this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2025
259 points (100.0% liked)

World News

48418 readers
3432 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 35 points 4 days ago (6 children)

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.

[–] frenchfryenjoyer@lemmings.world 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

both pilots were experienced and had also passed breathalyser tests before the flight too (source)

[–] Wooki@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

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.

[–] atomicorange@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Could have been cut off by one pilot as part of a troubleshooting attempt, maybe? Thinking “it’s not cut off, just a temporary state of affairs” or something like that. Just trying to think of ways this could be a miscommunication instead of blatant misconduct :(

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 days ago

There is no procedure that involves cutting off fuel to both engines while in-flight; one at a time, but not both. Then, there is no procedure that ever involves touching those controls during takeoff. Finally; there would be communication between the pilots discussing any such troubleshooting, they wouldn't just take it upon themselves to start flipping switches without at the very least letting the other pilot know what they're doing. Particularly when it comes to troubleshooting; there is a strict set of checklists they go through as a team, with one reading out questions, the other responding with data/answers from the instruments and the first confirming that response.

These were both experienced pilots with ample flight hours; they knew what they were doing at those controls. I'm not going to throw human error out the window entirely, but it's not looking very likely unfortunately.

Either that plane was brought down intentionally, or there was a stunning error in judgment wildly disregarding procedure in that cockpit that was not communicated at all. (note: the mics record to the blackbox continuously, they're not ptt, if one of the pilots had said something, it'd be on the tape.)

[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

There’s no communication between the two pilots before the switches were moved to cutoff to suggest they encountered any problems prior to fuel cutoff.

[–] atomicorange@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

Yeah, I didn’t realize how soon after takeoff this was when I proposed that idea either. There’s no way shutting off the fuel during takeoff would be a reasonable decision.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 36 points 4 days ago (2 children)

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.

[–] Supervisor194@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago (4 children)

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.

[–] neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 4 days ago (2 children)

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):

https://media.cnn.com/api/v1/images/stellar/prod/c-gettyimages-951922648-20250711223914009.jpg?q=w_1160%2Cc_fill%2Ff_webp

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?

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 days ago

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.

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago

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)
[–] obinice@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago

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.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 28 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

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.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 20 points 4 days ago (3 children)

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.

[–] CMahaff@lemmy.world 14 points 4 days ago (1 children)

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)
[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Petter and Ben from Mentour Pilot all but said they came to the same conclusion

[–] then_three_more@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff. The other pilot responded that he did not do so." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx20p2x9093t

Until there's independent evidence otherwise I'm going to assume either fudged maintenance reports or the switch designer at boeing is about to commit suicide by shooting themself in the back of the head hours before talking to the press.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Surely someone committing suicide and taking hundreds of people with him in the process wouldn't lie about it.

[–] roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It's also possible that the one that did it said "why did you do that" to try and shift blame for reason(s) of insurance payout, shame, or something else and the one that said "I didn't" is telling the truth.

Whichever one did it, that video from Captain Steeeve makes a pretty good case that one of them did.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] UniversalBasicJustice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Cloudberg is a she! You are absolutely correct that she is an excellent subject matter expert though.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] deranger@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 days ago

Mentour Pilot did a livestream today, he's also one of the major commercial aviation YouTubers.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

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?

[–] frenchfryenjoyer@lemmings.world 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] SpermHowitzer@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

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)

is it clear that FADEC cannot cut-off via software?

load more comments
view more: next ›