Officials Clashed in Investigation of Deadly Air India Crash (wsj.com)
- Reference: 0180231475
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/11/28/151231/officials-clashed-in-investigation-of-deadly-air-india-crash
- Source link: https://www.wsj.com/business/airlines/air-india-investigation-conflict-crash-36aed1ee
When two American recorder experts landed in New Delhi in late June, they received urgent messages from colleagues telling them not to go with the Indians; Homendy had grown concerned about sending U.S. personnel and equipment to an aerospace lab in the remote town of Korwa amid State Department security warnings about terrorism in the region. She made calls to Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and the CEOs of Boeing and GE Aerospace, and the State Department sent embassy officials to intercept the NTSB specialists at the airport.
Homendy eventually delivered an ultimatum: if Indian authorities didn't choose between their Delhi facility and the NTSB's Washington lab within 48 hours, she would withdraw American support from the probe. Indian officials relented. The downloaded data showed someone in the cockpit moved switches that cut off the engines' fuel supply, and India's preliminary report stated one pilot asked the other why he moved the switches while that pilot denied doing so. American government and industry officials now privately believe the captain likely moved the switches deliberately.
[1] https://tech.slashdot.org/story/25/06/12/1224214/air-india-boeing-787-carrying-242-passengers-crashes-after-takeoff
[2] https://www.wsj.com/business/airlines/air-india-investigation-conflict-crash-36aed1ee
Elect a kakistocracy, expect monkeys (Score:2)
Low trust, more corruption, more drama, slower results, and more conflict with competent people.
Human (Score:2)
Whether it was a big night in Mumbai the night before or a deliberate suicide move, everything seems to be pointing at the fact that it was a human action that led to the crash.
So just accept it for what it is. Accept that these kind of events are one of those risks related to malicious actors that you are never going to prevent, regardless of what your vetting process is, and if someone wants to crash a plane full of people, there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop them. All you can do is put it on t
Re: Human (Score:3, Insightful)
Nothing we can do? I agree if someone is willing to die, it is difficult to stop them in all cases. But maybe we can make potentially crash inducing actions in the cockpit of a plane (like shutting off fuel to engines) something that requires input from two pilots.
Re: (Score:1)
> maybe we can make potentially crash inducing actions in the cockpit of a plane (like shutting off fuel to engines) something that requires input from two pilots.
Is it best to systemize distrust of pilots like that? I know they use two hands to push a the throttle ahead on takeoff, but to start doing that kind of thing to a long list of actions seems like its going to eat at pilots. Conveying the message "we don't trust you regarding intentionally crashing the plane." Wouldn't the best thing would be to make the fuel shutoff warning (and other similar things) easily visible so an opposing "good" pilot at least knows whats happening as its happening (instead of too l
Re: (Score:2)
> Nothing we can do? I agree if someone is willing to die, it is difficult to stop them in all cases. But maybe we can make potentially crash inducing actions in the cockpit of a plane (like shutting off fuel to engines) something that requires input from two pilots.
There are plenty of "potentially crash inducing actions " that a pilot can do, forcing two to do them also means in an emergency you are complicating the response nad keeping one from flying the plane while the other coordinates the emergency response.
Re: Human (Score:3)
My take is that the weather at the time was very hot, around 40 degrees C, that in itself could lead to brain overheating and failed logic reasoning. So the pilot might have been thinking about raising the landing gears but instead cut the fuel because the thought got crosswired.
Re: (Score:2)
I get that, because I've done similar while dehydrated, though not while flying a plane. But aren't the cockpits typically nice and comfy?
Don't blame the pilot prematurely (Score:5, Insightful)
Geoffrey Thomas and Richard Godfrey have been meticulously analyzing all available evidence on flight AI171, including maintenance records from Air India for the accident aircraft. They have published tens of episodes on flight AI171. Check out one of the many episodes on the YouTube Channel, "Airline News with Geoffrey Thomas". Both of these men have extensive experience in aviation. In this description of this representative episode from November 20, you can see links to further resources, including Richard's report on the causes.
[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
When the investigative bodies break their own rules and behave suspiciously, it behooves us to understand that there can be many players with reasons to want to shift the blame to the pilots, which the investigators did by releasing incomplete fragments of the CVR, and not directly transcribed, not verbatim, but paraphrased, and none of the words attributed to a specific individual.
The uniqueness of good analytical journalism is that the value cannot be appreciated until the journalism is consumed -- in this case, listening to a few of the episodes. Many experts in relevant fields have contributed to their reporting.
The key alternative hypothesis, and one supported by maintenance records, aircraft documentation and air worthiness directives from Boeing is this: If the data stream to the FADEC that conveys the cockpit throttle control position data is interrupted, the control software is designed to shut down the engines. When the data stream resumes, the engines will automatically restart. If such an event happens during take off (which seems likely here, all evidence considered) the only action the pilots could take are the actions they did take on an uncommanded shutdown, the actions they are trained to take, and that is to toggle the fuel control switches.
In fact, the engines did restart, but because of the low altitude, there wasn't enough time to spin up to a sufficient speed to regain thrust. That the engines did restart and were not merely shut down and left off suggests the actions in the cockpit were intended to save the aircraft, not to crash it.
That's the TL;DR spoiler, but you owe it yourselves -- if you care about this story -- if you respect the families of the passengers and the flight crew who died -- to examine the events further, rather than flock like lemmings to draw conclusions based on a couple sound bites from parties potentially having an agenda to advance, which we have reason to believe is that of occluding their posteriors.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-L529Zy88qk
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's far from indisputable. Indeed, it's hotly disputed within the aviation industry. That does NOT mean that it was a short-circuit (although that is a theory that is under investigation), it merely means that "indisputable" is not the correct term to use here. You can argue probabilities or reasonableness, but you CANNOT argue "indisputable" when specialists in the field in question say that it is, in fact, disputed.
If you were to argue that the most probable cause was manual, then I think I could accept
Re: (Score:2)
Mods, this should not have been rated -1 flamebait! Totally inappropriate mod.
I deeply respect Captain Steeeve and his videos are great. Any nervous flyer should watch his videos (except the Air India ones!). And indeed Captain Steeeve's summary of the report is accurate. And his videos about the cutoff switches are accurate too. The chance of those switches being flipped inadvertently or on their own from mechanical wear and vibration is zero. And indeed the computer shows that inputs from those swit
Re: (Score:2)
I recall very early in the conversation, the transcription included a "why did you turn those off?"
Are you saying nobody said that?
I agree with you in principle: the open Internet, distributed expertise, and solid investigative journalism CAN reveal the true story when official sources are covering it up due to an agenda.
OTOH, the internet is *also* a being ground for paranoid conspiracy theories, tinfoil hatters, and cranks cherry picking data to drive their pet theories.
How does an amateur tell the differ
Re: (Score:2)
Those words were said, definitely. and the other guy responded, "I did not."
I don't know anything about what conspiracy theories are going around on the Internet, but I do know there among some professional pilots there is skepticism. There are no pilots at Air India who knew well these two pilots who believe they were simply suicidal. Plus there was at least one other incident this year with a 787 where both engines shut down during landing. The investigation has certainly been fraught with political te
Re: (Score:3)
Godfrey is notorious for making all kinds of assertions that are provably wrong. In his root cause analysis of AI 171, he directly quotes an FAA Advisory Circular that is publicly available, except when you read it, the cited text doesn't exist. Total fabrication. Thomas, who by his own admission is technically illiterate, nevertheless slaps Godfrey on the back and says, "Good work Richard!" Total balderdash.
One easy way to tell if research is bogus (Score:2)
It's available only on YouTube.
Real research is published in written form, so that it can be reviewed and inspected, and sources and methods examined.
I'm sure there's some good, well-researched material on YouTube. But I have yet to see a case where good, well-researched material is *only* available on YouTube.
Directly monitored switches? (Score:2)
Is the black box recording that the switches were physically moved or that a signal from the switches was received?
Or (if the switches directly controlled shutoff valves) is the black box recording that the valves were closed and therefore assumes the switches must have been moved?
Re: (Score:2)
This is the central question - and in the absence of a factual answer, the most politically convenient facts will be adopted.
Unfortunately there is a history of this in aviation accident investigation where every aircraft manufacturer is a "national champion"
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously the black box can only record what the computer tells it is the state of the switches. There's no camera looking at the switches to confirm they actually were moved. No doubt the switches are wired such that a short or an open circuit will not fool the computer into thinking the switch was moved and shut the engines down. But if something caused the computer to think (pardon the expression) the switches had changed state, it would shut the engines down and the flight recorder would dutifully rec
Re: (Score:2)
You're suggesting The Matrix is the way to go?
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, but not everything in life and the real world is 100% digitizable. In the case of air crash investigations, systems-specific investigators often need to go into the field to see evidence directly and decide which pieces need further examination at their or other labs. If it were completely digitizable, they could be replaced with a very small AI script and no human experts would be needed.
Re: (Score:2)
To build more data centers, of course.