Air India Crash

squerble said:
The quote:

"The EGT was observed to be rising for both engines indicating relight. Engine 1’s core
deceleration stopped, reversed and started to progress to recovery. Engine 2 was able to
relight but could not arrest core speed deceleration and re-introduced fuel repeatedly to
increase core speed acceleration and recovery."

The second engine had slowed down too much, it wasn't just behind. There's a chance it wouldn't have recovered properly, and would have needed higher airspeed (or the other engine's generators back online to produce enough voltage/current for a proper start). Anyway, I think we'll end up going around in circles here. While there could be some merit in the fuel cutoffs being ignored for the first 1000ft of a climb incase of a pilot deciding on a murder/suicide, it still seems like a naff idea to make the fuel cutoff a software switch.
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree, I think we are both essentially saying the same thing.
 
When a previous maintenance suggestion concerning the very item in question surrounding a hull loss was not carried out, it’s hard to come up with any serious reason for not doing it afterwards.
 
Werewolf said:
Because it's a potential invasion of their privacy
Click to expand...

There should be nothing going on in the cockpit that would be considered private and therefore no invasion of privacy, refusing raises suspicion and concern.

They are responsible for many lives and being scrutinised is surely expected, especially in response to an issue.
 
SupraWez said:
There should be nothing going on in the cockpit that would be considered private and therefore no invasion of privacy, refusing raises suspicion and concern.

They are responsible for many lives and being scrutinised is surely expected, especially in response to an issue.
Click to expand...
I would guess most pilots couldn't care less whether there are cameras in the cockpit. Pilot unions may take a different view but the real issue is cost. Most people don't realise just how eye wateringly expensive it would be to get such a system designed, installed and certified. The airlines would most likely oppose it.

Which wouldn't be a problem if such a system could prevent such accidents but it simply wouldn't. I can't see how cameras in the flight deck would have prevented this accident or any other.

After Sept 11th, it was mandated that cameras be installed at the flight deck door so that crew inside could identify who was trying to access the flight deck from outside. There is a clear link here between installing such a system and preventing another attack like the Sept 11th one.

I can't see such a link between cameras recording inside the flightdeck and preventing this event.

Regarding who flipped the fuel shutoff switches, the AAIB investigators working on this are very very competent. An analysis of background sounds in the flight deck, subtle movements of the flight controls, order of switch off and I'm sure other things I wouldn't claim to understand most likely will lead to who switched off the fuel.

Edit: Upon reflection, I realise I should have said I couldn't care less, although I'd want assurances that the data wasn't misused. I reckon a large number of my colleagues would probably agree with this but there would also be a large number of pilots would would venomously oppose it. The rest of my point stands.
 
Last edited:
esmozz said:
Most people don't realise just how eye wateringly expensive it would be to get such a system designed, installed and certified.
Click to expand...
Not as much as you would think (for the sector, obviously it would cost more than a ring doorbell).

Some current black boxes even have SSD space set aside for future image recording already, I.E the GE Aviation Model 3254F CVR/CDR has 5 Gigabytes set aside for it which is enough for over an hour of 1080p footage (way way more than would ever be needed to ascertain what the pilots were doing in the lead up to a crash).
 
Last edited:
ubersonic said:
Not as much as you would think (for the sector, obviously it would cost more than a ring doorbell).

Some current black boxes even have SSD space set aside for future image recording already, I.E the GE Aviation Model 3254F CVR/CDR has 5 Gigabytes set aside for it which is enough for over an hour of 1080p footage (way way more than would ever be needed to ascertain what the pilots were doing in the lead up to a crash).
Click to expand...

Fair enough - but for many aircraft that would mean having to replace the FDR system already in place. I regularly fly aircraft that are 15-20 years old. I have no idea if the FDRs fitted to those would be capable of storing image data.
 
Yeah it would be costly for existing aircraft to install a new system to record video. I expect it would be a requirement for new planes if it ever came in rather than forcing every older aircraft to retrofit it.
 
200sols said:
Yeah it would be costly for existing aircraft to install a new system to record video. I expect it would be a requirement for new planes if it ever came in rather than forcing every older aircraft to retrofit it.
Click to expand...

Dashcam and cigarette lighter. Sorted.








Questionable crashworthiness, but better than nothing…
 
chaparral said:
Loads of work places have camera’s these days including the place where I work.
Click to expand...

We have them in our trucks and you get used to them. Till some plonker cuts you up and you have to brake hard and you are in the office and it always seems to happen when I am listening to something weird like hardcore gabber or Britney Spears.

The system we have only records when incidents happen and it triggers some sort of motion sensor. All uploaded to some sort of cloud through wifi.
 
www.airlineratings.com

Which Airlines are Ordering Fuel Switch Checks and Why?

Which Airlines are Ordering Fuel Switch Checks and Why? Etihad, Southe Korea, India exercise caution around Boeing 787 fuel switches
www.airlineratings.com www.airlineratings.com

Etihad Airways was among the first, issuing an internal directive to its Boeing 787 pilots last week, instructing them to “exercise caution” when handling the fuel control switches.

Following that, India’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) on Monday ordered all Indian carriers operating Boeing 787 and 737 aircraft to inspect the locking mechanisms on fuel switches. The regulator set a deadline of July 21 to complete fleet-wide inspections.

Now, South Korea is preparing to issue a similar directive, instructing its domestic airlines to inspect the fuel control switches on Boeing jets, a spokesperson from the country’s Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport confirmed to Reuters. While no timeline was given, the ministry noted the checks would align with FAA guidance issued in 2018.
Click to expand...

It would seem the `advisory` from earlier this year is being very seriously , of the potential issue with the switch
 
Werewolf said:
Because it's a potential invasion of their privacy, and more importantly there is history of Airlines trying to use private conversations in the cockpit that did not break any law to sack staff.
Click to expand...
What makes them special that their workplace (where in fact that they are directly responsible for hundreds of lives and millions of pounds worth of kit, in a highly regulated environment) is more "private" than any other workplace? Phone calls are recorded, emails/teams chats are monitored, there's cctv in sensitive areas as a norm nowadays. What's more sensitive than a place where deliberately flipping the wrong switch kills hundreds and costs millions?
 
Not that I disagree with including cameras in the cockpit. But in this instance, it may not not have prevented deliberate sabotage. I suppose the value is being able to more readily understand what the pilots are doing in the cockpit.
 
I would have thought it was a matter of course that other aviation authorities will issue the checking of the switches as the investigation is still ongoing and the reasoning not yet known. Rather than the switches being an actual problem themselves.
 
Macky said:
Not that I disagree with including cameras in the cockpit. But in this instance, it may not not have prevented deliberate sabotage.
Click to expand...
While it wouldn't prevent it it would help ascertain if it was a deliberate or accidental act.

Which may actually work as a preventative measure in some future cases, I.E if cameras are installed in the cockpit and insurance companies are indemnified against having to pay the family of a suicidal pilot then somebody thinking of crashing the plane to claim the insurance would think twice.
 
I'm now leaning on one of the pilots having a brain fart and shutting down the engines. Probably the Captain with 18,000 hours, so used to flying that he no longer has to think every action fully through. He thought "gear up" believes he did "gear up" but due to a brain fart, his arm did "engine shutdown"

As I believe that the pilots in the cockpit should always have absolute authority to be able to fly to the plane how they want, without the risk of "computer says no" I don't think there is a fix, just an acceptable risk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom