June 22, 2025, 10:06:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11908406

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iccy

The Jeju recorders were okay if I recall correctly, they just had no input, was that the case?

They're not OK if they don't have the information on them that they "should" have had, aka they were stuffed, probably by a major electrical glitch, 4 minutes before the crash itself; they were blank from that point on.

Point taken about the radio.

Quote:

Somoeone made a good point above about the German Wings FDR/CVR being available the next day after the aircraft was aimed at the ground like a missile. These things are built tough, as you know, this may be type specific but….

They are both down the back in the A320 I think. The CVR was damaged and the FDR wasn't found for almost week after because it was blackened/camouflaged by fire, according to the press linked-to on Wiki.

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): CVR FDR

Capn Bloggs
June 28, 2025, 03:50:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11912317

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maybeitis

In response to removed posted video link about drifting ADs since 2022, not finished yet but remarkably, seems to be 100% accurate:

I'm not suggesting he's wrong about the ADs, I'm just saying that water in the avionics bay (which I'm sure has been brought up already) is pure speculation.

Subjects: None

Capn Bloggs
June 30, 2025, 16:26:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11913745

Richard Godfrey has completely ignored that fact that the speed was reducing all the way down the descent. He has hypothesised a steady descent angle at around 3.5:1 and therefore concluded that one engine had stopped and the other was on ~10,000lb of thrust because, at the initial speed they needed that thrust to counter the drag. But the AOA clearly increases markedly as the aircraft approaches the ground, which means that the speed was reducing significantly.

As for statements such as:

Quote:

One Engine Inoperative (OEI) just before take-off(Assumption).

Quote:

The Take-Off Speed at rotation is estimated at 160 KIAS (167 KTAS, 170 GS), which is higher than normal and expected in an assumed OEI take-off.

Quote:

The rotation point requires a runway ground roll of 2,540 m, which is longer than normal due to an assumed OEI take-off.

Quote:

The climb gradient is estimated at 5.09%, which is slightly above the normal range of 3% to 4%at TOGA for a Boeing 787-8, but within limits

Quote:

True airspeed was under-indicated due to low density, in other words the aircraft was moving faster through the air than the airspeed indicator showed, because there were fewer air molecules hitting the pitot tube in the hot, thin air

Quote:

The aircraft peaked early, then levelled off and started descending while passing over obstacles. It barely cleared Obstacle B by ~50 feet, which is tight, but sufficient. This explains the visibly profile in video and supports the notion of degraded climb due to hot/high conditions, heavyweight, and limited thrust margin

They make me take that whole spiel with a grain of salt.

In a nutshell, he's saying they had an engine failure before rotation, then got all the way up to 300-odd feet (following what looked to me like an initially standard low-angle/flat 787 takeoff, then ran out of puff and crashed with the other engine running at 15-18% Thrust.

Pure speculation aka WAG.

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Engine Failure (All) Self Proclaimed Experts TOGA

Capn Bloggs
July 01, 2025, 04:06:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11914010

Quote:

Originally Posted by Megan

Switch over to the centre tank to feed all engines typically takes place at 10,000'

Hold your horses, Megan, that doesn't mean you do it at 10,000, only that IF the message shows, turn them on. Here's part of the Before Start procedure (very early FCOM):

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Centre Tank FCOM

Capn Bloggs
July 01, 2025, 07:15:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11914061

Quote:

Originally Posted by Megan

I said centre tanks were typically turned on at that altitude (using a certain 737 operator as a guide).

This isn't a 737, and the switches aren't "typically turned on at that altitude".

Subjects: None

Capn Bloggs
July 01, 2025, 07:45:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11914074

I've heard of conspiracy theories, but thinking that Boeing and the FAA have allowed the 787 to be certified with a non-compliant fuel system operation is going a bit far. And what about EASA? Plenty of European operators of 787s; EASA must agree it's compliant. "A320/737 does this" is totally irrelevant.

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): FAA

Capn Bloggs
July 01, 2025, 08:53:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11914121

Quote:

Originally Posted by AAKEE

The FAR/CS 25 doesn’t seem to require fuel from separate tanks during takeoff.

And nor does EASA, otherwise the 787 wouldn't be operated by Euro operators.

Time to give this certification stuff a rest.

Subjects: None

Capn Bloggs
July 10, 2025, 11:21:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11918949

So, we have a Memory Drill with a non-numbered thing you have to remember first, being sub-idle, and an FCTM that pumps the idea of getting those switches off and on ASAP, before the revs drop off too much, at any speed or altitude.

Great.

Subjects: None

Capn Bloggs
July 12, 2025, 10:08:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920453

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atatacks

At no point was gear up commanded (and obviously initiated) ? Did we have a PRC call out ?

Don't make a PRC. Wait a couple of seconds, Fuel OFF x 2.

Subjects: None

Capn Bloggs
July 12, 2025, 11:32:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920533

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uplinker

This might have been discussed but as has been suggested upthread; a possible scenario is that at some point, PIC took their hands off the thrust levers and/or placed them in a guarding position behind the thrust levers at their base - but by doing so unfortunately nudged the Fuel cut-off switches to 'Off' - perhaps 'helped' by there either being incorrectly fitted locking mechanisms or worn locking mechanisms ?

Seriously??

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uplinker

On this flight, the relative drop in noise and calm that follows the landing gear doors closing after the gear retracts during the initial climb, might have caused an action slip by PIC to perform the engine shut-down procedure used when parking on stand.

Come on! The gear never moved! You're an Airbus pilot; do you really think that could happen? If so, would the captain then sit there fat, dumb and happy wondering what was now going on... for 10 seconds? Even I would say "Sh1t" and whip those fuel switches back on quicker than the FO could say "WTF!".

Mods, if you don't lock the thread, I'm going back to Facebook!

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Action slip Engine Failure (All) Engine Shutdown Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Fuel Cutoff Switches Thread Moderation

Capn Bloggs
July 12, 2025, 11:39:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920544

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viloator

This is a discussion forum, of course there is (and should be!) significant discussion about a bizarre crash of a modern widebody aircraft. There will naturally be speculation and some nonsense but this is a discussion forum and that is to be expected.

This is a Professional Pilot's Forum. Nonsense and bizzaredness doesn't live here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Firesok

I posited this very thing weeks ago but it was immediately removed by mods.

And the CVR? "why did you cutoff?" ... "I didn't, the ipad did!".

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): CVR Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Switches Pilot "Why did you cut off" Thread Moderation

Capn Bloggs
July 12, 2025, 11:42:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920552

Quote:

Originally Posted by nachtmusak

Regardless of what actually happened in that cockpit, reasoning like this seems completely backwards to me. Since when do humans reliably, instantly recognise that they've just made a mistake?

For goodness sake, both engines just stopped and the backside is falling out of the jet! Come on.

Subjects: None

Capn Bloggs
July 13, 2025, 05:16:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921026

@Maybeitis, how about we leave the total redesign of the fuel switch locations and operation (which have been moved billions of times in thousands of aircraft without a hitch) until the final report is out.
These were deliberately moved. It wasn't a brain-fart. Unless the interim report omits crew calls which turn the scenario on it's head.

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Switches

Capn Bloggs
July 13, 2025, 08:31:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921132

Quote:

Originally Posted by Speed Trim Fail

Beyond the technical side, the Skipper’s side is the Left…. Or I’ve been doing something terribly wrong for years.

You're supposed to face forward you know.

Subjects: None

Capn Bloggs
July 13, 2025, 08:51:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921150

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lead Balloon

I understand, to some extent, the reasoning for not publishing the actual recording as a general rule, but from my perspective the usual outcome is speculation that can be just as critical of the actions and skills of the crew, and be just as inviting to 'ambulance chasers' keen on litigation, as ripping the band aide off the sore and dealing with the truth. I remain of the view that the least bad way to get to the awful truth - whatever it may be in the circumstances of this tragedy - includes publication of the raw recordings of the cockpit and ATC.

No. As amply demonstrated over and over on this forum, 95% of people have NO IDEA what goes on in commercial big-jet aviation, and a release of the raw-recordings would just cause chaos for the family of those left behind, the crew if there were any left eg a survivable midair, as well as friends and colleagues. Social media would go crazy. For no benefit. And I can assure you that from that point on, every pilot would keep their trap shut about anything to do with safety for fear of incriminating themselves. Safety would be put back decades.

Subjects: None

Capn Bloggs June 21, 2025, 15:06:00 GMT permalink Post: 11907827	Quote: Originally Posted by sabenaboy I was wondering what the cockpit jumpseat policy in Air India is? Is it known if someone was flying along in the cockpit? Quote: Originally Posted by T28B Were there another person, one expects that evidence will be found as the CVR data is deciphered by the investigating team. And it should be on the loadsheet. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): CVR Jump Seat
Capn Bloggs June 22, 2025, 10:06:00 GMT permalink Post: 11908406	Quote: Originally Posted by Iccy The Jeju recorders were okay if I recall correctly, they just had no input, was that the case? They're not OK if they don't have the information on them that they "should" have had, aka they were stuffed, probably by a major electrical glitch, 4 minutes before the crash itself; they were blank from that point on. Point taken about the radio. Quote: Somoeone made a good point above about the German Wings FDR/CVR being available the next day after the aircraft was aimed at the ground like a missile. These things are built tough, as you know, this may be type specific but…. They are both down the back in the A320 I think. The CVR was damaged and the FDR wasn't found for almost week after because it was blackened/camouflaged by fire, according to the press linked-to on Wiki. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): CVR FDR
Capn Bloggs June 28, 2025, 03:50:00 GMT permalink Post: 11912317	Quote: Originally Posted by Maybeitis In response to removed posted video link about drifting ADs since 2022, not finished yet but remarkably, seems to be 100% accurate: I'm not suggesting he's wrong about the ADs, I'm just saying that water in the avionics bay (which I'm sure has been brought up already) is pure speculation. Subjects: None
Capn Bloggs June 30, 2025, 16:26:00 GMT permalink Post: 11913745	Richard Godfrey has completely ignored that fact that the speed was reducing all the way down the descent. He has hypothesised a steady descent angle at around 3.5:1 and therefore concluded that one engine had stopped and the other was on ~10,000lb of thrust because, at the initial speed they needed that thrust to counter the drag. But the AOA clearly increases markedly as the aircraft approaches the ground, which means that the speed was reducing significantly. As for statements such as: Quote: One Engine Inoperative (OEI) just before take-off(Assumption). Quote: The Take-Off Speed at rotation is estimated at 160 KIAS (167 KTAS, 170 GS), which is higher than normal and expected in an assumed OEI take-off. Quote: The rotation point requires a runway ground roll of 2,540 m, which is longer than normal due to an assumed OEI take-off. Quote: The climb gradient is estimated at 5.09%, which is slightly above the normal range of 3% to 4%at TOGA for a Boeing 787-8, but within limits Quote: True airspeed was under-indicated due to low density, in other words the aircraft was moving faster through the air than the airspeed indicator showed, because there were fewer air molecules hitting the pitot tube in the hot, thin air Quote: The aircraft peaked early, then levelled off and started descending while passing over obstacles. It barely cleared Obstacle B by ~50 feet, which is tight, but sufficient. This explains the visibly profile in video and supports the notion of degraded climb due to hot/high conditions, heavyweight, and limited thrust margin They make me take that whole spiel with a grain of salt. In a nutshell, he's saying they had an engine failure before rotation, then got all the way up to 300-odd feet (following what looked to me like an initially standard low-angle/flat 787 takeoff, then ran out of puff and crashed with the other engine running at 15-18% Thrust. Pure speculation aka WAG. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Engine Failure (All) Self Proclaimed Experts TOGA
Capn Bloggs July 01, 2025, 04:06:00 GMT permalink Post: 11914010	Quote: Originally Posted by Megan Switch over to the centre tank to feed all engines typically takes place at 10,000' Hold your horses, Megan, that doesn't mean you do it at 10,000, only that IF the message shows, turn them on. Here's part of the Before Start procedure (very early FCOM): Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Centre Tank FCOM
Capn Bloggs July 01, 2025, 07:15:00 GMT permalink Post: 11914061	Quote: Originally Posted by Megan I said centre tanks were typically turned on at that altitude (using a certain 737 operator as a guide). This isn't a 737, and the switches aren't "typically turned on at that altitude". Subjects: None
Capn Bloggs July 01, 2025, 07:45:00 GMT permalink Post: 11914074	I've heard of conspiracy theories, but thinking that Boeing and the FAA have allowed the 787 to be certified with a non-compliant fuel system operation is going a bit far. And what about EASA? Plenty of European operators of 787s; EASA must agree it's compliant. "A320/737 does this" is totally irrelevant. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): FAA
Capn Bloggs July 01, 2025, 08:53:00 GMT permalink Post: 11914121	Quote: Originally Posted by AAKEE The FAR/CS 25 doesn’t seem to require fuel from separate tanks during takeoff. And nor does EASA, otherwise the 787 wouldn't be operated by Euro operators. Time to give this certification stuff a rest. Subjects: None
