FL370 Officeboy
June 12, 2025, 16:25:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11899438

Quote:

Originally Posted by KSINGH

something I\x92m not sure has been discussed till now- doesn\x92t the 787 have an \x91early door\x92 function where the gear doors automatically open to improve performance? Even pprune has discussed this:
B787-9 LDG gear retraction
(That thread is illuminating in light of this loss for a number of reasons too)

in the video/images seen it doesn\x92t appear that the gear doors are down, does this further indicate an AC power loss?

(not sure if this applies to the entire 787 family though)

That only applies to the 787-9. The accident aircraft was a -8

Subjects: None

FL370 Officeboy
June 12, 2025, 20:42:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11899714

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewW

The theories concerning inadvertent flap retraction are not consistent with the apparent transcript from the mayday call made or rat deployment. In the first video that circulated, the engines can\x92t really be heard (certainly not producing any significant amount of thrust). If the aircraft was climbing out misconfigured, those engines would be screaming. Instead, all you can hear is the rat.

Similarly - a bird strike, knocking out two engines simultaneously is a noisy/messy event and I would expect to see evidence of this occurring in both videos, and in the area at the point of ingestion. The engines don\x92t just roll back with a bird strike - they surge, smoke, bang and splutter. It would be very apparent.

At this time, I think everything is pointing towards both engines simultaneously having their fuel feeds interrupted between V1 and Vr. CVR/FDR will be interesting.

The issue I have with the \x91mis-selected flaps up\x92 theory is that if PM had accidentally retracted flaps, I\x92d expect the PF to lower the nose, apply max thrust to try and accelerate by flying level or in a minimal descent. In this accident, the nose never seems to get lowered to decrease the AoA, in fact pitch increases just before it seems to stall. I\x92d also expect similar for an overweight takeoff, thrust or loadsheet error.

The fact none of the above happened, coupled with the lack of landing gear coming up, makes me think they didn\x92t have thrust to play with.

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Dual Engine Failure Engine Failure (All) MAYDAY V1

FL370 Officeboy
June 14, 2025, 09:11:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11901290

Quote:

Originally Posted by RetiredBA/BY

Yes, we did acceleration checks, time to 100 knots, on the Valiant and, I believe, the Victor in the RAF. As well as brake drag, this proved engine performance was correct. I was surprised this was not done when I moved to civil jets. Many years ago I proposed a system called TOPIS. Take Off Performance Indicator System. Basically a bug driven around the ASI to show required and achieved speed.
IF, repeat IF, such a system was installed on that 787 it MIGHT have revealed a thrust problem before V1. ( and prevented the TUI BRS incident )
So, after a lot of thought, an unexplained loss of thrust on BOTH engines must be in the frame. But why? What is common to BOTH except the autothrottle system, driving the thrust levers. Even then it is possible to manually firewall the thrust levers, at least one could on the 73,75, and 76.
So, a real mystery. I will await the Investigatirs conclusion now they have the FDR.

On my 787 we call 'thrust set' which must be achieved by 80kts. This is confirming the thrust achieved matches the target thrust at the very least although this assumes the target thrust is correct, of course.

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): FDR V1

FL370 Officeboy
June 14, 2025, 16:34:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11901631

I still think total loss of thrust can be the only explanation. Nothing else makes sense - the question is how and why .

The 787 has had issues with 5G interference that could affect A/T and engines. This has been limited to landing phase in terms of guidance but I really hope there\x92s not a latent issue for takeoffs related to going from ground to air or such like.

https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/fi...AN-2022-01.pdf

https://www.nperf.com/en/map/IN/1279...600587&zoom=12

Subjects: None

FL370 Officeboy
June 14, 2025, 19:59:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11901779

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shep69

This to me makes more sense; perhaps I`ve got it wrong but in the video the trailing edge flaps definitely look up. Maybe there`s more and they weren`t.

I\x92m now convinced the whole \x91mis-selected flaps\x92 is a complete red herring. Based on the wreckage on the ground which clearly showed the flaps extended and a still from the witness video which I am 100% sure shows the flaps extended. I always believed it was a total loss of thrust and now can\x92t see any other explanation and so need to know why that happened.

Accident aircraft with TE flaps visible.

\x91Normal\x92 787 takeoff with flaps

Subjects: None

FL370 Officeboy
June 15, 2025, 10:18:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11902325

Quote:

Originally Posted by hawkeye red

Given the OAT ond TOW they most likely used the APU for airconditioning\x85

If you mean for takeoff, that\x92s not a thing on the 787

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

FL370 Officeboy
June 15, 2025, 18:53:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11902716

Quote:

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. I dont believe they would have posted something as serious as this without any credible source cause they are supposed to be a serious news outlet but you never know when stupidity takes over validity. Source is the protothema dot gr site

There are at least two whatsapp chain messages doing the rounds (one about the seat theory and one about water on electrics causing FADEC failure). Both are very detailed but clearly fake news with incorrect dates, ECAM instead of EICAS and lots of other things which are clearly inaccurate. They\x92ve probably seen this and reporting it as news

