Garfly

Yeah, I see they're presenting there too.

But, to reiterate, that action might have been the (expected) reaction to a double engine failure rather than the cause of it: “Here (in the AAIB prelim report) there is a reference to the pilot cutting off, let’s assume that the pilots cut off both the switches and then put it back again. Now that’s exactly what you’re supposed to do as per the checklist if you lose thrust on both engines." Capt. Sam Thomas. See the minute from around 07:30 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ_oNlBE_o8

Or have been let down before by "understanding" them all too well.

Russ Niles of AvWeb adds this take: Without Video, We'll Never Really Know - AVweb AVWEB.COM Will the real cause of the crash of Air India 171 ever be known? Excerpt: "As with everything else it seems, those switches feed wires that end up at a computer, which has the final decision on whether the simple opening or closing of a circuit can proceed. That little box, strapped unceremoniously to the main fan housing of the massive engine, controls all things to do with the fuel, including its sudden absence, a handy feature if it’s on fire but a disaster a few seconds after the mains have air under them. A solder joint on that control unit is prone to cracking and airlines were advised to replace them in 2021. This plane was said to be up to date on all those sorts of maintenance advisories, so I assume it was done. But the working theory heading around the airline blogs and forums is that it’s possible that a cracked solder joint interrupted the current from the switches under the Gs of rotation to stop the fuel flow long enough to shut down both engines. As far-fetched as it seems, it introduces enough doubt to lay waste to all the other depressing scenarios being bandied about and the arguments that flow from there."

Yes, I gather Capt. Thomas' point was that the moving of those switches, at all, has wrongly been taken as incontrovertible evidence of foul play. I, for one, am glad to see someone running his argument. Time might tell.

There is an interesting interview on YT with Capt. Sam Thomas, President of ALPA (India) where he runs an argument against blaming the pilots at all. It's a half-hour discussion but he makes a crucial point between 06:30 >> 08:00. He reckons that cycling the fuel cutoff switches is actually part of the memory-items checklist in case of double engine failure and may just have been the captain's desperate attempt at a re-light when he lost both at take-off. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ_oNlBE_o8

I suppose that such a theory could fit with the reported CVR dialogue. (Along the lines of: "Why did you do that?" / "I didn't do it!")

I take it that the fuel cutoffs are placed there very much by design; in the case of an engine malfunction the pilot's hand falls straight to what's likely the next crucial task (after closing the offending throttle).

Mentour and Ben discuss: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE0BetkXsLg

FWIW a discussion of those switches by Mentour and mate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQakAafxGck