carl spacklers hat said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

5Amp said:

---

I think it was a mistake by the copilot.

For instance, they have taxi lights they turn off after take off that are also toggle switches that toggle down in the off position.

Landing gear is a lever that would be moved up after take off, not down. Same with flaps, moved up.

The small generator they use when on the ground to power everything, not sure when they turn that off but that would be a switch moved in the down position.

D

---

I'm just an aviation buff, with less than 200 hours flying little planes a few decades ago.

But I'm always amazed at the "wrong switch" assertions. Accidentally cutting off the fuel flow switch when you meant to raise the gear is like rolling the window down when you meant to shift into reverse. Completely different switch in completely different places with different tactile feeling, and different muscle memory.

As repeatedly stated, the fuel switches are also guarded, and require releasing the switch before you can "flip" it.

And I don't know how the big boys are laid out, but lot of the little planes have flap switches that are shaped like.....a flap. Landing gear switches that are round....like a tire.

It's really hard to "flip the wrong switch".

---

Few possibilities:

1. Pilot moved the switch to cutoff willfully
2. Pilot moved switch to cutoff manually without realizing he was doing it.
3. Pilot moved switch to cutoff accidentally. Seems impossible because of safeguards.
3. Pilot did not move the switch, it moved itself, some kind of self-driving AI tech that was buggy.

Any others?

---

FIFY

---

It's just your opinion with no facts to back it up. We all have opinions so nothing wrong.

deddog said:

---

Jetpilot86 said:

---

javajaws said:

---

If the pilot didn't do it I would have expected his response to be a panicked "What?!?" instead of "I did not cutoff". I think he expected the question because he did it on purpose.

---

I don't necessarily think so. Depending on the level of fatigue, it's certainly possible to think you did one thing and really did something else. Been there, done that.

Not saying it was or wasn't, but being fatigued presents the same as being intoxicated, so trying to definitively assume murder-suicide is unwise at this time.

---

Per earlier reports both pilots were well rested.
I might be wrong on this, but i think pilots in India have to pass a sobriety test before flying. So it rules those two things out.

However unlikely, i still think there is a chance that the switches werent changed manually - but it appears to the blackbox like they were. So a glitch in how its being logged - A different - unexpected single point of failure.

---

If it were an electrical glitch, it wouldn't have switched them off one at a time. The evidence that they were actually turned off and not just showing that way was the plane losing thrust and eventually crashing

Don't know jack about flying, but my neighbor is a pilot for one of the majors and I finally caught him yesterday. I asked if he has read up on this and his immediate response was "100% suicide". He said there is not a scenario he could think of where that could accidently happen and made a similar reference to a previous post "it would be like dropping it into park while on a ramp entering the highway".

Also added that even if he was completely fatigued and working on fumes that it is still highly unlikely.

I will pat myself on the back about being the first to suggest in this thread putting cameras in the cockpit.

Seeing that suggested now more and more in the news following this... It's something that needs to happen... Even if it has to be phased in to let the old timers get used to it. There's no excuse for not having it.

Yep. Again, not a pilot either, but I thought of the urge on the highway to yank an old-style physical emergency/parking brake. Faster impact, of course. There's just no pilot 'muscle memory' around going to that part of the instrument panel, from what I have read, anywhere near take-off.

Aston04 said:

---

I will pat myself on the back about being the first to suggest in this thread putting cameras in the cockpit.

Seeing that suggested now more and more in the news following this... It's something that needs to happen... Even if it has to be phased in to let the old timers get used to it. There's no excuse for not having it.

---

100%

Aston04 said:

---

I will pat myself on the back about being the first to suggest in this thread putting cameras in the cockpit.

Seeing that suggested now more and more in the news following this... It's something that needs to happen... Even if it has to be phased in to let the old timers get used to it. There's no excuse for not having it.

---

Yeah. Cameras in this case would have not prevented the crash nor were they necessary to determine the cause. A real reactionary solution in search of a problem.

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Rexter said:

---

The guy interviewed by SkyNews has a good point. There should be a camera in the cockpit. If it's good enough for a truck, it's good enough for a plane.

There should be off-site storage for flight data. Shouldn't be that difficult to have each aircraft transmit that.

---

Trucks have dash cams, showing the outside world. They don't show the drivers.

Airliner cockpit cameras would have to be internal, showing the pilots themselves. Nothing happening outside the window 99% of the time.

Would you like cameras on you while you work, 8 hours a day?

---

Are my actions responsible for the lives of 50-100-150-200+ people?

Moreover, the cameras could potentially provide valuable examples of real emergency situations handled correctly. That is actually the biggest value from the cameras.

If the truckers had a complex set of switches, etc. they were manipulating with a partner to keep the truck moving, I would bet they would have cameras pointed at them too. Let's just be honest, driving a truck is not the same thing and an outward pointed camera tells more of the story... Whereas, flying a plane is opposite..

GAC06 said:

---

Aston04 said:

---

I will pat myself on the back about being the first to suggest in this thread putting cameras in the cockpit.

Seeing that suggested now more and more in the news following this... It's something that needs to happen... Even if it has to be phased in to let the old timers get used to it. There's no excuse for not having it.

---

Yeah. Cameras in this case would have not prevented the crash nor were they necessary to determine the cause. A real reactionary solution in search of a problem.

---

That's pure speculation on your part. It is highly plausible the India Air pilot thought the ambiguity created (by not having a camera pointed at him in the cockpit) allowed him a window to kill himself, while potentially having people blame it on mechanical failure or the other pilot.

And those switches and controls are already monitored

Aston04 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Aston04 said:

---

I will pat myself on the back about being the first to suggest in this thread putting cameras in the cockpit.

Seeing that suggested now more and more in the news following this... It's something that needs to happen... Even if it has to be phased in to let the old timers get used to it. There's no excuse for not having it.

---

Yeah. Cameras in this case would have not prevented the crash nor were they necessary to determine the cause. A real reactionary solution in search of a problem.

---

That's pure speculation on your part. It is highly plausible the India Air pilot thought the ambiguity created (by not having a camera pointed at him in the cockpit) allowed him a window to kill himself, while potentially having people blame it on mechanical failure or the other pilot.

---

Speculation is you saying it's highly plausible he did it because there wasn't a camera. He was recorded, and you don't know what else is on the recording. If there was a camera he could simply pull the circuit breaker or put a sticky note over it then do what he did. Cameras are a feel good fake solution for people who like to watch "Air Disasters"

GAC06 said:

---

Aston04 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Aston04 said:

---

I will pat myself on the back about being the first to suggest in this thread putting cameras in the cockpit.

Seeing that suggested now more and more in the news following this... It's something that needs to happen... Even if it has to be phased in to let the old timers get used to it. There's no excuse for not having it.

---

Yeah. Cameras in this case would have not prevented the crash nor were they necessary to determine the cause. A real reactionary solution in search of a problem.

---

That's pure speculation on your part. It is highly plausible the India Air pilot thought the ambiguity created (by not having a camera pointed at him in the cockpit) allowed him a window to kill himself, while potentially having people blame it on mechanical failure or the other pilot.

---

Speculation is you saying it's highly plausible he did it because there wasn't a camera. He was recorded, and you don't know what else is on the recording. If there was a camera he could simply pull the circuit breaker or put a sticky note over it then do what he did. Cameras are a feel good fake solution for people who like to watch "Air Disasters"

---

Potential video of those actions are a deterrent to this situation and would be another piece of the puzzle confirming he did it.

Already covered that, read it again. No deterrent at all.

I don't understand the absolute vehement opposition to cameras.

Considering what's at stake, why are we opposed to providing investigators not just an additional tool, but an absolutely vital tool, to help with investigations of plane crashes.

The audio recording is just not sufficient.

Was there this much opposition by the pilots to the audio recorders being mandated back in the day?

If it's vital and an essential tool, please show me some examples of mishaps where the cause was undetermined and a camera was likely to help.

