Plane Crashes

[Vulcan59]

So, if it's verified that the RAT did deploy, then as listed in the post above, one of the likely cause is a dual engine failure!

Just a note that the generators are engine driven and there are two 235 Vac generators per engine (a total of 4 generators). So for all four to fail sure does seem like a dual engine failure on takeoff. Sabotage or maintenance issue?

 

[Mari]

Seven killed in helicopter crash in India’s Uttarakhand state

Incident comes days after an Air India plane crashed in the western Ahmedabad city, killing all but one of 242 on board.

www.aljazeera.com

Seven killed in helicopter crash in India’s Uttarakhand state​

The incident comes days after an Air India plane crashed in the western Ahmedabad city, killing all but one of the 242 on board.

Smoke billows from the site of the helicopter crash near Gaurikund, Uttarakhand, India, June 15, 2025 [Uttarakhand's State Disaster Response Force via AFP]
Published On 15 Jun 202515 Jun 2025

Seven people, including a toddler, have been killed in India’s northern Uttarakhand state when a helicopter ferrying them for a Hindu pilgrimage crashed in the Himalayas, officials say.

Officials from the Uttarakhand Civil Aviation Development Authority told reporters the chopper took off at about 5:30am (00:00 GMT) on Sunday from the temple town of Kedarnath for Guptkashi, a town some 37km (23 miles) away, but crashed shortly after takeoff.

The deceased have been identified as the pilot, Captain Rajveer Singh Chauhan, and passengers Vikram Rawat, Vinod Devi, Trishti Singh, Rajkumar Jaiswal, his wife Shraddha Jaiswal and their two-year-old daughter, Kashi.

The bodies were badly burned in a fire that followed the crash, authorities said.

Uttarakhand’s State Disaster Response Force told the ANI news agency that the crash site is located in a remote and dense forest area, adding that the rescue operation is under way in coordination with the local police.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1934126528226308147

Officials said the crash was believed to have been caused by poor weather conditions.

In a post on X, Uttarakhand’s Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami called the incident “very sad”.

Kedarnath, standing at an altitude of 3,584 metres (11,759 feet), is home to one of the four most sacred Hindu temple shrines and receives tens of thousands of pilgrims each year during the summer season.

To avoid the arduous trekking in the mountainous terrain, affluent pilgrims often use helicopter charter services. But mishaps are common in the treacherous region, where sudden weather changes and high-altitude flying conditions can pose risks.

On June 7, a helicopter operating in the Kedarnath Valley made an emergency landing on a highway due to a technical fault shortly after taking off. The pilot was injured, but all five passengers on board were unharmed.

Last month, a helicopter crashed in Uttarakhand’s Uttarkashi district, killing six people, including the pilot. One person survived.

Indian media reports said Sunday’s crash was the fifth such incident in less than two months. It also came only days after an Air India plane crashed in Ahmedabad city, killing all but one of 242 passengers on board and dozens of others on the ground.

 

[axj]

An impossible string of coincidences with Boeing aircraft and India currently:

Midair emergencies force four Boeing Dreamliners to divert India flights

These developments come just days after an Air India 787-8 crashed shortly after takeoff in Ahmedabad, killing 290 people

www.rt.com

 

[Vulcan59]

The latest from the Air Accidents Investigation Branch of India;

On Jun 17th 2025 an official, a former Air India Captain trained by the Captain of the accident flight, stated, that the CVR has been successfully read out, the voices on the CVR are very clear. It is becoming gradually clear from the newly emerging evidence that there was probably zero negligence in the cockpit, the crew did not give up until the very last moment. The probability of a technical cause is high. A preliminary report by India's AAIB can be expected in a few days.

The Aviation Herald

Aviation Herald - News, Incidents and Accidents in Aviation

avherald.com

 

[Possibility of Being]

So, if it's verified that the RAT did deploy, then as listed in the post above, one of the likely cause is a dual engine failure!

Just a note that the generators are engine driven and there are two 235 Vac generators per engine (a total of 4 generators). So for all four to fail sure does seem like a dual engine failure on takeoff. Sabotage or maintenance issue?

VASAviation guy posted a video about another Air India B787 incident last month. It happened on June 16 and was caused by fuel contamination/fuel filter issue. A short report from Avherald:

Incident: India B788 at Hong Kong on Jun 16th 2025, engine fuel filter problem​

By Simon Hradecky, created Tuesday, Jun 17th 2025 17:09Z, last updated Tuesday, Jun 17th 2025 17:09Z​ ​ An Air India Boeing 787-8, registration VT-NAC performing flight AI-315 from Hong Kong (China) to Delhi (India), was climbing out of Hong Kong when the crew stopped the climb at FL220 advising ATC they needed to stay close to the airport and did not want to continue enroute, they would likely return to Hong Kong. After working the related checklists the crew told ATC, they had a fuel filter problem for the right hand engine (GEnx) and were ready for a return to Hong Kong. The aircraft landed safely on Hong Kong's runway 25R about 40 minutes later.​

In the video, he explains the problem and what happens when filters on both sides are affected, and speculates on the possibility that's what could have happened to Flight AI-171 on the takeoff at Ahmedabad just a week earlier.