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

FL370 Officeboy June 12, 2025, 16:25:00 GMT permalink Post: 11899438	Quote: Originally Posted by KSINGH something I\x92m not sure has been discussed till now- doesn\x92t the 787 have an \x91early door\x92 function where the gear doors automatically open to improve performance? Even pprune has discussed this: B787-9 LDG gear retraction (That thread is illuminating in light of this loss for a number of reasons too) in the video/images seen it doesn\x92t appear that the gear doors are down, does this further indicate an AC power loss? (not sure if this applies to the entire 787 family though) That only applies to the 787-9. The accident aircraft was a -8 Subjects: None
FL370 Officeboy June 12, 2025, 20:42:00 GMT permalink Post: 11899714	Quote: Originally Posted by AndrewW The theories concerning inadvertent flap retraction are not consistent with the apparent transcript from the mayday call made or rat deployment. In the first video that circulated, the engines can\x92t really be heard (certainly not producing any significant amount of thrust). If the aircraft was climbing out misconfigured, those engines would be screaming. Instead, all you can hear is the rat. Similarly - a bird strike, knocking out two engines simultaneously is a noisy/messy event and I would expect to see evidence of this occurring in both videos, and in the area at the point of ingestion. The engines don\x92t just roll back with a bird strike - they surge, smoke, bang and splutter. It would be very apparent. At this time, I think everything is pointing towards both engines simultaneously having their fuel feeds interrupted between V1 and Vr. CVR/FDR will be interesting. The issue I have with the \x91mis-selected flaps up\x92 theory is that if PM had accidentally retracted flaps, I\x92d expect the PF to lower the nose, apply max thrust to try and accelerate by flying level or in a minimal descent. In this accident, the nose never seems to get lowered to decrease the AoA, in fact pitch increases just before it seems to stall. I\x92d also expect similar for an overweight takeoff, thrust or loadsheet error. The fact none of the above happened, coupled with the lack of landing gear coming up, makes me think they didn\x92t have thrust to play with. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Dual Engine Failure Engine Failure (All) MAYDAY V1
FL370 Officeboy June 14, 2025, 09:11:00 GMT permalink Post: 11901290	Quote: Originally Posted by RetiredBA/BY Yes, we did acceleration checks, time to 100 knots, on the Valiant and, I believe, the Victor in the RAF. As well as brake drag, this proved engine performance was correct. I was surprised this was not done when I moved to civil jets. Many years ago I proposed a system called TOPIS. Take Off Performance Indicator System. Basically a bug driven around the ASI to show required and achieved speed. IF, repeat IF, such a system was installed on that 787 it MIGHT have revealed a thrust problem before V1. ( and prevented the TUI BRS incident ) So, after a lot of thought, an unexplained loss of thrust on BOTH engines must be in the frame. But why? What is common to BOTH except the autothrottle system, driving the thrust levers. Even then it is possible to manually firewall the thrust levers, at least one could on the 73,75, and 76. So, a real mystery. I will await the Investigatirs conclusion now they have the FDR. On my 787 we call 'thrust set' which must be achieved by 80kts. This is confirming the thrust achieved matches the target thrust at the very least although this assumes the target thrust is correct, of course. Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): FDR V1
FL370 Officeboy June 14, 2025, 16:34:00 GMT permalink Post: 11901631	I still think total loss of thrust can be the only explanation. Nothing else makes sense - the question is how and why . The 787 has had issues with 5G interference that could affect A/T and engines. This has been limited to landing phase in terms of guidance but I really hope there\x92s not a latent issue for takeoffs related to going from ground to air or such like. https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/fi...AN-2022-01.pdf https://www.nperf.com/en/map/IN/1279...600587&zoom=12 Subjects: None
FL370 Officeboy June 14, 2025, 19:59:00 GMT permalink Post: 11901779	Quote: Originally Posted by Shep69 This to me makes more sense; perhaps I`ve got it wrong but in the video the trailing edge flaps definitely look up. Maybe there`s more and they weren`t. I\x92m now convinced the whole \x91mis-selected flaps\x92 is a complete red herring. Based on the wreckage on the ground which clearly showed the flaps extended and a still from the witness video which I am 100% sure shows the flaps extended. I always believed it was a total loss of thrust and now can\x92t see any other explanation and so need to know why that happened. Accident aircraft with TE flaps visible. \x91Normal\x92 787 takeoff with flaps Subjects: None
FL370 Officeboy June 15, 2025, 10:18:00 GMT permalink Post: 11902325	Quote: Originally Posted by hawkeye red Given the OAT ond TOW they most likely used the APU for airconditioning\x85 If you mean for takeoff, that\x92s not a thing on the 787 Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): APU
FL370 Officeboy June 15, 2025, 18:53:00 GMT permalink Post: 11902716	Quote: 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. I dont believe they would have posted something as serious as this without any credible source cause they are supposed to be a serious news outlet but you never know when stupidity takes over validity. Source is the protothema dot gr site There are at least two whatsapp chain messages doing the rounds (one about the seat theory and one about water on electrics causing FADEC failure). Both are very detailed but clearly fake news with incorrect dates, ECAM instead of EICAS and lots of other things which are clearly inaccurate. They\x92ve probably seen this and reporting it as news Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): AAIB (All) EICAS FADEC Preliminary Report

Posts by user "FL370 Officeboy" [Posts: 7 Total up-votes: 0 Pages: 1]