Capn Bloggs July 10, 2025, 11:21:00 GMT permalink Post: 11918949	So, we have a Memory Drill with a non-numbered thing you have to remember first, being sub-idle, and an FCTM that pumps the idea of getting those switches off and on ASAP, before the revs drop off too much, at any speed or altitude. Great. Subjects: None
Capn Bloggs July 12, 2025, 10:08:00 GMT permalink Post: 11920453	Quote: Originally Posted by Atatacks At no point was gear up commanded (and obviously initiated) ? Did we have a PRC call out ? Don't make a PRC. Wait a couple of seconds, Fuel OFF x 2. Subjects: None
Capn Bloggs July 12, 2025, 11:32:00 GMT permalink Post: 11920533	Quote: Originally Posted by Uplinker This might have been discussed but as has been suggested upthread; a possible scenario is that at some point, PIC took their hands off the thrust levers and/or placed them in a guarding position behind the thrust levers at their base - but by doing so unfortunately nudged the Fuel cut-off switches to 'Off' - perhaps 'helped' by there either being incorrectly fitted locking mechanisms or worn locking mechanisms ? Seriously?? Quote: Originally Posted by Uplinker On this flight, the relative drop in noise and calm that follows the landing gear doors closing after the gear retracts during the initial climb, might have caused an action slip by PIC to perform the engine shut-down procedure used when parking on stand. Come on! The gear never moved! You're an Airbus pilot; do you really think that could happen? If so, would the captain then sit there fat, dumb and happy wondering what was now going on... for 10 seconds? Even I would say "Sh1t" and whip those fuel switches back on quicker than the FO could say "WTF!". Mods, if you don't lock the thread, I'm going back to Facebook! Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Action slip Engine Failure (All) Engine Shutdown Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Fuel Cutoff Switches Thread Moderation
Capn Bloggs July 12, 2025, 11:39:00 GMT permalink Post: 11920544	Quote: Originally Posted by Viloator This is a discussion forum, of course there is (and should be!) significant discussion about a bizarre crash of a modern widebody aircraft. There will naturally be speculation and some nonsense but this is a discussion forum and that is to be expected. This is a Professional Pilot's Forum. Nonsense and bizzaredness doesn't live here. Quote: Originally Posted by Firesok I posited this very thing weeks ago but it was immediately removed by mods. And the CVR? "why did you cutoff?" ... "I didn't, the ipad did!". Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): CVR Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Switches Pilot "Why did you cut off" Thread Moderation
Capn Bloggs July 12, 2025, 11:42:00 GMT permalink Post: 11920552	Quote: Originally Posted by nachtmusak Regardless of what actually happened in that cockpit, reasoning like this seems completely backwards to me. Since when do humans reliably, instantly recognise that they've just made a mistake? For goodness sake, both engines just stopped and the backside is falling out of the jet! Come on. Subjects: None
Capn Bloggs July 13, 2025, 05:16:00 GMT permalink Post: 11921026	@Maybeitis, how about we leave the total redesign of the fuel switch locations and operation (which have been moved billions of times in thousands of aircraft without a hitch) until the final report is out. These were deliberately moved. It wasn't a brain-fart. Unless the interim report omits crew calls which turn the scenario on it's head. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Switches
Capn Bloggs July 13, 2025, 08:31:00 GMT permalink Post: 11921132	Quote: Originally Posted by Speed Trim Fail Beyond the technical side, the Skipper’s side is the Left…. Or I’ve been doing something terribly wrong for years. You're supposed to face forward you know. Subjects: None
Capn Bloggs July 13, 2025, 08:51:00 GMT permalink Post: 11921150	Quote: Originally Posted by Lead Balloon I understand, to some extent, the reasoning for not publishing the actual recording as a general rule, but from my perspective the usual outcome is speculation that can be just as critical of the actions and skills of the crew, and be just as inviting to 'ambulance chasers' keen on litigation, as ripping the band aide off the sore and dealing with the truth. I remain of the view that the least bad way to get to the awful truth - whatever it may be in the circumstances of this tragedy - includes publication of the raw recordings of the cockpit and ATC. No. As amply demonstrated over and over on this forum, 95% of people have NO IDEA what goes on in commercial big-jet aviation, and a release of the raw-recordings would just cause chaos for the family of those left behind, the crew if there were any left eg a survivable midair, as well as friends and colleagues. Social media would go crazy. For no benefit. And I can assure you that from that point on, every pilot would keep their trap shut about anything to do with safety for fear of incriminating themselves. Safety would be put back decades. Subjects: None

Posts by user "Capn Bloggs" [Posts: 56 Total up-votes: 0 Pages: 3]