Has the Captains mental health been eliminated as an issue? I don't see any references here to that for a number of pages...the "theories" seem to be getting pretty "out there".

GAC06 said:

---

If it's vital and an essential tool, please show me some examples of mishaps where the cause was undetermined and a camera was likely to help.

---

Watch a couple of episodes of Air Disasters....it becomes real clear real quick that a camera would provide the missing information that the FDR and Cockpit recorders don't.

Why are you so vehement against them? Afraid the pilots will be caught grab-assing the flight attendants?

There is no logical reason NOT to have cameras in the cockpit. None. Train operators have them, bus drivers have them, some companies DO have the cameras pointed to their truck drivers. Day Care centers have them. There's a whole host of professions that have cameras on them.

Tell me why additional information for crash investigations is a bad thing? If you can't understand that video is going to provide key information in crash investigations, then you are being intentionally obtuse.

This crash right here is a perfect example of how video could tell us definitively what took place and by whom.

GAC06 said:

---

Aston04 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Aston04 said:

---

I will pat myself on the back about being the first to suggest in this thread putting cameras in the cockpit.

Seeing that suggested now more and more in the news following this... It's something that needs to happen... Even if it has to be phased in to let the old timers get used to it. There's no excuse for not having it.

---

Yeah. Cameras in this case would have not prevented the crash nor were they necessary to determine the cause. A real reactionary solution in search of a problem.

---

That's pure speculation on your part. It is highly plausible the India Air pilot thought the ambiguity created (by not having a camera pointed at him in the cockpit) allowed him a window to kill himself, while potentially having people blame it on mechanical failure or the other pilot.

---

Speculation is you saying it's highly plausible he did it because there wasn't a camera. He was recorded, and you don't know what else is on the recording. If there was a camera he could simply pull the circuit breaker or put a sticky note over it then do what he did. Cameras are a feel good fake solution for people who like to watch "Air Disasters"

---

That's actually a logical conclusion. He played dumb throughout the whole crash - like he wasn't taking it down. Knowing there's NOT a camera watching you helps with that intention. But whatever man- be against a camera in your cockpit.

GAC06 said:

---

If it's vital and an essential tool, please show me some examples of mishaps where the cause was undetermined and a camera was likely to help.

---

There is always (well almost always) a visual monitoring of the person operating the aircraft. Its called the "other pilot". Even when the pilot takes a leak I have observed the FA stay there with the open cockpit door or in rare occasions stand in the cockpit.

Here GAC06 is correct, adding cameras to the cockpit does not add much if anything to safe operation of the aircraft.

You have no clue what he did "the entire time". You have one sentence that was released to you.

That's a lot of words to say "no I can't give an example". I'm asking you to justify why a camera is necessary. In this case, it wouldn't have prevented the crash and it wasn't necessary for the investigation.

GAC06 said:

---

You have no clue what he did "the entire time". You have one sentence that was released to you.

---

so you are saying video would help? Glad we agree now.

No, investigators know what's on the recording. If there was video India wouldn't release it anyway. You're patting yourself on the back for suggesting something that:

Wouldn't have prevented the crash

Wasn't necessary for the investigation




You might as well have suggested everyone on the plane wear two seatbelts instead of one.

GAC06 said:

---

That's a lot of words to say "no I can't give an example". I'm asking you to justify why a camera is necessary. In this case, it wouldn't have prevented the crash and it wasn't necessary for the investigation.

---

This crash is an example. A camera would confirm who did what and when. Audio is not giving you that. Audio is actually inconclusive here. You have one pilot asking the other pilot why he switched them off. The other pilot says he didn't.

So is the other pilot lying? Is the first pilot the one who actually switched them off but for the audio record is trying to make it sound like his co-pilot did?

Guess what....a video would tell us what happened.

That's just this case.

There are a ton of crash investigations where you here the narrator says, "Investigators can't determine if the pilot or co-pilot did this or that, or did not do this or that" and some of these final repots are assumptions based on flight data and audio recording only.

If anything, the video could make the investigations more efficient and less subject to speculation.

