World News

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.

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.

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.

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?

Nineteen people died on the ground.

Technically 260 people died on the ground. Because that is where the plane crashed.

However, nineteen people on the ground died.

There is a critical difference in that word order. The former includes everyone who had reached the ground by the time they died, the latter only includes those who were on the ground to begin with, and not those who were on the plane.

Or in other words, the first phrasing highlights destination, the second highlights source. Everyone died on the ground after the plane impacted it, but only 19 were already on the ground when the impact killed them.

The placement of the word “died” is what makes all the difference.

Isn’t English fun?

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

If that's all true: Why do these suicidal fucks take others out with them?

If it's not true: Does Boeing have another catastrophic pattern failure?

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