View: https://youtu.be/8XYO-mj1ugg?si=t9buTs6QcfphnDfV
It's seems more likely to be double engine failure.
Dream liner down in India on air port
- Thread starter Snautzer01
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
View: https://youtu.be/8XYO-mj1ugg?si=t9buTs6QcfphnDfV
It's seems more likely to be double engine failure.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I'm looking forward to Forum commentary on this. I wouldn't know how accurate it might be.
Dual engine failure is definitely a possibility.
What would cause dual engine failure on a 12 year old 787 with 41,000 hours, and 8,000 takeoffs and landings?
Bird Strike?
Fuel Contamination?
Maintenance Error?
What would cause dual engine failure on a 12 year old 787 with 41,000 hours, and 8,000 takeoffs and landings?
Bird Strike?
Fuel Contamination?
Maintenance Error?
Thumpalumpacus
Lieutenant Colonel
I didn't see birds in the video, and if the fuel were contaminated, would the plane be able to get to takeoff speed? Wouldn't the engines show irregular performance, or shudder, or something?
syscom3
Pacific Historian
There is a possibility of ground crew malfeasance. Give the pilot the wrong weight. Considering the recent problems in Kashmir, its not something to discount.
Not until the contaminations clogged the screens preventing fuel from getting through.
Its happened before on two Boeing 777s, and an Airbus A330. All three of them with Rolls Royce Trent engines. All three were contaminated with ice in the screens. There is an airworthiness directive out for Trent Engines regarding this.
A contamination can be anything, does not have to be ice.
Thumpalumpacus
Lieutenant Colonel
AerialTorpedoDude69
Airman 1st Class
- 255
- Mar 1, 2022
The sole survivor reported that the lights started flickering just before the aircraft lost altitude (he described this as being "stuck in the air", so this definitely could be a double engine failure. The problem might be hardware, but it sounds like software, which Boeing has struggled with in recent years.
IIRC, in the event of a double engine failure, the 737 has a ram-air turbine set up to generate emergency power, so lights don't go out, but they could flicker as the turbine is only providing emergency power for onboard avionics systems. I think that the 787 also has the same turbine set up.
www.bbc.com
IIRC, in the event of a double engine failure, the 737 has a ram-air turbine set up to generate emergency power, so lights don't go out, but they could flicker as the turbine is only providing emergency power for onboard avionics systems. I think that the 787 also has the same turbine set up.
British man describes how he escaped Air India wreckage
Mr Ramesh said he saw cabin crew members and passengers dying in front of his eyes.
www.bbc.com
Thumpalumpacus
Lieutenant Colonel
The sole survivor reported that the lights started flickering just before the aircraft lost altitude (he described this as being "stuck in the air", so this definitely could be a double engine failure. The problem might be hardware, but it sounds like software, which Boeing has struggled with in recent years.
IIRC, in the event of a double engine failure, the 737 has a ram-air turbine set up to generate emergency power, so lights don't go out, but they could flicker as the turbine is only providing emergency power for onboard avionics systems. I think that the 787 also has the same turbine set up.
British man describes how he escaped Air India wreckage
Mr Ramesh said he saw cabin crew members and passengers dying in front of his eyes.
I get hung up on the odds of both engines failing at the same time. Contaminated fuel could do it I suppose. But if the lights were flickering, then yeah, that implicates circuitry in some fashion. And no doubt that will affect engines.
The sole survivor reported that the lights started flickering just before the aircraft lost altitude (he described this as being "stuck in the air", so this definitely could be a double engine failure. The problem might be hardware, but it sounds like software, which Boeing has struggled with in recent years.
IIRC, in the event of a double engine failure, the 737 has a ram-air turbine set up to generate emergency power, so lights don't go out, but they could flicker as the turbine is only providing emergency power for onboard avionics systems. I think that the 787 also has the same turbine set up.
British man describes how he escaped Air India wreckage
Mr Ramesh said he saw cabin crew members and passengers dying in front of his eyes.
Software problems don't take 12 years to surface.
From personal experience, sometimes they take even longer.
cammerjeff
Staff Sergeant
While I do not know if the airline followed the strict twin engine over water maint procedures that allow 2 engine airliners to fly long over water routes previously served my 3 or 4 engine airliners. But we were not allowed to perform routine maintenance on both engines at the same time. this was to prevent something like changing oil filters on both engines and having the same material or human mistake taking out both engines at the same time.
So if they were following the ETOPS procedure that should rule out a Maintenance induced duel engine failure. That does not rule out a possible fuel contamination issue be it water or foreign material clogging the filters, but there are also delta pressure valves that allow the bypass of a clogged fuel filter ( or oil filter ) so even if the filter is clogged there should be sufficient fuel flow to allow the engines to run.
