Pilot error? Do not go to conclusion, other questions are: Ahmedabad aircraft accident experts. Bharat News

From the cockpit voice recorder data, the report notes that one of the pilots asked the other why he cut the fuel, for which the other pilot replied that he was not.

While some people interpret these findings as a sign of human error, the giants of the aviation industry stated that it is a long time to reach any conclusion based on the initial report. The report, he said, some major questions answer, but also raise many people that only one will be able to clarify the investigation.

Union Civil Aviation Minister K Ram Mohan Naidu warned against jumping at the conclusion and Civil Aviation Minister of State Muralidhar Mohol said that it would not be appropriate to comment or draw any conclusion based on the initial report. “Initial search that has gone into the fuel control switch cut-off mode, is actually shocking. They (investigators) now have the most potential reason, and now they should check to find out how it happened and why it happened. These are the major questions that should be answered in the final investigation report.” A former air accident investigator told the Indian Express.

An aircraft is an extremely sophisticated and complex machine, and the exact cause or combination of the causes requires a wide and laborious examination to detect the combination. A single trigger in an aviation accident is rare; There can be many, or leading to each other. The AAIB is expected to release the final investigation report within one year of the accident, according to international guidelines.

Did one of the pilots transfer the fuel control switch?

To ensure this, the report states that the engine switches fuel control that allows and cuts fuel flows into the aircraft engines, which leads to a cutoff infection. It does not suggest that they were transferred to cutoff mode by any pilots. The report mentions a pilot, the other was asked why he cut the fuel supply, the other replied that he was not.

Experts say that the contingent movement of the switch is not possible. Spring-loaded switches have brackets on both sides to protect them and have a stop lock mechanism, for which the pilots need to be lifted the switch before moving between one of their two positions-Run and Cutoff.

“No Sane Pilot will move the switch during the flight and that too at such a low height, unless a dual engine was to deal with failure. And even in coordination, not unilateral trick. It is not really a possibility to transfer them from accidents, because they have to move to muding with one or other modes.

Experts believe that only full audio and transcript of the cockpit voice recorder will be able to give more information about the discussion and tasks of pilots in the cockpit in the minutes leading to Trades.

Meanwhile, a pilot association has expressed concern towards the AI 171 crash investigation. Sam Thomas, president of the airline pilots Association of India (ALPA-I), said in a statement, “The tone of the investigation suggests a bias to the pilot error. ALPA-I clearly rejected this estimate and emphasized a fair, fact-based investigation.” The bodies of the pilots have repeated their request to join the air crash test “very minimal, as supervisors”.

Fuel cut-off due to electrical, system, issues?

“In addition to looking at the action of the pilots, investigators should see if the fuel switch cut-off can be due to any other electrical or system-related issues. Can it be an electrical or software malfunction that indicates the aircraft system that the switch was in cut-off mode, even if they didn’t really move?” A senior airline pilot asked, Given the Boeing 787, there is a modern electric heavy aircraft.

Another airline pilot said that such landscape was theoretically possible without the physical movement of the switch. Further analysis of the aircraft’s black box should be able to establish whether the switches were actually mechanically moved, or whether the cut-off was due to another issue.

Pilots and former aircraft accident investigator stated that during the important tech-off phase of the flight, the pilots had no business in keeping their hands anywhere close to the fuel control switch, as in accordance with the standard operational processes installed. This is to prevent accidental or unknown togling of any important switch.

The fact is that the preliminary report has not issued any recommendation to the Operators of the Boeing 787 aircraft and GE GenX -1B engine, suggests that investigators, for the least time, do not have enough reason to believe that fuel control switch from an electrical or system failure can be “transition”.

Experts also reported that these switches are manual and not motorized, and cannot be physically transferred by electrical signals or avionics of the aircraft.

In particular, the report also refers to the 2018 Special Airwriting Information Bulletin (SAIB) issued by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) about “Possible dissolution of fuel control switch locking facility”. However, Air India did not inspect because Saib was only a consultant and not mandatory. In addition, the Cockpit’s throttle control module – in which the fuel control switch is among others – was replaced in 2019 and 2023, but the reason for replacement was not associated with the fuel control switch. The preliminary report states that no defects related to the fuel control switch on the aircraft had been reported since 2023.

Nevertheless, can the switch lock, component fatigue, or a disruptions of a mechanical failure can move the switch? Experts said that this is unlikely. Even the possibility of a disintegrated switch was not likely to be full of accidents, pointing to the conclusions of the report, saying that both switches appeared in changing positions.