Posts by user "EnerJi" [Posts: 6 Total up-votes: 0 Pages: 1]

EnerJi
June 15, 2025, 19:29:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11902750
Originally Posted by matiagr
The biggest news site in Greece claims to have the results of a kind of preliminary report from India AAIB which say that as the plane rotated, the pilot's seat malfunctioned (broken pin) and went suddenly far back forcing the captain to accidentally lower the thrust lever as he already had his hand on it and despite the co-pilots effort to help increase the thrust it was already to late to avoid the stall.
Originally Posted by LTC8K6
Yes, they are electrically adjusted. So a pin is not involved and a sudden move rearward is highly unlikely.

The Ipeco seats fitted on the 787 (and other airframes) have had numerous problems and numerous Airworthiness Directives to correct issues of uncommanded movement. They are not exclusively electric (i.e. can also be manually adjusted), and presumably there is some sort of pin or locking mechanism to hold them in place and this mechanism (at least in original form or if not corrected) has been known to fail.

The most famous incidents involving the 787 resulted in uncommanded forward movement of the seat, resulting in inadvertent depressing of the yoke and an unexpected pitch down. Other Ipeco seats have been implicated in unexpected forward AND rearward movements. The FAA published an AD just a couple of days ago related to an Ipeco seat doing just that (different model seat not on Boeing planes, FWIW).


Originally Posted by fdr
I will wager that this is absolute nonsense.
You're probably right. Until we start getting reliable information from official sources it's wise to take the theories of a single news outlet with a huge chunk of salt.

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): AAIB (All)  Air Worthiness Directives  FAA  Preliminary Report

EnerJi
June 18, 2025, 05:30:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11904920
Originally Posted by Squawk7700
For a Boeing 787 (typically equipped with either GE GEnx-1B or Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engines), the spool-down time from full takeoff power to idle is generally around 4 to 7 seconds.
Is that the elapsed time one would expect in the event of a commanded reduction in thrust? It was posted further up thread that the engine logic smoothly reduces thrust even if the levers are retarded rapidly, and that the engine would spool down MUCH faster (within 1-2 seconds) if the fuel valves snapped closed.

Of course, that raises the question of the pitch attitude of the aircraft. If the fuel valves snapped closed wouldn't we expect the nose to pitch down rather suddebly? So perhaps this is a hint that the loss of thrust occurred more gradually than a snap closing of the fuel valves.

Last edited by Senior Pilot; 18th June 2025 at 07:47 . Reason: Remove off topic comments

Subjects: None

EnerJi
June 18, 2025, 20:01:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11905520
Tata group chairman (majority owner of Air India) N. Chandrasekaran had a TV interview with Times Now, an English-language news group in India. I haven't seen the full video (blocked from the USA but someone will surely upload to YouTube soon), but there are some summaries and quotes from the interview appearing on various US sites.

Below are some interesting quotes from an MSN article ( https://www.msn.com/en-in/money/tops...ys/ar-AA1GYiEZ ), including a claim that both pilots but especially the FO had more experience than previously reported:


“There are speculations about human error, speculations about airlines, speculations about engines, maintenance, all kinds,” he said. “But the fact that I know so far is this particular aircraft, this specific tail, AI-171 has a clean history. As for the engines, the right engine was a new engine put in March 2025. The left engine was last serviced in 2023 and due for its next maintenance check in December 2025. Both engine histories are clean,” he told Times Now. “There were no red flags or maintenance issues,” Chandrasekaran said. “Never been safety concerns raised, Dreamliners have been operating for a long time.”

“Captain Sabharwal had more than 11,500 hours of flying experience, the first officer Clive (Kundar) had more than 3,400 hours,” Chandrasekaran stated. “What I hear from colleagues is that they were excellent pilots and great professionals. So, we can't jump to any conclusions. I am told by all the experts that the black box and recorders will definitely tell the story. So, we just have to wait for that,”

Last edited by EnerJi; 18th June 2025 at 20:02 . Reason: formatting

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): AI171  Human Factors

EnerJi
June 19, 2025, 01:40:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11905663
Originally Posted by Kentut
Unfortunately not available in the US. This is what I see:


Subjects: None

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.

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

EnerJi
July 11, 2025, 22:28:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11919916
Originally Posted by A340Yumyum
Well, it\x92s narrowed it down to 3 possibilities:

Action slip
SAIB NM-18-33
Intentional.
I would add a fourth, however unlikely it might be: some kind of electrical short which caused the "cutoff" signals to be sent without the physical switch moving.

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Action slip  Fuel (All)  Fuel Cutoff Switches  SAIB NM-18-33  Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin