July 12, 2025, 18:02:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920717
Two things I would like to add:
1: in the context of 'evidentiary' posts, the fact we discuss an issue here which is then embedded in a YouTube expert's analysis, doesn't then make that YT video credible evidence to prove a point here. It's a hamster wheel in action.
2: The absence of some detail or another from the preliminary report doesn't speak to a cover up. What it does is tell us that either that detail was absent from the investigatory evidence, so not available to consider, or it was present but not considered (at this stage at least) a material detail which was useful to report.
1: in the context of 'evidentiary' posts, the fact we discuss an issue here which is then embedded in a YouTube expert's analysis, doesn't then make that YT video credible evidence to prove a point here. It's a hamster wheel in action.
2: The absence of some detail or another from the preliminary report doesn't speak to a cover up. What it does is tell us that either that detail was absent from the investigatory evidence, so not available to consider, or it was present but not considered (at this stage at least) a material detail which was useful to report.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Preliminary Report
July 12, 2025, 18:25:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920730
One suggestion about why the report was sanitised and a fuller transcript was not provided could be to delay public reaction on this and avoid copycat events.
Jump seaters should be mandatory on all flights. On AS2059 the jumpseater maniac was overpowered by the other pilots. Two against one is better than pilot against pilot.
The 10 second delay could be explained by a cabin altercation when one pilot saw the other one deliberately perform the cutoff.
Jump seaters should be mandatory on all flights. On AS2059 the jumpseater maniac was overpowered by the other pilots. Two against one is better than pilot against pilot.
The 10 second delay could be explained by a cabin altercation when one pilot saw the other one deliberately perform the cutoff.
On edit: and No, I doubt the preliminary report was written to avoid the risk of copycat actions or delay public reaction. The investigatory team are not at all likely to be considering that kind of audience in what is essentially a finding of fact. An altercation would have been caught on the CVR... and reported upon.
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 Preliminary Report
July 12, 2025, 19:10:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920763
Human factors in the context of behavioural analysis of an event of this sort, is as I was once told, like trying to juggle 18,903 golf balls at the same time, while keeping precise track of which one is which.
We are capable of hugely unpredictable and improbable actions, even as we undertake complex technical tasks with total precision, and what breaks or holds together is often determined by factors which are wholly unrelated to the task in hand - which is of course why pilots (and others) train rigorously, to move essential responses from voluntary to autonomic status in our individual headspaces.
When you add high stress levels and intense anxiety, as probably being faced in this case, trying to apply a form of rationalised 'anyone would do this ' analysis is hardly likely to apply. Even a deliberate act by one of the crew may not represent what we, in our armchairs, assume.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Human Factors
July 12, 2025, 19:16:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920766
By all means, I have no problem with that at all. I merely offered a perspective based around experience of this kind of investigative work - though I have said previously that I have no experience directly of the AAIB in India, just the way large scale investigations have typically functioned historically in the UK.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): AAIB (All) AAIB (India)
July 12, 2025, 19:31:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920775
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Human Factors
July 12, 2025, 20:03:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920794
It would have saved a thousand hours of internet posts if it could!
Subjects: None
July 12, 2025, 20:16:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920805
It pretty much can and the odds are vastly in favor of a human hand on the switches. I *hate* the idea someone is either that clueless turning off random things or that evil, but the odds of anything else being the cause are rapidly approaching being hit by lightning after winning the lottery.
I know.......it could turn out to be some way out cause no one has thought off.
A buddy went down with double engine failure in an Aztec, when he switched tanks water that had leaked into the airplane formed an ice ball that jammed the cables to the actual switches between tanks and cut off all fuel. If he hadn't landed in a field and gotten an A&P on it before the temps went above freezing maybe no one would have ever known why 2 engines with totally separate fuel systems died at the same time.
I know.......it could turn out to be some way out cause no one has thought off.
A buddy went down with double engine failure in an Aztec, when he switched tanks water that had leaked into the airplane formed an ice ball that jammed the cables to the actual switches between tanks and cut off all fuel. If he hadn't landed in a field and gotten an A&P on it before the temps went above freezing maybe no one would have ever known why 2 engines with totally separate fuel systems died at the same time.
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) Fuel (All) Fuel Cutoff Switches
July 12, 2025, 20:28:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920814
Subjects: None
July 12, 2025, 20:43:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11920820
It doesn't help us with this though.
Subjects: None
July 13, 2025, 16:17:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921416
On the site that I maintain that covers this thread here:
https://paulross.github.io/pprune-th...171/index.html
I removed the subject that described deliberate action on the part of the pilot(s) for reasons I explained here:
Air India Ahmedabad accident 12th June 2025 Part 2
I would restore that subject if any hard evidence appears that suports that theory, not on the basis of speculation (and out of respect to the families and memories of the flight crew).
For those thinking along those lines could I offer this challenge: All the civil aviation pilot suicide cases that I have heard about have been achieved by a rapid descent from cruising altitude. It is a pretty sure outcome. But to switch off the fuel just after takeoff, would you really expect that to succeed? Supposing the other pilot noticed and corrected this in one or two seconds rather than ten, then you would have failed.
I'm not saying people intent on this behaviour are being rational but even by the laws of un-rationality it seems an unlikely way of trying to achieve your goal.
I would restore that subject if any hard evidence appears that suports that theory, not on the basis of speculation (and out of respect to the families and memories of the flight crew).
For those thinking along those lines could I offer this challenge: All the civil aviation pilot suicide cases that I have heard about have been achieved by a rapid descent from cruising altitude. It is a pretty sure outcome. But to switch off the fuel just after takeoff, would you really expect that to succeed? Supposing the other pilot noticed and corrected this in one or two seconds rather than ten, then you would have failed.
I'm not saying people intent on this behaviour are being rational but even by the laws of un-rationality it seems an unlikely way of trying to achieve your goal.
Subjects: None
July 13, 2025, 19:13:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921548
No-one has discussed the concept of suicidal ideation, where a person may idly 'play' with ideas of how to end their life. If someone 'played' with the idea of how to end their life but make it look accidental, I think they might come up with a scenario such as this.
Ideation doesn't always result in an actual act, but if the thoughts came from life factors not being fully brought into consciousness, there may be a 'dream sequence' moment where they actually do the thing they've played with in their mind. It's not pre-planned or intentional, and the person who's acted out may not even be consciously aware they've done so.
Ideation doesn't always result in an actual act, but if the thoughts came from life factors not being fully brought into consciousness, there may be a 'dream sequence' moment where they actually do the thing they've played with in their mind. It's not pre-planned or intentional, and the person who's acted out may not even be consciously aware they've done so.
Your point is a fair one though - it is quite possible that ideation got played out in actuality for non-intended reasons. But that said, this would be a very unusual way for it to manifest, because the presence of inhibiting factors (passengers, observers on the ground, the CVR to name but three) would be pretty high.
It does raise a thought though: If one of the flight deck crew had suffered suicidal ideation and began to act it out without deliberately intending, the other querying 'why did you do that', could certainly be the trigger that got him to reply 'I didn't' and then back to attempting/helping a recovery.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): CVR
July 13, 2025, 19:17:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921554
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Thread Moderation
July 13, 2025, 19:26:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921562
What I found interesting when viewing the Captain's background, was that he was a long-time carer for his aging father, and had called home before the flight to confirm that he would be in contact again once arrived in London. Also that he was highly respected with no history of difficult personal interactions, and had passed all medical clearances.
I'm sure we're all open to actual evidence though.
Subjects: None
July 13, 2025, 20:17:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921601
We don't know this. There is no identification of who did what during this incident. It's fair to say that the PM is
likely
to be the one who flips switches while the PF has his hands full on the yoke, but this incident was anything but normal, so we can't assume normal applies.
Subjects: None
July 13, 2025, 20:28:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921619
I meant the Captain was the PM in this case…
You are quite right, we don’t have any evidence of who did what, other than those actions and words that were said and done. That’s why we discuss based on our everyday experiences in the very job they were doing to at least come up with a plausible explanation, right?
You are quite right, we don’t have any evidence of who did what, other than those actions and words that were said and done. That’s why we discuss based on our everyday experiences in the very job they were doing to at least come up with a plausible explanation, right?
I would only add that MH370 doesn't tell us anything in this case, simply because there is no actual evidence.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): Mental Health
July 13, 2025, 20:37:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921627
Quote: Originally Posted by
Contact Approach
But there is evidence, pretty clear evidence!
The "evidence" might be available, but I disagree it is available to us. I assert the prelim report has been deliberately sanitised to prevent us (i.e. everybody outside the AAIB circle) being given enough 'evidence' to make certain conclusions.
You/others might not like it, some might say it is obvious (I say not), but I think it is carefully worded enough to imply what might have happened, but nothing is clear - intentionally.
But there is evidence, pretty clear evidence!
The "evidence" might be available, but I disagree it is available to us. I assert the prelim report has been deliberately sanitised to prevent us (i.e. everybody outside the AAIB circle) being given enough 'evidence' to make certain conclusions.
You/others might not like it, some might say it is obvious (I say not), but I think it is carefully worded enough to imply what might have happened, but nothing is clear - intentionally.
Suggesting otherwise is a bit insulting to the professionals who wade into debris fields, examine minute evidence, and have to try and work out how and why a catastrophe happened. It isn't a fun job, and it isn't done in isolation from a lot of expertise.
What the report does not contain are facts yet to be determined, and details unknown or uncertain at the time the rules required putting pen to paper. And if it is lacking in the sort of precision we would hope for, it is still the only factual report we have.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): AAIB (All) Preliminary Report
July 13, 2025, 21:18:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921672
The two fuel cutoff switches were put in the OFF position. If you have ever used those switches yourself, you will know that it can not be accidental. A deliberate action from one of the pilots is BY FAR the most plausible (or only) explanation. I feel very sorry for the innocent pilot in the cockpit and the hundreds of other victims. Having passed many medical examinations, I can assure you that psychological testing is not part of the periodic medicals.
It does appear to me that you're NOT open to evidence if you continue to deny that a deliberate pilot action is not plausible.
Please enlighten me about how much time you have spent in an airline cockpit... Judging by what you contribute I suspect it will not be much.
Having added your newer arguments too, you appear to have ignored what I've said since. But to respond to your direct question, my time in an airline cockpit is that which related to participating (as a human factors SME) in an aircraft accident investigation. Not much, but not actually relevant to the point I made relating to your post, or this subsequently - unless you contend that investigators have no place in investigating an accident.
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 Human Factors
July 13, 2025, 22:02:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11921714
Here is something I have not seen on this thread. In the UK, as I understand it, an accident investigation is lead by the AAIB, however if evidence is discovered that suggests a criminal act has taken place then the police lead the investigation with the AAIB in a supporting role. Here is the
memorandum of understanding [pdf]
describing this, sections 3.5 and 3.6 describe the difference.
I assume something of the same happens in India. However, I can not find any evidence online that a criminal investigation has been launched there and it seems AAIB (India) continues to lead the investigation.
This suggests that, with all the evidence gathered by the investigators so far (which is substantial), there are no grounds to conclude that a criminal act had been committed.
In other words, this is an accident and not deliberate.
I assume something of the same happens in India. However, I can not find any evidence online that a criminal investigation has been launched there and it seems AAIB (India) continues to lead the investigation.
This suggests that, with all the evidence gathered by the investigators so far (which is substantial), there are no grounds to conclude that a criminal act had been committed.
In other words, this is an accident and not deliberate.
If there's one factor which strikes me as pertinent to the AI171 prelim report, it's that it may have been written in the form we see, to help hold the question of criminality sufficiently distant that the investigators don't loose control of the investigation.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): AAIB (All) AAIB (India) AI171 Preliminary Report
July 14, 2025, 16:53:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11922363
The preliminary report narrows things down a lot but not as much as it could have done. The report will have been approved by several people. What we see is their consensus. Why did they choose this version?
.....
Two posters above have quoted AvHerald's report that "... India's media reports that the investigation is NOT focusing on a human action causing the fuel switches to appear in the CUTOFF position, but on a system failure." One interpretation of this is that the investigation knows all about the human action and that the system they refer to is the industry's approach to pilot mental heath and well-being.
YYZJim
.....
Two posters above have quoted AvHerald's report that "... India's media reports that the investigation is NOT focusing on a human action causing the fuel switches to appear in the CUTOFF position, but on a system failure." One interpretation of this is that the investigation knows all about the human action and that the system they refer to is the industry's approach to pilot mental heath and well-being.
YYZJim
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 Preliminary Report RUN/CUTOFF
July 15, 2025, 14:42:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11922996
Absolutely true. I can imagine that this report is a compromise among the investigators and was issued after representatives of Boeing and the USA, were happy that they would be able to say that there were no technical issues that caused the crash and the Indian side of the investigation team that is not ready (if they will ever be...) to acknowledge that the switching off was an intentional, deliberate action.
The NTSB, Boeing, GE and AAIB-UK personnel involved in the team are 'advisory', along with various SMEs. They don't get to 'negotiate' and I seriously doubt that they'd be given any chance to. They would have examined the evidence, and reported what they found and what conclusions could be drawn from it.
The report is written the way it is because it can at this stage only deal with pertinent facts as they are known, while the investigation continues in the expectation of unearthing more details.
As I have said before, the people who do this work are professionals, not there to play politics or represent business interests.
Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): NTSB