one would think such a fail state should be only accessible after the user has bypassed and confirmed the action.
let's be honest, do we trust boeing at this point?
this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2025
261 points (100.0% liked)
World News
48368 readers
2788 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
So, so many poorly informed people in here jumping to conclusions, many of which were already ruled out in the preliminary report.
I don't know any more than what's in that document myself.
Perhaps some of the armchair aircraft safety investigators in here might want to at least skim the details before coming up with wild theories? Or at least provide reasoning and evidence to support them.
May those who lost their lives, and their loved ones, find peace and closure as best they can once we have all the details. Until then, it would be crass to speculate, especially as non-experts not privvy to the details of the investigation.
Given the mechanical saftey built into those switches, Unfortunately I guess that leaves us with two reasonable possibilities:
A) One of the pilots was somehow mistaken on the function of those switches and toggled them when they should not have. Then they genuinely thought they hadn't when asked why they had cutoff fuel.
Or
B) One of the pilots chose to cut off fuel supply to both engines, intentionally bringing down the plane. They then lied to the other pilot when asked why they'd cutoff fuel.
both pilots were experienced and had also passed breathalyser tests before the flight too (source)
Breathalysers don't detect tired or suicidal pilots.
The interim report stated copilot was pilot flying meaning they only focus on flying and he had also just flown already today. Captain however was his first flight in his shift and was also pilot monitoring.
load more comments
(8 replies)
is it clear that FADEC cannot cut-off via software?
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/11/india/air-india-crash-report-intl-latam
This article has a photo of the switches in question, and goes into more detail about how they work.
So I know there has to be a reason why these switches are vitally important but doesn't it seem weird that you can take a catastrophic action like turning the fuel supply off when you're in mid-takeoff? If you try and put a modern car in reverse at 65 MPH, the car is like "haha no" and ignores you.
From the article...
The fuel switches were “designed to be intentionally moved,” according to CNN safety analyst David Soucie, who said cases in which all fuel switches were turned off accidentally are “extremely rare.”
“Throughout the years, those switches have been improved to make sure that they cannot be accidentally moved and that they’re not automatic. They don’t move themselves in any manner,” Soucie said on Friday.
And the photo of the throttle (middle) and fuel cutoff switches (bottom):
There's just one-level-deeper of questions I'd have here. How were the switches designed such that they prevented accidental activation? Because it looks like they just get simply flipped down. Could it be pull-out-and-down? Or maybe there's a lot of resistance during the switch action?
They have metal detents; you have to pull the lever out, then push it down against a reasonably heavy spring.
These had to be very deliberately moved to the cutoff position.
How were the switches designed such that they prevented accidental activation? Because it looks like they just get simply flipped down. Could it be pull-out-and-down? Or maybe there's a lot of resistance during the switch action?
The lever-lock fuel switches are designed to prevent accidental activation - they must be pulled up to unlock before flipping, a safety feature dating back to the 1950s. This isn't a new or weird design. It's essentially the standard used in basically every plane because it works.
"It would be almost impossible to pull both switches with a single movement of one hand, and this makes accidental deployment unlikely," a Canada-based air accidents investigator, who wanted to remain unnamed, told the BBC.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Sounds like the pilots killed the fuel, and did not mean to do so. Having watched the video, and being totally ignorant of this sort of thing, that makes sense of what I saw.
I'm not trusting any report until I have had heard from Admiral Cloudberg. If you're not familiar, plane crash investigation is what he does. He's completely unbiased and seems to be the expert, at least for us layman.
I watched a very comprehensive and professional video by Captain Steeeve on this subject earlier today. He didn't outright literally say that one of the pilots deliberately downed the plane, but it was very clear that he thought that was the only explanation that really made sense here. Why do you say it sounds like they "did not mean to do so"? The switches are designed to not be movable without considerable deliberation and intent, you can't just bump these with your knee and switch them off. And both pilots were plenty experienced enough to know that you don't turn those switches off at that point in the flight.
Highly recommend everyone give this a listen. It covered most of the other possibilities people are bringing up in this thread:
- They have to be pulled out, moved, and pushed back in to change the state
- The plane cannot take off with them in the wrong position
- There is no procedure to ever toggle both off at the same time, and no procedure to toggle them off period at their low altitude
- Both were toggled off within 1 seconds of each other
- The engines were functioning normally when they were toggled off
Captain Steve really tried to not blame the pilots in previous videos about this crash, in fact he really believed it had to be something else, so it says a lot that this is the only conclusion he can come up with.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Petter and Ben from Mentour Pilot all but said they came to the same conclusion
load more comments
(4 replies)
Cloudberg is a she! You are absolutely correct that she is an excellent subject matter expert though.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
If I remember correctly, those switches need to be physically lifted up and rotated for the engines to switch from RUN to CUTOFF. there's also physical guards there to prevent pilots from knocking them. here's a diagram of the layout (source).
I've read theories that the pilot who manipulated the fuel switches could've mistook them for the stabiliser cutout switch but the switches are very different. the timing is also sus because it would've been at just the right time for things to have not been recoverable. 10 seconds earlier and the takeoff could've been aborted, 10 seconds later and the plane could've had enough altitude and speed to land in a safer area. also the way the pilot reacted to the other pilot suggests he saw the other pilot shut off the fuel to both engines one after the other and was in a state of shock
They lift up over a gate and you move them down to shut off, rather than turning. There’s no guard over them though. They’re not really close to any other switches you’d be manipulating at any time, especially right after takeoff, and they are a different shape than any other switch (Boeing likes to shape their switches differently so that if you grab the wrong one you’ll feel it). I cannot imagine how one could accidentally move one, let alone both switches do cutoff. But sometimes my brain does inexplicably dumb shit, so I dunno.
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›