Added:
Just saw this:

Preliminary report on fatal Air India crash to focus on fuel control switches

The investigation has honed in on the movement of the aircraft's fuel control switches.

www.dimsumdaily.hk

Preliminary report on fatal Air India crash to focus on fuel control switches

9th July 2025 – (Hong Kong) A preliminary report on the tragic crash of an Air India jetliner in June, where 241 out of 242 individuals onboard lost their lives, is set to be disclosed by Friday, as shared by three informed sources. The investigation has honed in on the movement of the aircraft’s fuel control switches, particularly concerning the London-bound Boeing 787 Dreamliner’s descent after reaching 650 feet before the catastrophic incident post-takeoff from Ahmedabad, India.

The probe has scrutinized data from the flight and voice recorders of the Boeing 787, coupled with Boeing’s simulation of the aircraft’s final moments. Notably, there haven’t been any immediate indications of mechanical malfunction, nor have there been advisories to airlines regarding alterations to 787 operations.

The aviation industry publication, The Air Current, unveiled a pivotal focus on the fuel switches responsible for powering the plane’s engines. The specific actions involving these switches under investigation remain undisclosed

Concerns have been raised regarding the black box data’s inability to definitively confirm or rule out any improper, inadvertent, or intentional actions leading up to or following the loss of thrust before the crash. Aviation safety expert John Cox highlighted the unlikelihood of accidental fuel switch manipulation, emphasizing the immediate impact of switching off these controls on engine power.

Given the complexity of air accidents typically involving multiple factors, the current investigation is particularly attentive to engine thrust, as previously reported by Reuters.

While the Indian investigative report is anticipated to be publicized on Friday, the sources cautioned Reuters about potential alterations to the schedule and the extent of information expected in the forthcoming document. Anonymity was preserved by the sources due to a lack of authorization to engage with the press.

The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau of India, leading the inquiry under international regulations, is yet to respond to media inquiries outside regular business hours.

Amidst concerns regarding information accessibility during the investigation, recent developments include the inclusion of a specialist from the UN’s International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as an observer following a special request for support.

This tragic incident is not only a test for the Tata Group’s efforts to reinvigorate Air India’s standing and modernize its fleet but also crucial for India’s aspirations to establish itself as a significant global aviation hub. The country aims to leverage aviation growth to further its developmental objectives, aligning with plans to make India a pivotal aviation hub akin to Dubai.

A parliamentary panel in India will delve into the safety standards of the nation’s civil aviation sector, inviting industry and government representatives to address recent air safety concerns, including the Air India crash.

 

[rs]

It’s been reported that both recorders were recovered and successfully read out. By now it should be clear what happened. The delay and waiting until the last legal second is starting to smell like a cover-up. If it’s equipment, it’s existential for Boeing. If it’s pilot error, it’s existential for Tata. OSIT.

 

[Ursus Minor]

So, if it's verified that the RAT did deploy, then as listed in the post above, one of the likely cause is a dual engine failure!

Just a note that the generators are engine driven and there are two 235 Vac generators per engine (a total of 4 generators). So for all four to fail sure does seem like a dual engine failure on takeoff. Sabotage or maintenance issue?

Air India 171 Update: Fuel Cutoff Switches in 'Cutoff' Position according to WSJ ​

Just in from an experienced airline captain...

According to sources familiar with the black box data, both fuel cutoff switches were found in the “cutoff” position—meaning the engines were intentionally shut down... (cutting the flow of fuel to both engines)

If this turns out to be correct one or both pilots have sent their passengers to an early grave.

Apart from the technical stuff I wonder if this could be a case of hundreds of people taking flight 171 having made the unconscious decision to opt out?

What a karmic burden for the suicidal pilot...

 

[Vulcan59]

I find it impossible to think that both Fuel Control Switches were put to "Cut-off" on takeoff by one of the pilots, intentionally. Easy to put the blame on the pilots!

Think of the consequence of stating as fact that it was a computer glitch that cut-off the fuel supply to both engines! That would cause the entire B787 fleet in the world to be grounded until the issue can be resolved. That would also put a stop to B787 orders temporarily. Big money involved!

However, according to Schiavo, per the previous incidents, the “chief” on the list is TCMA and FADEC.

TCMA is the Thrust Control Malfunction accommodation, and FADEC is the Full Authority Digital Engine Control. The TCMA tells the FADEC, which controls airspeed and thrust on the engines, whether it is on the ground or in the air.

