Especially for those flying a recip. Since so many folk like to put blower juice in 'em.
Did you try unplugging it and plugging it back in?
To me, a very plausible scenario: V1, Vr, V2, one engine fails, one pilot tries to restart the wrong one, now you're 400ft AGL with one engine failed and one that was just cutoff, with no altitude to restart it.
It will cycle the engine and spar values closed then open again.
I'm not a big-iron pilot, but if only one engine failed immediately after rotation, don't you just fly the plane?
If they did, they did not follow procedure.
Yes since with one engine operating, so that leaves the one in a billion odds that both fail at the same time since the airplane had no thrust to climb or even maintain altitude.
As observers we have the luxury of holding our bets until the all the cards are turned over. Anything else is just a guess.
It's not plausible at all, you don't try to restart an engine below 400 feet.
According to Google, there were 35 million commercial airline flights worldwide in 2023. If the odds of a dual engine failure were actually 1:1,000,000,000, then we should expect it to happen only once every 29 years. I can think of several dual-engine flameouts off the top of my head in that span, and not all 35 million were large jet airliners, so the actual rate is way more than one in a billion. Now, of course we know that statistics don't actually work that way and extremely unlikely events will likely occur more frequently than the odds indicate, but I still wouldn't say it's a one in a billion occurrence.
Well, on the PA-23-160 you just fly. Think about the effect your W&B and hours SMOH has on the POH's blistering 180 fpm at 95 mph single-engine climb rate . . . consider feathering . . . Recall that any rats onboard are of the order Rodentia, so if the gyros work, it means the gear are staying down for a while. (Aviate, commemorate, navigate, re-evaluate, communicate . . ..)
I guess we need a 787 driver to simulate guarding and sliding hand back and down the quadrant and see if he could catch both switches in a way that would pull them up over the detent. Sim switches would be the ones to try because they would have the most wear. Maybe they put out a timeline tomorrow. If fuel is shutoff at the likely gear up call my wild speculation just becomes speculation.
So a clickbait "update" of updated speculation?
There are guards on the outside of each switch. In addition there is no procedure to guard the throttles.I guess we need a 787 driver to simulate guarding and sliding hand back and down the quadrant and see if he could catch both switches in a way that would pull them up over the detent. Sim switches would be the ones to try because they would have the most wear. Maybe they put out a timeline tomorrow. If fuel is shutoff at the likely gear up call my wild speculation just becomes speculation.
I believe some airlines have a procedure to guard the thrust levers. Yes, I've seen the guards. Somehow, someway could a hand guarding the thrust levers slide back and catch both worn switches when going to put the gear up? Tomorrow we may know if the fuel switches being turned off corresponded to a point where gear up was commanded. Or not.
Captain's hands are on the thrust levers from when the power is set until V1, regardless of who's takeoff it is.
But, but, but…………the internet sleuths have it all figured out.
The Zapruder film clearly shows that there were two attractive yet untalented actors in President McKinley's box at Ford's Theater.
Reference the 767 in your moniker, I have a hazy memory of my Captain shutting down and not liking how easy one switch went to cutoff. Wrote up the switch.
Welp
Wow . . ..
If that happened right after the gear up command my wild speculation becomes less wild. I would ask any of you active 787 flyers to check if you can shutdown without pulling the switches up next time you block in. I'm guessing there is some ergonomic investigating happening in some sims also. They should publish CVR transcript with timeline.
www.dw.com
