Posts by user "Chiefttp" [Posts: 10 Total up-votes: 0 Pages: 1]

767 pilot here, on the 767 it would capture the altitude, but more importantly, it would freeze the airspeed at whatever speed the alt capture occurred at. So the thrust levers would retard to maintain the much slower speed at the point of capture. This could be a possible scenario, especially if the crew was slow to realize what happened, AND the 787 has a similar low altitude capture issue.

Salvi, just spitballing here, a low alt capture is simple to rectify, but if you’re not expecting it ( perhaps a wrong MCP alt setting) coupled with a HUD , which focuses your attention on it, not the thrust levers, and add to the mix an inexperienced F/O. I can
also see in the final moments of desperation, reaching down and turning the Fuel Control Switches, OFF-THEN-ON, in the hope that an engine will come to life, if they believed that the engine was dead. This may be the reason the RAT extended? Just thinking out loud.

Galaxy flyer,
UPS had a triple engine shutdown on A RR Tay engined 727. The crew got one started in the nick of time and were able to land at KORD. I know the crewmemebers.

An old post from 2004,

I’m a 767 Pilot, so I’m not sure if this applies exactly to the 787. Referring to Loose Rivets post mentioning a longer than usual takeoff run, perhaps a scenario I’ve seen in simulator sessions may have occurred. On the 767 we have a Thrust Mode Selection Panel (TMSP). To demonstrate a potential error that could occur, an Instructor would select “ Climb thrust” on the TMSP instead of a takeoff thrust setting prior to takeoff. This can inadvertantly happen. In any event, if the crew mistakenly took off in a Climb thrust instead of a takeoff thrust, the takeoff roll will be much longer. With the high temperature conditions that day, the climb out would have been anemic, possibly prompting the crew to believe there was an engine thrust issue. In the simulators, when this issue was demonstrated, most crews didn’t realize what was happening and continued the takeoff anyway resulting in tail strikes, and or very sluggish climb performance. There are protections to avoid this, but the insidious nature of this scenario has caught many a crew.

My only question is, after close to 40 years flying, on takeoff, if I lost thrust/ Power, my immediate reaction would NOT BE TO CHECK THE FUEL CONTROL SWITCHES. Unless the Pilot flying saw the Pilot monitoring visually reach down and shut the fuel control switches off, which would be odd since as the PF, your attention is looking at the instruments and outside, not inside and downward in the direction of the FC switches. It seems odd how quickly they ascertained the fuel control switches were shut off. No startle factor, or confusion, just a very quick determination that the FC switches were cutoff. Very strange.

Three points,

1. One previous poster who was a test pilot stated that the Boeing switches were unguarded, and as such, wouldn’t pass military standards. I flew 4 Military aircraft in the USAF, and none of them had guarded switches or covers over the start /stop switches. They were all toggle type levers or solenoid operated buttons. Perhaps he was referring to RAF aircraft.

2. As far as the previous issue with the Stab Trim. Those switches are guarded and covered, however! I find it hard to believe any stab trim runaway would be detected so early in the flight. I’ve had a runaway stab trim in a 757 and it took a while to diagnose it and finally disconnect the errant trim module. The first indication was the aircraft required more trimming than normal. Nothing one can detect 10 seconds into a flight.

3. I’ve been flying Boeings for over 30 years, (727,757,767) with similar fuel control switches and I can’t think of a single time it was loose, slipped, or faulty.

Stab trim issue is not applicable here, and it would have been recorded in the FDR….even a fast runaway isn’t that fast, and no pilot would be able to notice it until well after rotation, during climb out.

Dani,
I’d be willing to wager $10,000 to any 787 Pilot who can move the Fuel Control Switch to rest exactly on the tip of the “nub” separating the two sides of the locking mechanism…I’d bet it would take quite some time to manipulate it to get it to rest on this rounded tip. I’d also throw in an extra $10,000 to any pilot who can do this for both switches, and not draw the attention of the other pilot as they manipulate the switch into this impossible position. Then, there’s the problem of taxiiing so smooooooothly that the 2 switches don’t fall back off this pinpoint balanced position, let alone they stay in this position during the takeoff roll.

I did fly a sim session once with a pilot who exhibited signs of incompetence. It was a practice sim after he had failed a checkride. He reached across my head and tried to shut off a hydraulic system as he read the checklist for a Pack malfunction. The Pack switches were on his side of the overhead panel! The training Instructor attributed his confusion to the fact that he didn’t fly very much. Turned out he had “Early onset of Alzheimer’s “. Could this be a possibility here?

After 1400 posts, why hasn’t anyone suggested this? EARLY ONSET ALZHEIMERS OR DEMENTIA. . I’ve shared my experience in an earlier post concerning a pilot whose confusion during a sim event was very apparent. This can be a possibility as opposed to the suicide theory.

I think that we will get answers only after a deep dive into both pilots backgrounds and life. As much as this may seem on the surface like a suicide, consider the “Brain fart” theory, or, as I mentioned in an earlier post, a possible early onset Alzheimer’s condition which can cause confusion and irrational actions. I’ve seen this confusion in the sim and I dismissed his erratic actions as incompetence. Only after a thorough investigation into the pilot’s lives, and interviews with friends and families will we get a clearer picture to ascertain the possibility of intentional suicide, brain fart, or early mental impairment. I think the answers will be found there versus design issues with the 787.

DMBA,
You posted,
“what about a flying jam donut depositing monkey toes on the control switches and causing them to lift up by using elephants to fly up and over the lock? Can you rule that out? No, so maybe it happened… let’s get real!

Such a strange response, I’m not disputing that someone physically shut off the Fuel Control Switch. I’m sayin possibly he did it by mistake in a confused state. I’ve seen it myself, where a 60 year old pilot tried to shut off a hydraulic pump on the left side of the cockpit (he was an F/O sitting right seat) when the checklist called for shutting off a Pack directly above his head. They are not even close, and he was diagnosed with early onset Alzheimer’s. His erratic and confused action caused him to fail the ride. Why is my theory so off the wall, but the fact that he wanted to commit suicide, and take hundreds of innocent people with him considered plausible?
Are you a pilot?