2nd question: Never. To my knowledge there is no automatic shutdown on any Boeing. Air/ground logic DOES change the idle speed. Idle needs to be high on approach so that there is minimal spool time should a go-around be needed. We want idle to be high the first second or two after landing so that the reversers also spool quickly. But during roll-out and all taxiing, we want the idle to be low. Air/ground logic handles that. It’s about idle settings. I have no idea what happened with ANA. There is a big hole in my understanding there.
Still, what happened to ANA, while a big malfunction for sure, is only related to this present case in exposing that the 787 is not without flaws, which we already know. If we hear the beeper in the CVR, that would be a big tell. But I still highly doubt her malfunction assertion. Hopefully we’ll learn soon.
I’m going to leave a small window open to the posibility that this could be a technical malfunction and/or software failure, based solely on my lack of knowledge and understanding and the fact that the preliminary report does very little to alleviate my shortcomings.
But for this to be the case it also means there has to be a flaw in the way switch position is registered and that the actual CVR transcript opens for another interpretation of why did you set the switches to cutoff.
I admit that this is highly unlikely, but I look forward to learning more…
I do think we can rule out worn switch locks though, as the cutoff switches were found in the run position, post crash.
This is also not on the 787 but on the GEnX. EEC software is done by GE and not by Boeing, the engine pretty much functions on it’s own and does some action based on a request by the pilot. Note that no two engines function identical so they ‘spoof’ the data that they show to the pilot. Pilots don’t like two numbers being slightly different(or four in case of a 74 ).
Actually this is pretty much true for any indication, they only want to draw attention to something when it’s necessary.
Anyway that article reads like garbage without any evidence.
So far there is no indication of technical fault Troll, as soothing as that may be in a way. Because, why would someone kill themselves and take 300+ people with them into the grave?
If there was even the slightest indication of a technical cause then I can assure you the whole fleet would be parked and inspected with a magnifying glass right now. There’s no chatter about any such thing happening in the usual channels at all and this tend to happen all the time when a new technical defect is found on someone’s fleet. Usually no incident or accident happened but the technical issue are rectified in a preliminary way to avoid future accidents.
If the engines would match up to the numbers in the Dash 8, we would buy a lottery ticket!
No, and as I say earlier, I’m just going to allow for the fact that we don’t have all the facts, yet.
Not sure if you’re being ironic, because this has happened before and could very well be the case here. There’s no denying that this may seem like the most likely scenario, considering the information at hand.
But it could also be some sort of acute mental degradation due to a brain hemorrhage, or similar.
But we don’t know enough to make educated guesses here.
What gnaws at me is the CVR conversation… It doesn’t make sense to me. But it was a very stressful situation and there may be more that will be revealed later and there could be a language barrier.
That’s the only place where we might disagree. I totally empathize with the CVR statement. We imagine ourselves barking emphatically “WTFAYD!!!”. But the reality is most of us will react with a timid “Why?”
I would definitely say yell, “WTF did you do that for?” as I reached for the switches with my left hand, my scan going over the engine indicators. Not waiting 10 seconds. My next question would be, “Are you trying to kill us?” But I’m not an AI FO either, and it’s very likely that there are additional factors beyond my understanding. The behavior as reported by the CVR is so illogical. Like we stepped into the Twilight Zone. And if the captain was truthful when he answered that he did not cut fuel, then why did it take so long for one of the two to take action?
On second thought, maybe modern aircraft are so automated, that flight crews are numbed into not taking action. Are there too many, “What’s it doing now?” moments? Thinking of my dad’s comments about riding horses. “They’re 1100 lbs with a mind of their own.”
The takeoff in a 787 is no more automated than a DC-3. The pilot flying is concentrating on pitch rate to his target attitude, hitting that attitude, correcting for speed and calling for the gear at a positive ROC. The pilot monitoring is raising the gear once the positive ROC is confirmed and then waiting for the next calls. Some SIDs can be fairly complex especially when combined with noise abatement procedures. Both pilots are attuned to what’s coming next: either a pitch change, heading change, or both; followed by acceleration, climb power and cleanup. I’m not trying to make it more complicated than it is. But I also want to paint a proper picture that a good crew are quite focused at this point; more so than any other phase of flight. And it is this level of focus that feeds my empathy for the confusion by whomever made the “Why?” challenge.
I feel I need to know more about what was said, in which language and tone of voice… I wonder if the recordings will be released?
The question why and the reply, I didn’t, suggests that the pilot asking didn’t see it happen.
When an engine starts rolling back, is the first instinct to look at those switches?
I’d expect an engine fail callout…
Or… If this was a willful act, could the pilot asking why be the one who did it, but doesn’t want the suspicion pointed at him due to insurance payments…?
I’m just thinking out loud to illustrate that the short CVR ”transcript” doesn’t give us much information.
Yeah. I know I am typing in circles. And I do agree that the CVR would help. But I am also very much against public sharing of actual CVR audio. It is against the law in the US and that was a very hard fought law on the part of ALPA. I will not defend it further than that. There is no system that has the ability to shut down both engines simultaneously other than the pilots. The engines and their associated computers are separated entities. There are parts of the system that have the authority to change the idle setting to both or to sync N1 or N2, but not shutdown. The ANA TMCA event is puzzling. And as I said I don’t claim to understand it. But all of us who fly sophisticated multiengine airplanes from BE-58 Barons to 787s know that designers put as much of a walled garden as possible between the left side of the jet and the right–from fuel to electrics to controls to hydraulics to engines. Everyone knows that automated systems are just as prone to wackiness as are humans. Therefore, if something does go awry, obviously it shouldn’t be allowed to take out all sides of a redundant system.
Most CVR recordings are utterly boring and mundane anyway. I suspect the next development is a focus on live transmitting CVR/FDR back to homestation. A lot of data is already constantly transmitted that way and it seem like a logical next step.
No I am not being Ironic at all, I think we all know about the Germanwings crash and the FedEx incident. I still find it puzzling why someone would do that though.
Even retired I’ll fight it! I would rather see pilots replaced with AI than have their privacy violated so flagrantly. Plus, we would learn nothing. It would just be the salacious last moments of two professional lives for FOX to put on repeat.
Oh yeah in a few years that will be mandatory, would help greatly with these investigations as well.
@smokinhole why are you so opposed to this? Even if it follows the same rules as the CVR? Limited company access, for accident investigations etc? I don’t think it should appear on news stations.
Trains and busses often have it as well these days, I don’t think it’s something that can be avoided, plus I think the privacy argument doesn’t work when it’s a work environment. It’s not as if the camera’s are placed in your home.
Even at work a person has a right to dignity & privacy. This right has to be weighed against the need to investigate causes for accidents. Being in a work environment doesn’t automatically forfeit your human rights.
Agreed! I am not enjoying the overabundance of camera’s on every little street corner as you see in some cities. Though in this case I am of the opinion that it outweighs the right to privacy. Especially when people are operating a 300 million costing jet with 350+ people sitting in the back.
).