But you refuse to answer the question I asked of you...WHY are you so vehemently opposed to them? Today's technology would make them relatively cheap, and they could save the data to cloud servers.

Like I said, bus drivers, train conductors, and many truck drivers have video cameras on them. Why not put them in airplane cockpits as well?

You don't have the audio. You have no clue what's on it. I'm glad you mentioned Air Disasters earlier because that's what this is to much of the public. Entertainment.

Investigators know what happened. If there was video you wouldn't see it anyway. It's irrelevant.

GAC06 said:

---

You don't have the audio. You have no clue what's on it. I'm glad you mentioned Air Disasters earlier because that's what this is to much of the public. Entertainment.

Investigators know what happened. If there was video you wouldn't see it anyway. It's irrelevant.

---

You still haven't answered my question.

You ignore that many of the episodes of Air Disaster cover airplanes of older varieties and a whole various array of CVRs, FDRs and newer systems.

They can almost certainly determine which pilot switched the levers based on what the other pilot was doing. So it the left stick was giving input commands during take off then its the right seat flipping the switches. Ergo, its known which pilot did what.

I think a better question is why flight data and voice recordings are not captured real-time via satcom.

I am not necessarily opposed to cameras, they even stream live for much of our space travel now. But like GAC06 is saying, it almost certainly does not prevent this accident and likely would not make a difference in being able to determine the cause of the crash and who caused it.

I'm asking you to show me why it's necessary and you've failed to do so. You're arguing for adding cameras. Show me why they're necessary.

txags92 said:

---

deddog said:

---

Jetpilot86 said:

---

javajaws said:

---

If the pilot didn't do it I would have expected his response to be a panicked "What?!?" instead of "I did not cutoff". I think he expected the question because he did it on purpose.

---

I don't necessarily think so. Depending on the level of fatigue, it's certainly possible to think you did one thing and really did something else. Been there, done that.

Not saying it was or wasn't, but being fatigued presents the same as being intoxicated, so trying to definitively assume murder-suicide is unwise at this time.

---

Per earlier reports both pilots were well rested.
I might be wrong on this, but i think pilots in India have to pass a sobriety test before flying. So it rules those two things out.

However unlikely, i still think there is a chance that the switches werent changed manually - but it appears to the blackbox like they were. So a glitch in how its being logged - A different - unexpected single point of failure.

---

If it were an electrical glitch, it wouldn't have switched them off one at a time. The evidence that they were actually turned off and not just showing that way was the plane losing thrust and eventually crashing

---

This definitely looks intentional. The 1 sec gap, and the attempt to restart, and the conversation around it.

A lot of very unlikely (but not impossible) scenarios would have to occur for it to not be the pilot.
For example, maybe a rat was eating through the wiring and ate through one wire before the other - that was one of my first guesses for the crash...(rats are notorious for eating wiring, and I've worked at a company where all our servers went down on thanksgiving day because of a (fried) gecko. Also there have been rats on Air India planes before (Link)

We always think X shouldn't happen because of Y, but situation A123 unfolds itself.

Video may not have prevented this crash, but it's obtuse to say that no video ever could be helpful to (a) better determining how a crash or some other incident occurred and (b) learning information that could be useful for implementing changes that could prevent future crashes

deddog said:

---

txags92 said:

---

deddog said:

---

Jetpilot86 said:

---

javajaws said:

---

If the pilot didn't do it I would have expected his response to be a panicked "What?!?" instead of "I did not cutoff". I think he expected the question because he did it on purpose.

---

I don't necessarily think so. Depending on the level of fatigue, it's certainly possible to think you did one thing and really did something else. Been there, done that.

Not saying it was or wasn't, but being fatigued presents the same as being intoxicated, so trying to definitively assume murder-suicide is unwise at this time.

---

Per earlier reports both pilots were well rested.
I might be wrong on this, but i think pilots in India have to pass a sobriety test before flying. So it rules those two things out.

However unlikely, i still think there is a chance that the switches werent changed manually - but it appears to the blackbox like they were. So a glitch in how its being logged - A different - unexpected single point of failure.

