Pilot associations in India and abroad have justifiably objected to how the report was spun. But not enough have asked: shouldn’t action be taken against those who leaked it?
While Trump may not be aware of the region’s history, his remarks are no laughing matter. They summarise how the West views the recent tensions between India and Pakistan.
Dulat served in Kashmir when he was with the IB and developed a close relationship with Farooq Abdullah. Since then, Delhi has used him for secret negotiations.
The problem is not the movie ‘Chhaava’. It is how politicians exploited the emotions it provoked. The movie did not ask for Aurangzeb’s tomb to be vandalised, politicians did.
Trump may or may not like Modi on a personal level. But there’s one thing we do know about the US President: his approach to most issues is strictly transactional.
Trump is determinedly isolationist. He is not interested in being friends with foreign countries. He only wants to show Americans how he has whipped foreign governments into line.
What you conclude is clear – that nothing is conclusive.
Nothing can be – given the aircraft has crashed at high speed and totally burnt out/disintegrated and no pilots survived.
The moot point here is not the leak. The moot point with a view to take corrective steps (in addition to affix liability in crores) is: who is responsible – machine or pilot?
There is no doubt that the fuel switches were found in off position by the co-pilot and then turned on. (If to believe the Black Box audio has not been tampered with – which can well be another avenue to increase confusion.)
The crucial questions to be answered are simple:
1. Objectively, is it possible for the machine/on-board computers to inadvertently turn off fuel?
2. Is it possible for the system to also simultaneously physically move both the fuel switches in the cockpit (that are spring loaded and need twisting to change status of fuel) from on to off?
If yes to this 2nd question, then Boeing and their design need to be questioned. If not, the human angle comes into the picture.
The question to be answered is – under what circumstances or situations can both the fuels cocks in the cockpit be physically moved from open to shut. All else are red herrings.
(I too can qualify as a frequent flier – my seat at times in the fuselage and at times in the cockpit.)
What you conclude is clear – that nothing is conclusive.
Nothing can be – given the aircraft has crashed at high speed and totally burnt out/disintegrated and no pilots survived.
The moot point here is not the leak. The moot point with a view to take corrective steps (in addition to affix liability in crores) is: who is responsible – machine or pilot?
There is no doubt that the fuel switches were found in off position by the co-pilot and then turned on. (If to believe the Black Box audio has not been tampered with – which can well be another avenue to increase confusion.)
The crucial questions to be answered are simple:
1. Objectively, is it possible for the machine/on-board computers to inadvertently turn off fuel?
2. Is it possible for the system to also simultaneously physically move both the fuel switches in the cockpit (that are spring loaded and need twisting to change status of fuel) from on to off?
If yes to this 2nd question, then Boeing and their design need to be questioned. If not, the human angle comes into the picture.
The question to be answered is – under what circumstances or situations can both the fuels cocks in the cockpit be physically moved from open to shut. All else are red herrings.
(I too can qualify as a frequent flier – my seat at times in the fuselage and at times in the cockpit.)
Typo in the copy …..by now means????
To answer your last question. If the pilot did it, then there is no way to make flying safer.