[alancalverd]

Yes the cutoff valve stops the flow of fuel to an engine. So?

It's a few years since I last took a flying exam but I do recall that fuel flow to the engine(s) is rather an important factor in maintaining separation from the terrain, which is why we don't use the cutoff valve in normal flight.

Your scenarios 1 and 2  are inexplicit. What is clear is that the engines will not run for long with the fuel flow "off", so we make certain that the switches are "on" before attempting to start them, and do not touch them again until we are parked at our destination. By

a Boeing issue

I therefore assume you mean some form of telekinesis between Seattle and Ahmedabad, since one of the pilots remarked that the switches were "off" when the plane was airborne, at least ten minutes after starting.

[mxplxxx (OP)]

Yes the cutoff valve stops the flow of fuel to an engine. So?

It's a few years since I last took a flying exam but I do recall that fuel flow to the engine(s) is rather an important factor in maintaining separation from the terrain, which is why we don't use the cutoff valve in normal flight.

Your scenarios 1 and 2  are inexplicit. What is clear is that the engines will not run for long with the fuel flow "off", so we make certain that the switches are "on" before attempting to start them, and do not touch them again until we are parked at our destination. By

a Boeing issue

I therefore assume you mean some form of telekinesis between Seattle and Ahmedabad, since one of the pilots remarked that the switches were "off" when the plane was airborne, at least ten minutes after starting.

Not worth a reply, your sarcasm overwhelms your arguments. Beware; you are looking at a serious loss of face here.

[paul cotter]

When mxplxxx refuses to accept obvious facts the digression into sarcasm is appropriate. So you have racked another FAIL.

[Bored chemist]

2. The engines were not running at the time the cutoff switches were toggled off/on.

In which case the plane was still on the tarmac.
Sadly, that was not the case, so we can rule out option (2) leaving only (1) as the explanation.

Slightly more seriously, you can always hear the engine(s) in the background of the cockpit voice recordings.
So the investigators know when the engines failed independently of the FDR.

[paul cotter]

Since mxplxxx has failed to undermine the interim crash report I suggest the deletion of all posts referencing this disaster as they have no relevance whatsoever to the question "How do we measure the energy of a photon?", or move them to a new thread(in new theories, of course). A casual reader would be baffled by this pointless digression.

[mxplxxx (OP)]

Since mxplxxx has failed to undermine the interim crash report I suggest the deletion of all posts referencing this disaster as they have no relevance whatsoever to the question "How do we measure the energy of a photon?", or move them to a new thread(in new theories, of course). A casual reader would be baffled by this pointless digression.

I suggest all posts by PC relating to the Dreamliner crash be deleted.  They have no value and just waste the reader's time. I suggest PC go elsewhere for his entertainment. He is out of his depth on Naked Scientists.

[alancalverd]

Moderator warning.

[paul cotter]

Doesn't bother me in the least, Alan. I have a relatively thick skin.

[mxplxxx (OP)]

Doesn't bother me in the least, Alan. I have a relatively thick skin.

Good, then you won't mind me telling you that you are also thick minded.

[Bored chemist]

 mxplxxx
I suspect this is goodbye and I doubt that many will miss you much.
Before you get banned (that seems to be your current objective), can you confirm that you don't realise that a plane will not take off unless fuel is being pumped to the engines?

[mxplxxx (OP)]

Time I moved on anyway. AC, BC, CC, PC are the only Naked Scientists who reply to my posts these days. And you are the rudest and densest lot imaginable. Good riddance.

[mxplxxx (OP)]

Time I moved on anyway. AC, BC, CC, PC are the only Naked Scientists who reply to my posts these days. And you are the rudest and densest lot imaginable. Good riddance.

I regret using the word "dense"; frustration got the better of me. My intent has always been to challenge thinking, not dismiss people.

[paul cotter]

Well then, you have failed miserably to produce one cogent argument that the interim report is in error.

[mxplxxx (OP)]

Well then, you have failed miserably to produce one cogent argument that the interim report is in error.

Who gives a damn what you think?

[Bored chemist]

It doesn't matter what you and Paul think of each other.
This is still true. " You have failed miserably to produce one cogent argument that the interim report is in error."

Now, please answer this; can you confirm that you don't realise that a plane will not take off unless fuel is being pumped to the engines?

[mxplxxx (OP)]

Just to reiterate.

The status of the fuel pumps at the time the fuel pumps switches were set to OFF unequivocally answers the question "what caused the crash of the Indian Air Dreamliner?"

1. fuel pumps pumping - cause is human
2. fuel pumps not pumping - cause is mechanical

This means that the AAIB already know the cause and are not revealing it for reasons unknown. It is also the reason the vital fuel pump status is missing from the preliminary report. i.e. if it were present, everyone would know the cause.

[Bored chemist]

And again....
If the fuel pumps were not pumping, how did the plane take off?
Magic?
The power of suggestion?
Carried aloft on the hand of a genie?
A spectacular display of synchronised flatulence?

What is your answer?

[paul cotter]

Levitation.

[alancalverd]

"Fuel cutoff" is not primarily connected with fuel pumps but should activate valves preventing any fuel from reaching the pumps. That's what the relevant switches on the 787 are purported to do. 

Fuel pumps are switched by a separate overhead panel on the copilot side on a 787. No way anyone could fiddle with the eight switches unnoticed, and they appear to be more concerned with tank balance than feed to the engines, which would be controlled by the FADECs in response to power demand.

[paul cotter]

Post #1178 is a perfect example of logical argument. However logic does not work here.