“If the TCMA senses it is on the ground, it throttles back the engines without pilot input,” she further said, before adding, “On the Air India flight the fact that there are known computer problems causes me to suspect the Thrust Control Malfunction accommodation (TCMA) and the Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC).”

https://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/ai-171-crash-tcma-failure-may-have-caused-boeing-787-crash-says-us-aviation-attorney-engines-throttled-back-after-take-off/3911076/

 

[Ruth]

Apparently there was a conversation (recorded) on the flight deck about the fuel switches in the very short time they were airborn. Weird! If one of the pilots did in fact switch the fuel switches off.... and then denied it when the other pilot questioned it. Was he doing it consciously or unconsciously - if he physically did it at all....? Or did the pilot questioning the action - was he the one to do it. It seemed it definitely happened, but how and why it happened (and who actually did the action, and why) is a mystery.

 

[The Mechanic]

Apparently there was a conversation (recorded) on the flight deck about the fuel switches in the very short time they were airborn. Weird! If one of the pilots did in fact switch the fuel switches off.... and then denied it when the other pilot questioned it. Was he doing it consciously or unconsciously - if he physically did it at all....? Or did the pilot questioning the action - was he the one to do it. It seemed it definitely happened, but how and why it happened (and who actually did the action, and why) is a mystery.

So this is weird, right. The report said the fuel cutoff switches "transitioned from the RUN to the CUTOFF position", but it doesn't specifically says one of the pilots did that. Than one of the pilots asks the other why he cut of the fuel, and the other pilot denies having done so. Seems like the computer turned it off then to me. I think the guy in the video makes the incorrect assumption one of the pilots did this. But perhaps I'm wrong and the computer can not even control those switches.

 

[Ruth]

Here's another video from Jeff Ostroff, an engineer, who was one of the first to bring people's attention to the deployment of the RAT (because of the turbine noise). He's going through the pelimininary report.

 

[Vulcan59]

The Indian AAIB (Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau) has released the preliminary accident report. Essentially, the report suggests that the locking mechanism for the fuel control switches somehow got disengage and went to the 'cutoff position'.

What’s deeply concerning is that this wasn’t an unforeseen defect. Back in December 2018, the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued a Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB No. NM-18-33). It warned that certain fuel control switches — including those installed on Boeing 787 aircraft — had been reported to disengage from their locking mechanism. The issue, while not deemed hazardous enough for a mandatory directive, was flagged for operator awareness and voluntary inspection.

...

Despite the advisory, Air India did not perform any inspection or modification related to the fuel switch mechanism on VT-ANB. The airline maintained that the SAIB was advisory in nature and not binding.


...


The cockpit voice recorder provided perhaps the most damning insight. In the moments after the engines shut down, one pilot can be heard asking the other:

“Why did you cutoff?”
“I didn’t.”

The exchange suggests neither pilot intentionally moved the switches — raising the likelihood that the levers were moved inadvertently or mechanically failed. Investigators have not yet concluded whether the switches failed mechanically or were accidentally triggered due to cockpit ergonomics or pilot action under stress. - Source

 

[Beau]

So this is weird, right. The report said the fuel cutoff switches "transitioned from the RUN to the CUTOFF position", but it doesn't specifically says one of the pilots did that. Than one of the pilots asks the other why he cut of the fuel, and the other pilot denies having done so. Seems like the computer turned it off then to me

From what I've seen watching videos about this, the fuel cutoff switches cannot be turned off by a computer. The likeliest scenario is one of the pilots accidentally hit the fuel cutoff switch and because the locking mechanisms on the Boeing 787 weren't functioning, the switches moved to OFF. In fact the pilots moved the switch back to RUN, trying to get the engines running again, but there just wasn't enough time. Juan Browne breaks it all down:

 

[rs]

The fuel cutoff switches require that you first pull on the switch to disengage the locking mechanism, and only then can you transition the switch to a new position. It is a compound action required for obvious safety reasons. I don’t believe that a ‘computer glitch’ can mechanically reposition the switch… you can search google for images of the switches. You can’t ‘bump’ them into a new position, it requires a deliberate action. It also seems unlikely that both switches could have had the interlock mechanism broken. Perhaps some kind of sabotage is conceivable.

 

[Beau]

The fuel cutoff switches require that you first pull on the switch to disengage the locking mechanism, and only then can you transition the switch to a new position. It is a compound action required for obvious safety reasons. I don’t believe that a ‘computer glitch’ can mechanically reposition the switch… you can search google for images of the switches. You can’t ‘bump’ them into a new position, it requires a deliberate action. It also seems unlikely that both switches could have had the interlock mechanism broken. Perhaps some kind of sabotage is conceivable.

If you'll read the posts right before yours by Vulcan59 and myself, you'll see that there was a reported problem with the locking mechanism for the switches which allowed them to move to the off position without disengaging.