By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Newly released data from the US National Transportation Safety Board suggests that the fuel switches to both engines of China Eastern Airlines flight MU5735 were manually shut off before the aircraft plummeted to the ground. This finding, drawn from the flight data recorder, indicates a deliberate action that led to the engines losing power. While experts acknowledge the data points towards human command, they caution that this does not definitively prove motive or intent. The Civil Aviation Administration of China, which has previously denied intentionality, has not yet released a final accident report, fueling public criticism.
Read the original article here
The flight data from the China Eastern Airlines crash in 2022 is increasingly pointing towards a deliberate act rather than an accident. Reports indicate that while cruising at a significant altitude, the fuel switches for both engines were moved from the “run” position to the “cutoff” position. This movement is not a simple, accidental flick of a switch; on a Boeing 737, it requires a physical action of pulling the switch up before moving it to the cutoff position.
Crucially, the data suggests that after these switches were moved, the engine speeds decreased, and there was no subsequent attempt to return the switches to the “on” position. This lack of effort to restart the engines is a significant indicator. If these switches had been accidentally disengaged, the pilots would have almost certainly tried to reactivate them immediately, especially at cruising altitude. The fact that they remained in the cutoff position implies a conscious decision.
The flight data recorder (FDR) unfortunately stopped recording when the plane’s generators lost power at a lower altitude, meaning it didn’t capture the final moments leading up to the impact. However, the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) continued to function via a battery backup, providing a vital audio record of what transpired. While US investigators obtained four voice recordings from the damaged CVR, they did not retain copies themselves, passing them on to the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC).
This raises questions about the transparency of the investigation. The CAAC is in possession of information that could be pivotal in understanding the events of that flight. If the voice recordings reveal the sequence of events and who or what actions led to the fuel cutoff, they could offer conclusive evidence. Theories about attempted hijackings by other crew members or passengers are difficult to substantiate without access to this audio, and if the voice recordings confirmed that the pilots themselves initiated the fuel cutoff, it would be a deeply tragic scenario of one individual’s decision impacting so many lives.
It’s worth noting that the initial unverified posting of these files online has since been corroborated by their appearance on the NTSB’s official site. Accessing them requires a specific search through their reading room, highlighting the availability of this data for those who know where to look. This incident is not an isolated one, with past events like the Air India crash also involving pilot actions that led to the aircraft’s demise, raising concerns about pre-calculated methods for bringing down aircraft.
Some speculation points to the possibility of pilot depression or suicidal thoughts, suggesting that the stigmatization of mental health issues could contribute to such catastrophic events. The idea that the fuel switches might be overlooked during inspections is countered by the rigorous checks commercial planes undergo before flight. The question then becomes, why were these switches not addressed if they were faulty, or, more pointedly, why were they manipulated if they were not?
The scenario has drawn comparisons to the Germanwings Flight 9525 crash, where the pilot deliberately locked himself in the cockpit. Following that tragedy, rules were reinforced to ensure two people are always present in the cockpit. However, even with such safeguards, the immense forces and disorientation during a steep dive, combined with the complexity of overpowering a determined pilot, present significant challenges for other crew members or passengers.
The potential for a deliberate crash by a pilot has broader implications, suggesting a need for better mental health support for aviators. The argument that the fuel switches are merely a “red herring” is countered by the specific mechanics of their operation and the lack of subsequent intervention to restore them. While other methods of bringing down an aircraft exist, the fuel cutoff mechanism is a direct and powerful one.
The Chinese government’s approach to releasing information has also been a point of discussion, with concerns about potential “cover-ups” and a reluctance to disclose uncomfortable truths, perhaps to avoid national security risks or to prevent copycat incidents. While these reasons might have some merit, the families of the victims deserve clarity. The concept of “saving face” for a nation’s aviation industry can lead to the suppression of critical information.
The comparison to the Tenerife airport disaster, where pilot error and bravado were implicated, illustrates how governments and entities can be resistant to acknowledging fault, especially when it involves their own nationals or prominent figures within their industries. The notion of “face” in this context extends beyond cultural nuance to the economic and reputational impact on national airlines and aviation sectors.
Ultimately, the flight data provides compelling evidence that the China Eastern Airlines crash was not a random mechanical failure. The deliberate manipulation of the fuel switches, coupled with the absence of any attempt to rectify the situation, strongly suggests a planned descent into disaster. The ongoing investigation and the cautious release of information from Chinese authorities continue to fuel speculation and highlight the urgent need for transparency in understanding such profoundly tragic events.