Concerns about AI171 investigation
a) It raises more questions than it answers
b) it’s obvious that some US based sources had leaked its details to US media 2-3 days ago
c) it is regrettable that the entire CVR transcript was not released by the AAIB to help us understand more.
d) Without a thorough investigation being completed, how could the AAIB have issued a line that “no recommendations for Boeing or GE” absolving them
e) That something caused both engines to fail after take off (lack fuel as we now know)
f) The FAA Dec 2018 advisory is very significant in this regard. more
b) it’s obvious that some US based sources had leaked its details to US media 2-3 days ago
c) it is regrettable that the entire CVR transcript was not released by the AAIB to help us understand more.
d) Without a thorough investigation being completed, how could the AAIB have issued a line that “no recommendations for Boeing or GE” absolving them
e) That something caused both engines to fail after take off (lack fuel as we now know)
f) The FAA Dec 2018 advisory is very significant in this regard. more
Viewed by 2528
View all 6 comments Below 6 comments
There are two possibilities . the fuel switch may be Purposely Turned OFF by Somebody OR It may be tempered . But the Possibility of Defect is rare as Pilot get all O.K. Signal & hence he start for Take off. The Media & peoples has lost their common sense by eating junk foods. The Person who did this must he having through Knowledge of Engine Functioning. The Fuel which was in Line consumed during running but was not sufficient for take off. It Is similar to any Vehicle. The Vehicle runs few meters after fuel get exhausted. It is due to Fuel remain in supply Pipe used for this purpose. Govt. Is afraid or not having any daring to put truth in front of peoples. If there is CCTV, they can easily find out who went for engine check up & for maint. purpose. They are diverting the things. It is BJP . Buddhe Janonka Party. more
Jul 17
A hastily done, controversial, "GE or Boeing absolving", cover up report, rather than an evidence based one with evidentiary inputs from the only first hand account findings corroborators, the pilots, themselves dead. In contrast the month-long investigation following the Ethiopian Airlines crash gave many learnings, for example about MCAS, as it was conclusively evidentiary. more
Jul 14
it would have been good if the final report had been released than releasing a report which is not complete which throws lot of questions than what it answers. more
Jul 14
The report appears to be mischievous, giving a virtual clean chit to Boeing and GE, who are parties to the investigation, while bringing up the issue of the fuel switches. Some very selective and controversial statements are made, casting serious aspersions on the pilots and leaving a lot of unanswered questions. Unless there is a very detailed report corroborating each action with transcripts of the recordings, we are reaching nowhere. Maybe it was a pilot error, or it was an electronic failure or something else. From this report, it seems that all the electronics and engines were working fine, maintenance, etc, was performed regularly. However, it hints at something that one of the pilots did. In a subtle way, it tries to state that the equipment was in pristine condition, but the people flying the aircraft did something crazy. more
Jul 13
Please note that this is preliminary report without signature just for information. No conclusions can be drawn till final report. It appears to be case of sabotage by ground handling staff. more
Jul 13
Why even release a report that leads nowhere except to help increase Boeing and GE stock prices in the US and cool off the media gaze? Singing or not signing a report doesn't make it better. So many scam-ridden companies have audit reports signed by stalwarts. Conclusions are drawn based on how statements are positioned. There is selective reporting of certain matters. There is nothing to indicate sabotage by ground handling staff, and more to do with pilot error. more
Jul 13
