Unpacking Pilot Fatigue and New Duty Hour Norms
Boarding Now is a podcast from where we look at key aviation developments through an India lens. We will also feature special interviews and cut through the jargon and hype to keep it real. So, sit back, relax, and enjoy every episode.
Host: Jagriti Chandra
Edited by Jude Francis Weston
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
Air India 171 crash: Report ‘raises questions, offers no answers' Global Pilots' Body slams against guesswork on fuel cutoff
The International Federation of Air Line Pilots' Associations (IFALPA) has expressed concern over the initial report released by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) regarding the Air India AI171 crash. According to the global pilots' body, the preliminary report 'raises several questions but offers no answers.' IFALPA cautioned against interpreting the early findings as conclusive, noting that any extrapolation at this stage would be speculative and could interfere with the ongoing investigation. In a statement issued on Monday, IFALPA reiterated its support for the AAIB's efforts and emphasised that the families of those who lost their lives 'deserve our collective professionalism.' It highlighted that the purpose of a preliminary report is to present early factual data and should not be used to form final conclusions. Fuel cutoff and cockpit confusion documented in report The AAIB report into the June 12 crash stated that both engine fuel switches of the London-bound Air India flight were turned off, leading to engine shutdowns. It further noted that cockpit voice recordings captured a moment of confusion, with one pilot asking the other why the fuel was cut. The response from the second pilot was that he did not do it. The report also confirmed that fuel samples collected from airport bowsers and storage tanks were tested at the Directorate General of Civil Aviation laboratory and were found to be satisfactory. The crash occurred just seconds after the plane took off from Ahmedabad airport and struck the residential quarters of doctors at BJ Medical College, killing 241 of the 242 onboard and several people on the ground, including nine students and their family members. No safety recommendations, IFALPA urges caution The preliminary report did not include any safety recommendations. IFALPA underlined that this is in line with ICAO Annex 13, which mandates the release of such reports within 30 days of the incident but does not expect safety conclusions this early in the process. 'Whilst this preliminary report by its very nature raises many questions, it does not provide answers,' the statement said. The association also urged all parties to refrain from speculation, stressing the importance of allowing the investigation to reach its final stage without outside interference. Debate grows, experts urge patience Following the release of the report, aviation expert Captain Mohan Ranganathan speculated on NDTV that the incident may have been caused deliberately, citing the manual nature of the fuel switch mechanism. However, several former pilots and aviation analysts strongly opposed this view, stating it is premature to draw such conclusions without a full report. AAIB chief Aurobindo Handa also advised against hasty interpretations, stating that it would be inappropriate to assign blame until the investigation is investigations continue, global aviation bodies urge restraint and professionalism until all facts of the Air India crash are fully known.
NDTV
2 days ago
- NDTV
Deliberate Or Mechanical Flaw? Pilots vs Pilot Over Air India Crash Report
New Delhi: The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau's preliminary report on its probe into the Air India crash on June 12, in which 260 people were killed, has stirred speculations and debates on two fronts. Firstly, whether there was a deliberate attempt made by the pilot to turn off the fuel switches from 'RUN' to 'CUTOFF' position during takeoff and secondly, the Wall Street Journal article, which came 20 hours and 8 minutes before the AAIB report was officially released, that focused on "Pilots' Actions and Plane's Fuel Switches". Earlier on NDTV, Captain Mohan Ranganathan, one of India's leading aviation experts and an ex-instructor of Boeing 737, made a stunning claim that the crash of AI171 may have been the result of deliberate human action because the fuel switches can only be moved "manually". However, former pilots and aviation experts have strongly opposed this view. In a roundtable of four aviation experts and ex-pilots, Mr Ranganathan's views were questioned, who stood by his claim of "deliberate manual selection". What Captain Ranganathan Said? On June 12, in an interview with NDTV, the aviation expert was asked if one of the pilots intentionally switched off the fuel, fully aware that doing so could cause a crash, to which Captain Ranganathan said, "Absolutely." On Monday, Mr Ranganathan reiterated his views and said, "The report (AAIB report) points to deliberate manual intervention. The US Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) report has said this; there was nothing wrong with the switches today. The switches can't slide back to cut off. So it has to be pulled out and moved back. So that is possible only with a manual intervention." The probe team from AAIB found the fuel switches in the RUN position at the crash site However, Mr Ranganathan has questioned the "wishy-washy" nature of the report, which only mentions one line from the pilot's interaction - One pilot asked, "Why did you cut off?" The other replied, "I didn't". He has called for the release of the full cockpit voice recorder (CVR) data, which will have the sequence of who said what when the fuel switches transitioned to 'CUTOFF'. Captain Ranganathan, however, never inferred that it was done intentionally by the pilot to crash the plane, though he did mention that one of the pilots had a "medical history" and was on medical leave earlier, which led to Dreamliner Pilot Opposes "Manual Intervention Argument" Captain Rakesh Rai shared insights on the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner's characteristics, his experience of flying the same aircraft, and his views on the AAIB report and the "suicide angle" being debated. "Even if they (AAIB) don't want to publish the RT transcript at this stage, it is difficult to digest that only two sentences were spoken in the cockpit. If you look at the picture, which was published in the report, the aircraft is barely 50 to 80 feet or maybe 100 feet above the ground, and the RAT (Ram Air Turbine) is already deployed. It means that something happened right at the time of rotation, when the aircraft is just starting, and the engines have failed," he said. Captain Rai highlighted an important part of the report - The words used by AAIB to describe 'RUN' to 'CUTOFF'. He said they have used the word "transition", adding, "In these modern aeroplanes, you don't need to cut off the fuel control switch. Everything is transmitted electronically. So, even if the fuel switch is in the run position, it can go into the cutoff position without moving the fuel control switch. The fuel can just shut off. If there is something wrong with the software, it commands the fuel shutoff valve to close. With the fuel control switch still in run position, the engines can shut down." An excerpt from the AAIB report is as follows: "The aircraft achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 Knots IAS at about 08:08:42 UTC, and immediately thereafter, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec. The Engine N1 and N2 began to decrease from their take-off values as the fuel supply to the engines was cut off." Captain Ranganathan differed with Captain Rai and said, "You can hold both the switches, pull them out and move," to which the Dreamliner pilot said, "I do not agree with that." Captain Rai said, asking for a full transcript of the pilots' conversation in the cockpit, said, "The report does not talk about the timeline when this sentence, 'Why did you CUTOFF?', was spoken, and that's an important point. "This sentence may have been spoken at a time when they were trying to relight the engine. So, the other pilot may have asked, Did you cut it off? He said, No." "If the pilot had done it deliberately, then there must have been a solid argument in the pilots will not keep quiet, right? There must have been a solid argument in the cockpit. Why did he do it? And you are going to kill all of us," he added. Manual Intervention? "Absolutely Absurd," Says Expert Captain Kishore Chinta, a chief pilot at Sirius India Airlines, strongly opposed Mr Ranganathan's views and said, "I find it absolutely absurd to say that the pilots planned to deliberately turn the switches off. For the simple reason that even if we go by the paraphrased, one sentence in the report, which says that one pilot asked, it is indicative of a surprise element, that it surprised one pilot, and the other pilot answered, Hey, I didn't do it. "The report is absolutely silent and paraphrasing in terms of the selective release of information. If there was a timestamp of each event with what happened in the cockpit in terms of warnings, what was the altitude, what was the engine parameters at that time, followed by cockpit voice recorder, CAM 1, CAM 2, the interaction between the pilots or any warnings picked up, all these would have given us a more, you know, clearer picture on if there was any deliberate action," he said. "Nobody is deliberating on the fact that these switches can be moved uncommanded? Everyone is saying they can only be physically moved. The only reason those switches are recycled is to reset the EEC logic. The electronic engine control logic is reset in case of a dual engine failure to reactivate the start cycle, the igniters and the fuel metering unit; all these logics are reset. If we go by the theory that it was a suicide, why even touch those switches? Takeover controls and just flip the wings over." Squat Switch And Landing Gears Captain MR Wadia, the President of the Federation of Indian Pilots, did not agree with the "manual intervention" argument and explained why the landing gear of the aircraft did not go up when the aircraft was airborne. Captain Wadia said, "As the aircraft is about to take off, the power, everything is fine. There's enough power and enough speed to get the aircraft airborne. However, as he (Captain Ranganathan) pointed out, the first call is positive, radar climb gear up, now, that is a normal call, and I presume the pilot who was supposed to call has called that thing. But why hasn't the gear gone up?" "The reason for this is the squat switch. All aircraft today, whether it's Boeing or Airbus, have something called the squat switch, an electrical switch, that identifies whether the aircraft is on the ground or in the air. Even if you by mistake pull the undercarriage lever switch won't allow it to go up because it is indicating to the computer system that the aircraft is still on the ground." The other aspect in the other, which Captain Wadia stressed upon, was the deployment of RAT or Ram Air Turbine - a propeller that gives emergency power to an aircraft for navigation. Captain Wadia said only these two pieces of evidence are present, and "why would we presume a suicide angle to this?" "Were the fuel switches touched? Yes, but after they were in CUTOFF position and were moved to RUN position," he said, adding that we should go by the pilot's word when he said 'I did not cutoff'. YN Sharma, CEO of Chimes Aviation, said, "The only thing we are getting from the report is that the action of both switches moved from RUN to CUTOFF is a deliberate action. If there is a software issue, and the supply is cut off from the back, but that won't physically move the switch. For that, you need a hand that will physically move the needs to be investigated what prompted that action." He said that as per the information Flight Data Recorder (FDR), the switches were moved from RUN to CUTOFF, and then a few seconds later, they were moved back to the RUN position. Almost five seconds later, the pilot gave a 'MAYDAY' call, and then the aircraft crashed. "This is a preliminary this point, we should have the full transcript of the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and FDR Data in the public domain. You have these many data points and this is a preliminary report," Mr Sharma said. 'Who Gets Benefit From This Narrative?' Captain Chintan concluded by saying, "Even the deliberation that the pilot did something is a great disservice to them because they are not there to defend themselves, and also to the family members who lost their loved ones." "What we need to understand is who is getting benefits from this narrative?" he asked. "Does it benefit the Indian aviation regulator, the aviation community or the manufacturer? That will answer all your questions." Referring to the WSJ report, he said, "Why this narrative is being pushed by the western media and where the money is. It benefits the insurers by blaming the pilots and the manufacturers by taking away the liability from them." The AAIB mentioned there was a known FAA advisory from 2018 on a possible fuel switch flaw that existed, but inspections were not done by Air India. The airline's CEO, Campbell Wilson, said the report found no mechanical or maintenance issue with the doomed aircraft or its engines. A Reuters report said that the US Federal Aviation Administration and Boeing have privately issued notifications that the fuel switch locks on Boeing planes are safe. "The FAA does not consider this issue to be an unsafe condition that would warrant an Airworthiness Directive on any Boeing aeroplane models, including the Model 787," the Reuters report said. Two hundred and sixty people died in the crash, including 241 passengers. Only one flier on seat 11A survived but battles trauma from the June 12. The report does not clearly define whether the switches were deliberately moved or if it was a mechanical flaw, but families are still waiting for answers while mourning the loss of their loved ones.
New Indian Express
2 days ago
- New Indian Express
'Incorrect, baseless': SpiceJet denies mid-air plunge on Delhi-Srinagar flight after passenger's claim
SRINAGAR: After a passenger on a Delhi–Srinagar SpiceJet flight on July 12 alleged that the aircraft experienced a sudden free fall near J&K's Banihal Pass, SpiceJet issued a clarification on Monday stating that the flight had encountered a brief patch of turbulence due to prevailing monsoon conditions. Arjimand Talib Hussain, a passenger on SpiceJet flight SG-385, shared a video claiming the aircraft went into a free fall of several hundred metres over Banihal Pass in J&K on July 12. In the 29-second video, which has gone viral on social media, cries of some passengers travelling in the flight can be heard. The passengers can be seen holding aircraft seats tightly, while one of the flight attendants can be seen crawling inside the flight, with the captain making announcements that 'everyone please fasten your seat belts.' In the post on X, the passenger Arjimand Hussain said, 'All my life, I have travelled in all sorts of weathers, across the globe, in hundreds of flights, but have never experienced something like this.' 'G-385 Delhi-Srinagar SpiceJet flight's precarious moments yesterday. The plane dropped several hundred meters in free fall over the Banihal Pass. It felt like the end of life for everyone. It was not a normal turbulence. I have experienced all sorts of those,' he said.
