Cycling the FCS is a part of the dual eng failure memory items. The FCS weren’t cycled CUTOFF, then RUN, they were both moved to CUTOFF, then 10 plus secs later back to RUN. This not IAW the published memory items.
In the event of a dual engine failure the B787 starts the APU without crew action, which the report says it had commenced. There must have been sufficient RPM for the start sequence as the Left engine had relit and was starting to spoil up again.
The only way to start a B787 is via the EEC Autostart function, you cannot complete a manual start in a B787.
There is no doubt the FCS were moved to CUTOFF and subsequently returned to RUN. The only questions to be answered is who and why?
What the “experts” on this site are missing is the fact engine systems operate independently. There is no way a software fault could cause both engines to fail within 1 second of each other. There is no doubt both fuel control switches were moved to cutoff, then 10 seconds or so later back to run.
What hasn’t been established is who did it and why.
The only way the person querying the FCS position would know they were in the Cutoff position would be to observe the switch position. There are no indications of fuel valve positions.
Again, I point out these systems are in no way connected to each other. The chances of both systems experiencing the same fault within 1 second of each other are too remote.
The AAIB report states one of the crew observed the Fuel Control Switches in the Cutoff position and questioned the other crew member. The switch position is tracked by the EAFR.
Cannot happen to both engines at the same time (or within 1 sec as per the report).
All systems associated with the engines are completely independent. It’s like suggesting a couple of PC21s flying in close formation both flame out at the same time due to a system fault in one aircraft.
“July 8 (Reuters) - The investigation into the Air India flight 171 crash has zeroed in on the movement of the engine fuel control switches, following an analysis of the Boeing 787's flight and voice data recorders, the Air Current reported on Tuesday.”
focus seems to be “on the movement of the engine fuel control switches”
The B787 has a very advanced asymmetry correction system which becomes active above 60KIAS. Once airborne you could take your feet off the rudder pedals, fail an engine and the flight control system will compensate for the asymmetry.
I would agree with those comments on other Boeing types, however the B787 gust / asymmetry correction would mask the minor stagger in asymmetric thrust caused by the minute delay in fuel cutoff.
There’s a lot of inertia in those large fans, the time taken to move both switches to cutoff would be less than a couple of seconds. There maybe be little to no discernible yaw. It ja also possible to use one hand to move both to cuttoff.
Bottom line is if you’re a private pilot and not based at or regularly operating from a Security Controlled airport get an AVID. You could argue any pilot who doesn’t have the need for an ASIC is breaking the law by obtaining one. When I have to pay for my own ASIC I’ll be switching to an AVID.
Get around to it shortly? It’s not like they didn’t know the outcome, should’ve had something out to members the day the report was released. Says a lot about the culture of the place.
It will be interesting to see what happens to the various office bearers over time. I’m not sure whether you’ve read the Coroner’s report? It seems some actions by office bearers were not in accordance with documented procedures. The issues of concern to the Coroner relate to action / (inaction?) once the question of validity of the pilot’s RPC came to light within the organisation.