Dream liner down in India on air port

[AerialTorpedoDude69]

Unfortunately Safety Matters looks to me to be similar to the group, in pre internet days that hired a lawyer to prove that the Air New Zealand crash in the Antarctic was not pilot error. The lawyer concluded what they wanted him to and blamed everyone but the captain. Pilots and flight engineers who had flown with that captain said the book was 1000% bullshit and told me why the lawyer was wrong on every one of his claims. See my post 166 for more detail.

Their analysis of the crash found that the RAT deployed 2.5 seconds prior to when the fuel cutoff switch flipped, indicating a non-human cause for the engine cutout. The analysts used CCTV footage as proof.

So what they are saying is the aircraft suffered two electronic failures, in unconnected systems, 2.5 seconds apart. The RAT does NOT shut down engines. It is deployed only after engine shutdown.

As an ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) trained Annex 13 qualified accident and incident investigator I would list that as not impossible but extremely unlikely and I would require a lot more evidence than the material that they are presenting.

I love that this forum has absolute experts on aviation safety. I am highly appreciative of your knowledge on this subject.

You are probably right that the NGO has an axe to grind. In this case, this NGO is highly critical of Indian ground maintenance practices, so it seems that they are blaming India's air safety regulatory agency. At least, in most of their papers they are critical of India's regulators.

I know that the RAT is supposed to deploy when power cuts out, but it has accidentally deployed in numerous instances when power was not cut out. In memory, there were several 787 Indian and Japanese accidental deployments in the last few years and not a single published report on these deployments. (that i could find)

Regarding the 787 crash in India, I think the report found that IF the RAT deployed first, then they had already lost power before the fuel cutoff engaged. If that is their argument, then the fuel cutoff was indicative of a systemic fault. As the RAT provides power to avionics, then by definition it could not be an isolated component.

But as we discussed before, the fuel cutoff has a number of automatic triggers (such as engine fire, engine activity, etc...) so if there were a software fault, the fuel cutout could engage without pilot knowledge. But there have been instances of one cutoff switch flipping on without the pilot touching it with much force.

From the article:

• 08:08:33 – aircraft passes the critical decision speed to take off, known as V1.
• 08:08:35 – aircraft reached takeoff speed of 155 knots, known as Vr.
• 08:08:39 – liftoff confirmed by air and ground sensors.
• 08:08:39.5 – RAT deployment triggers.
• 08:08:41 – CCTV image captures aircraft taking off with RAT deployed.
• 08:08:42 – both fuel cutoff switches transitioned to CUTOFF, one second apart.
• 08:08:47 RAT hydraulic pump begins supplying power (AAIB data).
• 08:08:52 – Engine 1 fuel switch moved back to RUN.
• 08:08:56 – Engine 2 fuel switch moved back to RUN.
• 08:09:05 – MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY call to air traffic control.
• 08:09:11 – EAFR recording stops.

I'm not sure what caused the other 787's cutoff switch to fail, but if it was a bad maintenance practice or a defective batch of components in the supply chain, then it's possible that they took off with two defective switches that were pushed down (this seems like a bad positioning of the run-cutoff switch) by gravity and accelerative g-forces.

There has also been discussion on the landing gear freezing mid retraction:

Cover-Up or Coincidence? Faulty 787 Fuel Switch on London-Bengaluru Flight Sparks New Questions in AI 171 Crash Probe

Air India Boeing 787-8 grounded after London-Bengaluru flight due to faulty fuel control switch; AI 171 crash probe continues.

aviationa2z.com