---

If it were an electrical glitch, it wouldn't have switched them off one at a time. The evidence that they were actually turned off and not just showing that way was the plane losing thrust and eventually crashing

---

This definitely looks intentional. The 1 sec gap, and the attempt to restart, and the conversation around it.

A lot of very unlikely (but not impossible) scenarios would have to occur for it to not be the pilot.
For example, maybe a rat was eating through the wiring and ate through one wire before the other - that was one of my first guesses for the crash...(rats are notorious for eating wiring, and I've worked at a company where all our servers went down on thanksgiving day because of a (fried) gecko. Also there have been rats on Air India planes before (Link)

We always think X shouldn't happen because of Y, but situation A123 unfolds itself.

---

If it were rats chewing through wires to cut it off, it would not be possible for it to then register 10 seconds later as being turned back on.

GAC06 said:

---

I'm asking you to show me why it's necessary and you've failed to do so. You're arguing for adding cameras. Show me why they're necessary.

---

I have given you my reasons, you choose to ignore them. So let me give you the one, overarching reason, again: They provide additional information that can assist investigators. More data, more information, is always a good and valuable thing, and eliminates speculation. They can make the investigations more thorough and more efficient.

Now you tell me...why are you so vehemently opposed to them? Afraid a pilot and stewardess are going to get Coldplayed?

It may have been covered before, but the typical operation would be one pilot with their hands on the stick and the other pilot working the throttle?

Here is a video with the co-pilot at the controls for takeoff. Note that the she is focused intently on what is in front of her while the other pilot keeps a hand on the throttle levers. After V1, hand comes off the throttle (assume as you can no longer abort take-off), then carries out other tasks like raising the gear and appears to diddle with the computer at about the same time that the Air India fuel switches are flipped.

The fuel cut-offs are shown in the video. It would seem to me its quite plausible the pilot not at the controls could sneak an unnoticed hand over and flip the switches.

txags92 said:

---

deddog said:

---

txags92 said:

---

deddog said:

---

Jetpilot86 said:

---

javajaws said:

---

If the pilot didn't do it I would have expected his response to be a panicked "What?!?" instead of "I did not cutoff". I think he expected the question because he did it on purpose.

---

I don't necessarily think so. Depending on the level of fatigue, it's certainly possible to think you did one thing and really did something else. Been there, done that.

Not saying it was or wasn't, but being fatigued presents the same as being intoxicated, so trying to definitively assume murder-suicide is unwise at this time.

---

Per earlier reports both pilots were well rested.
I might be wrong on this, but i think pilots in India have to pass a sobriety test before flying. So it rules those two things out.

However unlikely, i still think there is a chance that the switches werent changed manually - but it appears to the blackbox like they were. So a glitch in how its being logged - A different - unexpected single point of failure.

---

If it were an electrical glitch, it wouldn't have switched them off one at a time. The evidence that they were actually turned off and not just showing that way was the plane losing thrust and eventually crashing

---

This definitely looks intentional. The 1 sec gap, and the attempt to restart, and the conversation around it.

A lot of very unlikely (but not impossible) scenarios would have to occur for it to not be the pilot.
For example, maybe a rat was eating through the wiring and ate through one wire before the other - that was one of my first guesses for the crash...(rats are notorious for eating wiring, and I've worked at a company where all our servers went down on thanksgiving day because of a (fried) gecko. Also there have been rats on Air India planes before (Link)

We always think X shouldn't happen because of Y, but situation A123 unfolds itself.

---

If it were rats chewing through wires to cut it off, it would not be possible for it to then register 10 seconds later as being turned back on.

---

Just an example.

My point was that with modern planes like the 787and A350 (which I believe are the pinnacle of commercial airplane engineering), a lot of really unusual things would have to happen in a very specific order for a plane to go down because of mechanical failure. Its not impossible, but statistically unlikely. I am terrified of flying, but would pick a Dreamliner or A380 any day

You have failed to provide a single example where cameras were necessary.

And now you're seeming to take it personally. It'll be alright.