New revelations come to light from the ongoing survey to crash Air India’s plane at India with the responsibility to fall into the ruler.
Recorded dialogue between the two Boeing 787 operators Indian water Which crashed last month in Ahmedabad, India, indicates that he was the most experienced of the two, the ruler, the one who interrupted the power supply of engines with fuelThe US newspaper Wall Street Journal said Wednesday.
The newspaper quotes its sources in the US, informed For the initial valuation of the data gathered and analyzed for this accident, which claimed the lives of 260 people, occupants at 787 and people on the ground on June 12th. The revelation of the WSJ comes a few hours after reports that want Sampaual to suffer from depression in recent years and has had psychological problems.
“He had been licensed for medical reasons from the volatile work for the last 3-4 years,” said Indian expert on flight safety issues, Mohan Ranganhan. Information stresses that the 56 -year -old pilot had taken the sick leave after his mother’s death, as he was not in a good psychological state.
The co -pilot, in the 787 rudder, asked the very experienced ruler why he turned the switches to adjust the two engines to the “cutoff”, DLong after the long -distance aircraft, which would fly to London, took off from the runway according to the report.
The ruler denied that he did
Cleive Kunder, 32, was 3,403 -hour experience, while Sumit Sampaual, 56, with a 15,638 -hour volatile experience was ruled.
The latter denied he did. During the preliminary finding of the accident investigation, released on Saturday by the Indian Air Force Research Service (AAIB), the long -distance passenger aircraft had developed a speed of 180 knots (333 kilometers per hour) and had just taken off when the switches were opened. (“Cutoff”), with a second one from each other. The text is not specified by whom.
The engines immediately lost every power. The preliminary finding did not attribute responsibility for the accident, but stressed that one of the pilots asked the other why he stopped supplying the engines with fuel – the other replied that he had not done so.
The plane lost height and fell on buildings in half a minute.
Images from cameras on the airport surveillance system recorded that a small, auxiliary turbine (RAM Air Turbine, Rat), was put into operation shortly after take -off. It is part of the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU), designed for the electricity of the aircraft systems of the aircraft in the event of the engine stoppage, or when on the ground.
In debris the switches were found in the “operation” position (RUN)
In the wreckage after the accident, the switches were found in the “Run” position. The data from the flight data recorder indicates that the engines took back just before the crash, but it was too late to prevent.
In his internal letter Monday, Air India CEO Campbell Wilson said the finding showed no problem, Mechanical or maintenance of Boeing 787, on the contrary, said that every maintenance required.
AAIB’s preliminary finding does not formulate any security recommendation, neither in Boeing nor on the GE engine manufacturer. Informing the US Federal Service of the US, FAA, he also assured that the switches are completely safe, according to the Reuters News Agency, whose knowledge was made.
A total of 241 people aboard Air India’s Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner were killed-just one survived-when the aircraft crashed on buildings a short distance from Ahmedabad airport. The Indian authorities also identified 19 victims on the ground.
Some US officials cited by Jernal estimated that stopping the power supply of engines with fuel will could be deliberate energy, considering that the investigation may now have a forensic nature.
Mr Wilson called earlier this week not to draw hurried conclusions from the preliminary finding and other data, stressing that Research is still “far away” than to be completed.
Investigations into air accidents often last over a year or more; in addition, it is generally difficult to determine any intentional action to cause accident. In some cases, experts from one country disagree with the conclusions of another, the newspaper noted.