I hate to come to conclusions before the investigation is complete. It is always easy to blame the flight crew when they do not survive the crash. And over my 30+ year Maintenance carrier I have had plenty of reasons to jump to conclusions about Pilots. But I still try not to as their lives are also on the line.
Also all modern twin engine airliners have ram air turbines as a last resort back up, but if both engines fail just after take off, and the APU is not running, I don't think the crew would have enough time, airspeed, or altitude to deploy the RAT to provide electricity to the A/C, you would be relying on the batteries in those moments.
I hope we will have answers soon.
So if they were following the ETOPS procedure that should rule out a Maintenance induced duel engine failure. That does not rule out a possible fuel contamination issue be it water or foreign material clogging the filters, but there are also delta pressure valves that allow the bypass of a clogged fuel filter ( or oil filter ) so even if the filter is clogged there should be sufficient fuel flow to allow the engines to run.
I hate to come to conclusions before the investigation is complete. It is always easy to blame the flight crew when they do not survive the crash. And over my 30+ year Maintenance carrier I have had plenty of reasons to jump to conclusions about Pilots. But I still try not to as their lives are also on the line.
Also all modern twin engine airliners have ram air turbines as a last resort back up, but if both engines fail just after take off, and the APU is not running, I don't think the crew would have enough time, airspeed, or altitude to deploy the RAT to provide electricity to the A/C, you would be relying on the batteries in those moments.
I hope we will have answers soon.
yosimitesam
Airman 1st Class
Indeed. Software is never static. Minor changes (a new feature here, update an old feature, improve this/that, etc.) happen periodically. Real-time event-driven software has to undergo more rigorous testing than procedural software, and aircraft software is "re-certified", hopefully. (True or False?). Small but necessary changes often have unintended knock-on effects and 15-year old modules can start to have problems. There are probably several hundred thousand source code lines in the software for the aircraft, probably only a third of which they haven't changed in some way since the first version. How many versions have been installed over years? Once a software "package" gets to 3 or 4 thousand lines of source code the number of possible "states" that event-driven software can occupy is far too large to test every possibility. You can only test the "most likely" branches of the state tree, including the known error branches (unit testing.) I spent 38 years writing software and have seen many IT "fads" come and go, but the first thing that is always asked when a piece of software fails is "what was the last thing changed?"
However, in my opinion, the 12 years since the introduction of the 787 does count for something and I would give odds of only 1/10 that it turns out to be some kind of software bug, introduced or otherwise.
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes." - Mark Twain
Last edited:
AerialTorpedoDude69
Airman 1st Class
- 255
- Mar 1, 2022
I just finished watching the complete video and it's amazing. Thanks for sharing it, I should have watched the complete video before commenting. Video definitely proves that because the RAT was deployed, the engines probably weren't providing power. 200% dual engine failure.
Boeing has been cutting back on everything including software validation teams, unfortunately. Their software updates are notoriously buggy. The FAA required that they push out a software update for their buggy radios recently.
In 2022, there were serious instrumentation bugs with the 787 on landing.
AerialTorpedoDude69
Airman 1st Class
- 255
- Mar 1, 2022
not an expert on Boeing, but this is my source:
Flying Blind: The 737 MAX Tragedy and the Fall of Boeing: Robison, Peter: 9780385546492: Amazon.com: Books
Flying Blind: The 737 MAX Tragedy and the Fall of Boeing [Robison, Peter] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Flying Blind: The 737 MAX Tragedy and the Fall of Boeing
www.amazon.com
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
I'm not sure thats "cutting back."
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
AerialTorpedoDude69
Airman 1st Class
- 255
- Mar 1, 2022
I don't want to derail this discussion on the crash but the book mentions that Boeing had a series of CEOs who implemented cost-cutting measures. "Flying Blind" covers how these CEOs were cutting corners on virtually everything, which led to the 737 Max disasters.
Specifically, the 737 Max crashes happened because Boeing tried to use improperly validated software to patch an engineering issue. The software validation team which should have found the bug wasn't properly funded and was given an impossible deadline.
I have not read the book, but I would wager to say its a lot more complicated than that. I don't know anyone at Boeing (at least today) that is actively cutting safety related things.
I'm not saying the Max should not have led to criminal charges for some though. It certainly should have…
- Thread starter
- #60
Snautzer01
Marshal
- 46,292
- Mar 26, 2007
I will step in a 747. I won't in those. Sorry
