Biggest Aviation Story Of 2026: Dreamliner Fuel Switch ‘Fault’ Under Scanner? | Newshour Agenda

本站添加: 2026-05-20

[00:00:00]Good evening and welcome to the news hour agenda. I'm Madhav Das Gopalakrishnan. Viewers, just months ago in February on News hour we had told you what exactly happened on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. We told you that the Boeing crew had reported abnormal behavior of the left engine fuel control switch, after which Air India grounded the aircraft. And now months later, Indian aviation watchdog DGCA is planning to travel to Seattle to observe Boeing's testing of a fuel control switch panel of the very same aircraft. The testing described by Indian officials as sensitive renews the spotlight on fuel control switch, which regulates the flow of jet fuel into a plane's engine. Now investigators are also preparing a final report into the Air India 787 crash that killed 260 people in Ahmedabad last June.

[00:00:49]There's an update coming in, in fact breaking news. We have Air India which has issued an official statement on Indian regulators' presence at the test of fuel switches in Seattle. In fact, the statement reads and I quote, "The module had already been confirmed as fully functional by both the OEM and the DGCA." OEM, of course, being the original equipment manufacturer. And the decision to proceed with further review and testing, Air India says, is understood to be intended to ensure a thorough and a conclusive evaluation of the component. As a measure of abundant caution, in fact, and they say that this additional step involves examination in a controlled laboratory environment to definitively confirm its performance and integrity, and that Air India fully supports the process. Let's quickly take this across to my colleague Shefali.

[00:01:36]Shefali, Air India is coming out and making its stand clear that they support it, but this is to be conclusively sure.

[00:01:42]The question is, all along for close to a year now we were told that this conclusive, that there is no problem with the switches. Why now are we looking at a test happening just about a month before the report is scheduled to come out, the final report of the AIB?

[00:01:57]Right, Madhav. We also know when the incident happened, which was on 1st of February 2026, and later the said aircraft was grounded, which was on the very next day when the plane landed here in Bengaluru, and later it was grounded, but after the many checks which was done by the OEM and DGCA, with both of the parties stating that it it has nothing to do with the module, and the fact that there was no problem with the module, and the pilot did was not able to use use the module properly as per the procedure as scheduled in the Boeing manual. And later it was told that it is serviceable, but now suddenly DGCA asking to conduct a test again in the Seattle facility of the OEM OEM, which in this case is Boeing, is something to be pondered upon. As DGCA now saying that it is as part of continued airworthiness of involved fuel control switch, and now have directed for their inspection at OEM facility.

[00:03:02]>> Okay, stay with us, Shewali, because there's more updates coming. In fact, these are switches which are designed to be immovable without action from pilots.

[00:03:09]And now they've come under scrutiny since the preliminary report into the crash found that they had been shut off nearly simultaneously. In fact, just a second apart, starving the engines of fuel. During the February incident in London, Times Now told you that the crew observed that during the engine start, the fuel switches did not remain fixed in the run position on the first two attempts. In fact, Boeing told Air India in February that the module containing fuel switches was found to be serviceable. The DGCA had said the switches passed checks. What then happened is a big question. In fact, now top DGCA sources are telling Times Now that Air India fuel control switch test will be carried out in the presence of DGCA officials, and Air India has been formally informed about the same.

[00:03:54]All right, there's more update coming in. Boeing statement in fact is now coming in on DGCA as well. Let's quickly put that up as well. In fact, Boeing is also going to monitor this. Boeing statement says that the 787 fuel control switch in Seattle that they are in constant contact with their customer and will continue to support them. So, this is of course very significant. Both Boeing as well as DGCA Shefali have confirmed that this testing will indeed happen. Now, the big question is why is it happening so close to the final AAIB report. Once again, that question arises. Is it only because an incident happened in London? Or is there more to it?

[00:04:29]No, of course Madhav, the fuel control switch is something that has always, since AI 171 crash, it has been there.

[00:04:37]Questions were being raised about when we look at AI 171 crash as well. There was questions about how the fuel control switch was moving from run to cut off. And when this incident which happened from London to Bengaluru on 1st of February, it again came to light with the same 787 aircraft. So, now DGCA has said and in its statement has categorically categorically said that as a part of continued airworthiness Okay. involving fuel control switch, now they will be there will be another inspection at Okay. Thanks so much Shefali for joining us with those quick updates. In fact, the fact is that this testing of the switch module is due to take place in June. And this date collides with the anniversary of the Ahmedabad plane crash, which is also the deadline of the final report as per ACAO norms. The DGCA now wants to examine the switch's locking mechanism and if there is an external pressure that was applied as well and what really the implication of this is. Let's quickly open this up to our panel. Joining us is Captain Amit Singh, aviation expert and founder of Safety Matters Foundation. We have C.S.

[00:05:41]Randhawa, president of the Federation of Indian Pilots. We also have Captain Minoo Vadia, who's founder president of the Federation of Indian pilots. We have J.S. Rawat, former joint director general of the DGCA and Saroj Da Vania, aviation lawyer, also joins us. Let me start with you, Captain Amit Singh. What are we looking at over here? Now, what is very curious is the manner in which all of this found mention in the preliminary report. We know that there was a fragment or a sliver of the conversation that was put forth and this finding of the switches moving within 1 second of each other. We know that in London there was an incident, the Heathrow to Bengaluru flight of the 787 where again there was a similar question over these switches. Now, if there have been these questions which have been lingering for over 10 months, why on the eve or maybe a month, month and a half before the AIB report has to come in, does this question over the switches once again arise?

[00:06:29]This is all a distraction. A 30-second flight has taken almost a year to investigate.

[00:06:34]And uh uh let me tell you the OEM here is Honeywell.

[00:06:39]Boeing has a design Boeing has the design uh they have designed the aircraft and uh assimilated parts from different vendors.

[00:06:48]So, Boeing cannot test the fuel control switch because they have not manufactured it.

[00:06:53]Uh in the US there are court cases against Boeing and Honeywell uh on the same issue about the fuel control switches.

[00:07:01]And uh this incidents I don't know what DGCA has categorized it as occurrence occurred in Feb beginning and uh DGCA issued a statement that uh there's nothing wrong with the fuel control switches and in addition based on Boeing's communication the pull to unlock force was checked and everything was found okay. Then why now again they have put it up is the issue.

[00:07:24]I wrote to AIB uh in February that uh it shouldn't come under purview of the AIB Mhm. since they're already investigating the crash and fuel control switch is under suspicion, so DGCA itself is under investigation in the AIB because they are in charge of the uh regulatory oversight.

[00:07:45]So, how can they investigate the fuel control switch? And in the past we have seen email exchanges between Boeing uh officials in the MCAS issue that how well they know Indian DGCA and how well they can manipulate them. Mhm. So, that is a bigger issue. So, analogy is if a crime happens and the police is suspect, it is handed over to CBI. Another similar crime happens, police will not investigate, CBI will investigate.

[00:08:13]Correct. The higher authority does it.

[00:08:15]Okay, so there's a conflict of interest essentially, which is what you're pointing out. Let me bring in Mr. J.S.

[00:08:19]Rawat on that. Mr. J.S. Rawat, how can the DGCA be a judge in the case in which its own role, you know, can at some level come under question? Is there a conflict of interest there? And what explains the DGCA's sudden interest because in February we were told everything is hunky-dory. Now suddenly this entire switch, the Honeywell switch or whatever it is, is being investigated in Seattle. Why?

[00:08:41]Because earlier they have category confirmed that there is no problem with the switches and because that it has been tested in the OEM's facility also.

[00:08:50]So, I don't know why why why why why why why why why why why why why because the switch is basically of the second February incident which has happened during the startup uh during the start of the engine at the UK London.

[00:09:03]So, DGCA is actually been been investigating that case and AIB investigation the 8172 accident. Mhm. The question is that as you have just mentioned that CBI has to do that police is doing that CBI has to do it. No, it is that uh AIB is free to take over any accident or incident which is conducted conducted by DGCA. And this is DGCA is conducting the investigation and I think from February there's a so many months have passed that they have not taken over the this accident incident and only DGCA is investigating. So, they are free to carry out the investigation.

[00:09:41]AIB is also, but as we understand that this time the DG it is the second incident which is being investigated by the DGCA. No, but you know, Mr. Rawat, they are free to conduct the investigation is very important perspective that you're putting forth. But, you know, you know, justice must not just be done, it must also be seen to be done. And let me bring in Captain Randhawa in this case.

[00:10:00]Captain Randhawa, It was basically DGCA does the investigation.

[00:10:05]Incident investigation, accident investigation is done by the AIB.

[00:10:08]Correct. So, why why why in this case >> If AIB at any stage feels that this investigation has to be taken over by them, they can take over the investigation. No, but why is that not happening? That is the question that I want to bring in to other panelists in as well. Captain Randhawa, why is that not happening? Now, Mr. J.S. Rawat says, and perhaps rightly so, that if AIB wants it can involve itself in the investigation. But, as you know, Captain Amit Singh pointed out, there is a possible conflict of interest. Now, in the US you have the FAA and you have the NTSB. Do we need a more formal structure like that? Does AIB need more powers?

[00:10:39]Does it need more, you know, manpower?

[00:10:40]Does it need more resources for instance to actually be able to take on all these investigations? Because in the past we've seen AIB not being able to stick to deadlines for instance.

[00:10:49]The the module on the ANX that has been going to be checked at the Boeing facility.

[00:10:57]Though Air India had done precautionary checks after the February 2nd incident on the Air India 132 flight from London Heathrow to Bangalore.

[00:11:10]So, now the question is that who should be before the final investigation is going to be honest by 12th of June next month.

[00:11:23]This is being again investigated, but it is investigated on the ANX aircraft.

[00:11:30]Now, ANX aircraft is the which was Air India 132.

[00:11:35]Now, that falls under the purview of DGCA, not under the purview of AAIB.

[00:11:41]But, why is it being done as a precursor to the final report which has to be submitted by the uh AAIB? That is not understood.

[00:11:52]Because as it is amply proved that the switches, they do not have any malfunction because they are they're mechanically locked.

[00:12:02]And it was incorrect to say that the pilots do not know how to move the switches. It's all rubbish. Because the pilot exactly knows, and it is mechanically locks when you put it from cut cut off to run position or run to cut off. There's a mechanical lock.

[00:12:20]So, it's incorrect to say by the OEM and by Air India that the pilots didn't know how to cut off the handle the switches. Mhm. Secondly, secondly, we have been overemphasizing the role of AAIB.

[00:12:35]I'm sorry to say, we almost 1 year has passed. We have at every forum, including parliamentary committees, we have said we have stressed upon that the body which is there to investigate the accidents, they are not competent enough.

[00:12:55]They are not even keeping in loop the subject matter experts.

[00:12:59]This is what is happening over there behind the scenes. So, only those five people who are who are trying to handle the investigation. Mhm.

[00:13:08]So, there is a flaw in the system. We have been We have been even challenging the timings of the you know, preliminary report which they have done. Right. And we have carried out a simulator check in Paris. We just awaiting for that report.

[00:13:25]Uh where we are going to challenge the timing if they are not in conformity.

[00:13:30]Okay.

[00:13:31]>> And submitted to the >> We'll watch out for that. We'll watch out for that if if that plays out in the court and how that plays out. And certainly, of course, there are many you know, parallel aspects going on. In fact, the deceased pilot's father has also approached the court on multiple counts. But let me bring in Saroj Damani. Ultimately, you know, from going by what Captain Rathore just said, is the entire attempt to just pin the blame on the pilot? Is that what we are seeing once again, starting from the preliminary report to what has been stated by various you know, manufacturers and others? Is somewhere this this part of that larger conspiracy to put it on the pilot?

[00:14:05]See, understand something. Now, today Boeing is also one of the most interested parties in this entire controversy.

[00:14:13]They should have the test or something done at a independent test facility, which is not associated with Boeing or which is not under control of Boeing.

[00:14:23]Today, what they are doing today, of course, first of all, can DGCA get into this or the accident bureau has to do it? Now, understanding how the investigation is done as per the international law on accident investigation, which is the Annexure 13, in which India falls as a signatory to investigate, follow the international protocol.

[00:14:44]The process is that they have to follow any incident relating to similar to the crash if occurs, like the engine switch incident on another flight also. The accident investigation bureau is supposed to look at it. That is what the ICAO Annexure 13 says, that it is not only technical aspect of that aircraft, but subsequent technical events relating to a similar aircraft also have to look by the accident investigation bureau.

[00:15:13]Mhm. In this case today, the DGCA saying that this we are investigating a separate incident of another journey and not the crash incident, and that is why we did not involve the accident bureau, and we are doing it independently. That's completely unknown to international law standards which have been laid down and which India is a signatory to. Right. So, ideally, this should have been done jointly by the accident bureau and the DGCA. Ideal situation is and Boeing doing the test once again. So, they are not satisfied with the current results.

[00:15:43]That means >> Okay. Let me bring in Captain Wadia. I think that's a very interesting point.

[00:15:47]Who should be doing that testing? Should it be done within a Boeing campus?

[00:15:50]Should it be done by Honeywell? Those are very important questions. And should the regulator there, perhaps the FAA or the NTSB or whoever is qualified to do so, be the location where that test happens is an important question coming in from Saroj Damaniya. But I'd also like to draw your attention, Captain Wadia, to another aspect. We are in the year 2026. From the year 2018, we have seen concerns being expressed about Boeing aircraft on the fuel switches. It started with the 737, and we know how the 787 fuel switch is a similar sort of locking mechanism as the 737. Why are we seeing these repeated delays and repeated questions coming in even 8 years later on such a sensitive aspect of the aircraft?

[00:16:28]It's a very important point for you to consider. Listen again to the both the pilots who have given their opinions earlier, Captain Amit Singh and Captain Randhawa.

[00:16:38]What have both the pilots emphasized on?

[00:16:41]The system. Today, it is not about the switches. It is not about the DGCA.

[00:16:46]After all, who's the DGCA? Mainly bureaucrats.

[00:16:49]After all, who's doing the investigation? As Captain Amit Singh rightly pointed out, a 30-second flight has taken more than a year to investigate. And there's so much that is drastically wrong which has not been highlighted. First of all, the aircraft has climbed to an altitude of about 600 ft or so.

[00:17:09]And got a speed of 180 knots or so. So, the power was available after takeoff for some few seconds, or about maybe 10 to 15 seconds.

[00:17:18]And the gear was left down. Who's emphasizing on that this is not a normal flight where a gear is left down at all.

[00:17:26]And earlier video reports even show that a rat is deployed. So, there's so much drastically wrong with the whole system that has been investigated. And whatever has been in discussed now, and whatever information that you are putting on, I think it is mainly a smoke screen to highlight to hide the main problems of what has probably happened on this aircraft. And the main problems have not been highlighted yet. And you ask, "Who should be investigating?" It is a very clear issue that all accidents are investigated only by specialists in accident analysis. And you have the IFALPA who has tremendous amount of pilots who are specialists in accident analysis. And who is doing the investigation today? Please find out.

[00:18:10]And why is so much nonsense being portrayed to the public, and misleading public, and hiding the facts that what could have actually happened on this flight? And there there's a tremendous amount of smoke screen. There are so many video issues that have been coming out. For example, the pilot's seat went back, and he pulled the throttle back, and he didn't know how to put the switches on.

[00:18:31]Absolutely.

[00:18:32]>> And as Captain Randhawa said, it's all total rubbish. Absolutely. And you've got to have a clear investigation which is not a smoke screen as it is going on right now. Right. Now, there are multiple theories, Captain Randhawa, as to what could have gone wrong technically. Now, we know that uh while the you know, airline, while the equipment manufacturer all have been at pains to say nothing is wrong with that switch, it's all okay. What could have possibly gone wrong? 10 months down the line, are we any much the wiser? Could there have been a possible electrical fault, or something which could have moved the switch, or was the switch's locking mechanism itself is not foolproof? What could have possibly happened to those two switches is still remains a question. What is your understanding?

[00:19:10]See, this fuel control switch movement is only a distraction. If you read the preliminary report, you can find the exact not exact, but you will get close to what happened.

[00:19:21]Uh uh it's the wordings which count.

[00:19:25]Everywhere where they have quoted any data, the preliminary report says as per EAFR or the flight recorder, the speed was this or time was this.

[00:19:35]But when they say the maximum speed recorded was 180 knots, they have not quoted as per EAFR. So, where is the source? And they have not said and they have said recorded, which means the speed could have been more.

[00:19:49]Mhm. That is the last good speed which was available in the recorder.

[00:19:54]So, something happened well before. So, as soon as the aircraft lifted, some electrical uh major catastrophic failure happened.

[00:20:03]The landing gear was selected up.

[00:20:05]You see the position of the wheels. Mhm. When the aircraft lifts up, the wheels are pointing upwards. When the landing gear is selected up, the wheels move parallel to the ground and then in.

[00:20:18]Mhm. In the later part of the video, you see the wheels are parallel, which means it was selected up.

[00:20:22]And read the report again carefully.

[00:20:25]When it says flaps, the report says as per EAFR, the flaps were at position five and they show the lever position five. When it comes to landing gear, they don't quote EAFR. They say only the landing gear lever was down. Mhm. Why didn't they quote the EAFR?

[00:20:40]Because it was selected up. So, all selected facing and the most important point is the CVR recording. Mhm.

[00:20:48]Uh basically uh what is the what the investigator heard, Mhm. he has said that one pilot said to another, why couldn't they say captain said to the co-pilot Right.

[00:21:00]>> or the co-pilot to the captain? Because when an electrical failure happens and the RAT deploys, all the individual channels stop recording. It is only the area mic. The area mic cannot differentiate who's saying. So, that is why they have said this. So, this is These are clear clear indications that an electrical failure happened just as the aircraft lifted off.

[00:21:19]>> Mr. Rawat, do you agree with that? Are these all clear indications that there was an electrical failure on board that ill-fated 787, sir?

[00:21:27]Because we have we have whatever whatever is in the preliminary report was this thing the technical part of the thing how that EFR they are taking. There was no this thing matching was done of the CVR recording as well as the DFDR EFR recording. So, basically it was the first flight that has to be done what was the what is recorded because when the when the they say that the pilot pilot has said to the other pilot that have you put it put them down or whatever the recording is there. Then there was subsequent conversation must have been subsequent conversation which have not come out. Mhm.

[00:22:05]So, they have just put a full stop there that one pilot has said this and who has said that nobody is you know nobody >> No, and the question still remains and what I want to bring in you know Captain Randhawa on this. Captain Randhawa, as you rightly said, it's a 30-second flight, you know, a few minutes of taxiing before that. Why could the full transcript not have been put out? Surely it's not because of the length of the conversation because if they wanted to, the preliminary report could have very much carried that entire conversation which would have perhaps shed more light.

[00:22:34]You see, the the point is that we have overemphasized right after the crash of 12th June that there is an electrical problem.

[00:22:46]Physically, the switches may not have moved at all.

[00:22:49]Right? So, all the emphasis is being done on the latching of the switch.

[00:22:56]So, more energy is being wasted on that rather than checking the electrical system because this aircraft has been having numerous problems about with the electrical system including the batteries. Right. Which we have been stressing upon right from 16th of June last year. Mhm. And till date nothing has been done by the AIB, by the ministry, or the DGCA. Mhm. See the fun.

[00:23:27]And we are reaching the almost the completion of the inquiry which which is going to take place in another say 3 weeks or so. Mhm. So, at this juncture now bringing in again the same same problem, the latching of the switches.

[00:23:46]But other parts of the system, the Fadec, the TCMA, the batteries, the plethora of electrical um things which need to be checked by the Boeing company and by the other service providers like the Honeywell.

[00:24:06]Right.

[00:24:07]>> And the engines are manufactured by the GE. So, all this had to be checked, the electronic circuitry.

[00:24:15]If if you if you if you know that we have stressed upon that on the ground 15 minutes before departure Mhm. lot of codes have been transmitted by the aircraft. Right.

[00:24:29]>> Which is available with Boeing and with Air India.

[00:24:33]And they no one is talking about it.

[00:24:36]Neither Boeing nor Air India >> does that indicate?

[00:24:41]Pardon me? What does that indicate? When you say that all these details have been transmitted, what does that indicate?

[00:24:45]>> background there must be some electrical arcing taking place. Okay. Which is causing at the background because the aircraft health monitoring is monitored by the Boeing. It automatically transmits at the background. It is not generating a warning on the I guess.

[00:25:02]But on the background, it is generating problems are there, electrical problems, there are disturbances. They They're causing electrical problems on the and not generating into a fault. Mhm. But they're not checking it. Mhm.

[00:25:17]They're just hopping up on that the fuel control switch uh has moved. Mhm.

[00:25:24]>> Right?

[00:25:25]It may not have moved. Mhm. That's what we are saying that the electronic circuitry and all could have cut off the fuel control switch. Uh sorry, not the fuel control switch, the fuel control valves. Right.

[00:25:38]Let me bring in Saroj Damani on that.

[00:25:40]Saroj Damani, the question that still arises is this. On multiple occasions, there've been whistleblowers who in the United States have been raising questions about the safety standards.

[00:25:48]Electronics as in fact the previous speaker, Captain Raghava, was referring to have come under the scanner on multiple occasions. And if whistleblowers have warned about these assembly defects and lawyers have said that Boeing has prioritized speed over safety, why are we looking at a situation where Indian, you know, either aviation companies or even the regulators are allowing these aircrafts?

[00:26:10]Should these tests not have been done with a little bit more of rigor, particularly after the crash?

[00:26:15]Of course, the safety aspect in of Boeing is in question. Earlier, it was issues with the 737. Subsequent after the Air India crash, the 787s also have been come under the scanner. The switch The fuel switch has been the main controversy.

[00:26:30]Boeing has not got any proactively taken some steps after such big issue you and crash happened. They should have ideally replaced the design or maybe got into process to solve the problem.

[00:26:44]What they are trying to show is there's nothing wrong. Mhm. It was the pilots who were at fault. They moved the switches and technically the aircraft was fit to fly is what they're seeming to show the world. Mhm. There has to have some technical defect. These pilots who are flying the aircraft were experienced pilots. It is It is not some newbie pilot who was flying it and the plane crashed. Mhm. So, fuel switch is cannot be the sole contributor. Of course, there have to be multiple things, and with the 787, also, there have been multiple whistleblowers who have come out with due to the certification issues or safety standards or the quality of parts which were used on the aircrafts at the time of certification have been under question by Boeing staff themselves who are the whistleblowers in the US. Right.

[00:27:28]>> And there's a huge legal claim pending against Boeing, of course, in the US, also, where manufacturers are actually held liable. The part manufacturers are also held liable. So, Honeywell and Absolutely. will try to do everything in their power to show that it was pilot error. Yes, sir. Absolutely. Boeing has been through legislative scrutiny in the United States. I think that's something that we all are aware of. We've seen how years ago, you know, the very highest level executives were grilled by, in fact, elected representatives. But let me quickly bring in, before we end this debate, uh Captain Minoo Wadia. Captain Minoo Wadia, a question that is on everyone's mind. Yes, we know the kind of implications of this. The thousands of 787s that are flying globally, and you know, any kind of technical defect or any kind of such uh lacunae will, of course, mean millions, perhaps billions in trying to fix these kind of lacunae.

[00:28:16]Now, we don't want to know what they are. But the question is this, what would you say to the investigators when at such a late stage, very close to the deadline, such a piece of information comes out? Could this also be an attempt at trying and delaying the investigation timeline? Because then you'll have a situation where investigators can come out and say that we want you to be 100% factually sure. And they have delayed reports in the past, as well. Captain Wadia.

[00:28:41]I am questioning the competence of even the AIB and even the DGCA.

[00:28:46]What all the aviators what I'm convinced about and exactly what both the aviators have said earlier there's a defect which has happened in the aircraft 100% there's no two ways about it.

[00:28:58]Whether it is with the electrical system with a FedEx or whatever but there is certainly a defect which has happened in the aircraft itself Boeing. Why has that not come out? Why has the investigation team not given us a full details of the conversation the CVR the conversation was only 30 seconds after the takeoff 30 seconds. Why hasn't the full transcript of the conversation been given to the public and in the open? Why is someone trying to hide the information? It is obviously for someone's vested interest.

[00:29:28]I am 100% convinced that there are vested interests in this investigation because by now facts would have come out. Definitely. All right. We'll have to leave it there Captain Amit Singh, Captain A.C.S. Randhawa, Captain Meena Wadia, J.S. Rawat and Saroj Debania. I'd like to thank all of you for joining us with your perspectives but certainly a lot of drama. This is the biggest aviation story of the year 2026.

[00:29:49]Everyone is standing by for that AAIB report to reveal the truth of what happened in the Ahmedabad crash. The midst of that comes this drastic development. Is this a smoke screen like some of our guests have been saying? Is there some genuine you know technical concerns that are there as far as the aircraft itself is concerned and what is the implication of all this as far as the investigation is concerned? That's something that we're going to be watching out for in coming days. I'd like to thank all of you gentlemen for joining us this evening.