India urges caution from media amid Investigation into Air India crash probe
Last month, an
Air India Boeing 787
crashed at Ahmedabad killing 270 people. Initial findings by AAIB said that the fuel switches were cut off seconds after taking off. The report also mentioned that there was confusion among the two pilots about who cut off the fuel switch.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Select a Course Category
Others
Management
Cybersecurity
healthcare
Public Policy
Data Science
MCA
Degree
Data Science
Finance
Project Management
Healthcare
Technology
Data Analytics
others
CXO
Operations Management
MBA
Digital Marketing
PGDM
Product Management
Leadership
Design Thinking
Artificial Intelligence
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
16 Weeks
Indian School of Business
CERT-ISB Transforming HR with Analytics & AI India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
28 Weeks
MICA
CERT-MICA SBMPR Async India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
9 months
IIM Lucknow
SEPO - IIML CHRO India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
7 Months
S P Jain Institute of Management and Research
CERT-SPJIMR Exec Cert Prog in AI for Biz India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
The appeal from AAIB boss GVG Yugandhar came following a report in The Wall Street Journal that a cockpit recording of dialogue between the two pilots of the Air India flight that crashed last month indicates the captain cut the flow of fuel to the plane's engines leading to the accident. The report also said that US officials feel that criminal authorities should review the matter.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Average Cost To Rent A Private Jet May Surprise You (View Prices)
Private Jet I Search Ads
Learn More
Undo
The AAIB said in a statement on Thursday that it is conducting a 'rigorous and most professional' probe in line with Indian and international standards. The bureau has investigated 92 accidents and 111 serious incidents since its establishment in 2012.
While acknowledging the significant public interest and shock generated by the incident, the AAIB cautioned against 'creating public anxiety or angst towards safety of Indian Aviation Industry, particularly on the basis of unfounded facts.
Live Events
'It has come to our attention that certain sections of the international media are repeatedly attempting to draw conclusions through selective and unverified reporting,' the AAIB said, urging the public and media to avoid spreading premature narratives that could undermine the integrity of the investigation.
The agency emphasized that its preliminary report is focused on explaining 'what happened,' but warned that it is "too early to reach any definite conclusions," and that the investigation remains ongoing. A final report, including causes and recommendations, will be issued at a later date.
AAIB has called on all stakeholders to await the publication of the final investigation report. Updates will be provided as and when there is information of technical and public interest.
The bureau's preliminary report has faced criticism from airline officials and experts saying that it selectively gave a single sentence from the
cockpit voice recorder
which has provided suspicion of pilot suicide while giving no other details. It also said that it has no instructions for the manufacturer of the plane and engine Boeing and GE.
The report also references a 2018 FAA advisory that warned of possible disengagement of the fuel switch-locking mechanism in another aircraft type. As the advisory was not linked to an unsafe condition, Air India did not inspect its fleet. However, Air India replaced the integrated throttle and fuel control module in its Boeing 787 jets in both 2019 and 2023, which included replacement of the fuel switches. It also said that it has no instructions for the manufacturer of the plane and engine Boeing and GE.
'The report, as released, lacks comprehensive data and appears to rely selectively on paraphrased cockpit voice recordings to suggest
pilot error
and question the professional competence and integrity of the flight crew,' Federation of Indian pilots said. 'This approach is neither objective nor complete,' it said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
23 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Jane Street to resume trading: Arbitrage vs market manipulation explained
US-based trading firm Jane Street found itself at the centre of a regulatory storm in India, after the market watchdog accused it of manipulating index prices to boost profits at the expense of retail investors. On July 3, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) temporarily barred the firm from participating in its securities markets. The regulator alleged that Jane Street carried out a coordinated trading strategy that distorted prices in India's Bank Nifty index, misleading investors and profiting from the resulting volatility. Jane Street, which has denied any wrongdoing, is now challenging the order and has deposited more than ₹4,800 crore (around $560 million) into an escrow account and has resumed trading in the Indian market. The case has left some institutional investors unsettled and may even serve as a larger wake-up call for India's financial market, sparking debate between legal arbitrage and illegal market manipulation. Here's a closer look at what this means. What is Jane Street? Jane Street is a global quantitative trading firm that uses mathematical models and algorithms to trade rapidly and across markets. With operations in more than 45 countries and over 3,000 employees, it is one of the largest players on Wall Street. In 2023, the firm reportedly accounted for more than 10.4 per cent of North America's equity trading volume, up from 7.6 per cent in 2022, according to a report by the Financial Times. In India, the firm traded heavily in both the cash market, where investors buy and sell actual shares, and the derivatives market, where traders use instruments like options and futures to bet on future price movements. What is an arbitrage trading strategy? Arbitrage is a legal trading strategy that takes advantage of price differences in different markets. This means that if a stock is trading at slightly different prices across two exchanges, a trader can buy low in one market and sell high in another. In India, arbitrage often occurs between the cash market and derivatives market, where traders can simultaneously buy and sell related assets to lock in small, low-risk profits. Arbitrage is legal in India as long as these trades are based on existing inefficiencies and do not attempt to create false price movements. Arbitrage may even be beneficial as it can help align prices, thereby improving market efficiency, as former Sebi primary market board member V Raghunathan told CNBC. What is market manipulation? Market manipulation is illegal. It involves deliberately distorting prices or creating a misleading impression of market activity. This could include tactics like artificially inflating demand, moving prices without a valid economic reason, or placing trades solely to influence market outcomes. Difference between arbitrage and market manipulation The difference between arbitrage and manipulation lies in intent and impact. Arbitrage works within the natural functioning of markets, while manipulation seeks to interfere with it. The latter can often harm other investors in the process. What are Sebi's accusations against Jane Street? According to Sebi, Jane Street used multiple entities to carry out a coordinated trading strategy in the Bank Nifty index. The market regulator alleges that one entity bought large volumes of banking stocks in the early morning, which pushed up the index price. At the same time, another entity took positions in the derivatives market anticipating a fall in the index. Near the close of the trading day, particularly on expiry days when derivative contracts are settled, Jane Street is alleged to have sold off the earlier stock purchases in large volumes, pushing the index lower. This price drop, Sebi claims, boosted the profitability of the firm's bets on falling prices. This practice is known as 'marking the close', which is considered manipulative if it involves intentionally influencing prices during the final minutes of trading. Sebi argues that Jane Street's actions created an artificial and misleading appearance of market activity, which in turn caused retail investors to trade at distorted levels and suffer losses. Jane Street's response to Sebi allegation Jane Street has denied any manipulation, describing its actions as basic index arbitrage. The firm has not commented publicly but has indicated it intends to challenge the regulator's order. On July 14, Jane Street deposited ₹4,844 crore into an escrow account, a step that Sebi said was required while reviewing the firm's request to resume trading in Indian markets. Broader market reaction and regulatory concerns The episode has unsettled parts of the institutional investor community. Although Indian stock indices are near all-time highs, foreign institutional investors (FIIs) have become increasingly cautious, particularly around midcap and smallcap stocks, where valuations appear stretched and liquidity is thinner. Jignesh Desai, chief executive for institutional equities at Centrum Broking, told Business Standard, 'FIIs are looking for consistency and predictability in regulatory actions, especially around high-frequency and algorithmic trading. As long as Sebi maintains transparency and market stability, this episode is unlikely to deter long-term foreign capital.' Read the full interview here. Meanwhile, K P Krishnan, honorary senior fellow at the Isaac Centre for Public Policy, has pointed out that the outcome of this case will matter not just for Jane Street but for how India defines and regulates complex trading in its increasingly sophisticated markets. What does this crackdown mean? The Jane Street case has raised critical questions about how modern financial markets operate — and how regulators balance market growth and activity with investor protection. Sebi recently reported that 91 per cent of retail traders lost money in the derivatives market last year, with total losses exceeding ₹1 trillion. While these losses cannot be attributed to any single firm, the contrast between large institutional profits and widespread retail losses has renewed concerns about market fairness. Sebi's intervention in this case could mark a turning point in how such strategies are policed.
News18
31 minutes ago
- News18
7 Bombs, 11 Minutes, 189 Dead: The Day Terror Struck Mumbai's Trains In 2006 To Acquittal Of 12
2006 Mumbai Train Blasts Case Recap: As Bombay High Court on Monday set aside a special court order convicting 12 accused in the 7/11 case, a look at the day terror struck city 2006 Mumbai Train Blasts Case Recap: Mumbai came to a standstill on July 11, 2006, as a series of powerful bombs went off in local trains during the evening rush hour – seven blasts within a span of 11 minutes in the first-class compartments left 189 dead and several injured. The first bomb went off around 6.20 pm on a Western Railway (WR) train from Churchgate to Borivali. The bomb exploded when the train was between Khar and Santacruz stations. Another bomb exploded at the same time in a local train between Bandra and Khar Road. Soon, five more explosions were reported at Jogeshwari, Mahim Junction, Mira Road-Bhayander, Matunga-Mahim Junction and Borivali. July 11, 2006: Between 6.20 pm and 6.35 pm, seven RDX bombs ripped the first-class compartments of Mumbai local trains. July 14, 2006: Terrorist organisation Lashkar-e-Qahhar, linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), claimed responsibility for the bombings through an e-mail to an Indian TV channel. July 17, 2006: July 18, 2006: A week after the blast, a memorial service was held in Mumbai to pay tribute to the victims. Sirens were sounded across Mumbai in homage to those who lost their lives, while then President Abdul Kalam led people into observing a two-minute silence. July 21, 2006: The police arrested three persons in connection with the bombings. November 2006: The ATS filed chargesheet in which 13 of those subsequently arrested and 15 absconding were named as the accused under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime (MCOCA). June 2007: Those who were accused in the 7/11 bombings moved the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutional validity of MCOCA. The following year, the SC ordered a stay on the trial. September 2008: Five Indian Mujahideen (IM) operatives were arrested by the Mumbai Crime Branch. Contradiction in the probe by the crime branch and the ATS started to show when the crime branch said IM carried out the bombings, while the ATS said Pakistani nationals planted the bombs. February 2009: Arrested leader of the Indian Mujahideen Sadiq Sheikh confessed to conducting the bombings in a news channel broadcast. February 2010: Lawyer Shahid Azmi, who defended some of the accused in the Mumbai blast case, was shot dead in his central Mumbai office. August 2013: Yasin Bhatkal, co-founder of IM, who was arrested from the Indo-Nepal border, claimed the 2006 bombings were done by IM in response to the 2002 Gujarat riots. August 2014: The court concluded the 7/11 trial but reserved its judgment. September 2015: The MCOCA court convicted 12 of the 13 arrested in the case. The court sentenced five convicts – Kamal Ansari, Faisal Shaikh, Estesham Siddiqui, Naveed Khan and Asif Bashir Khan – to death. Seven others – Mohammed Ali, Mohammed Sajid Ansari, Majid Shafi, Dr Tanveer Ansari, Muzzammil Shaikh, Zamir Shaikh and Sohail Shaikh – were sentenced to life imprisonment. The court acquitted one of the accused. Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Bizarre jailbreak: How French prisoner escaped in released cellmate's laundry bag; went unnoticed for 24 hours
AI-generated representative image A 20-year-old inmate, Elyazid A, nicknamed "the Joker" or "the Equaliser", chose a unique way to escape from a French prison- concealed in fellow inmate's laundry bag, who was being released. The inmate serving several sentences escaped by hiding in the luggage of his inmate who complete his sentence, the Prison Service said in a statement to AFP. He "took advantage of the liberation of his fellow inmate to hide himself in his luggage and get out," the statement said. However, the authorities re-apprehended him later in a village cellar last week, approximately 25km from Lyon-Corbas prison, according to Guardian News. The prison staff failed to notice his absence for 24 hours. Reports indicate he escaped by hiding in a large plastic laundry bag filled with clothes, which his released cellmate transported out on a trolley on Friday. The police continue their search for the accomplice cellmate. Multiple investigations have been launched by Justice Minister Gérald Darmanin, Lyon prosecutors, the French prison service and Lyon-Corbas facility to examine the escape circumstances. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 15 most beautiful women in the world Undo The national prison service head, Sébastien Cauwel, confirmed that Elyazid A, despite facing charges including criminal association and conspiracy to murder, was not considered a security threat. Cauwel described the escape method as exceptionally uncommon, attributing its success to significant internal failures. The incident raised questions about systemic issues within the facility, primarily stemming from staff-related shortcomings rather than infrastructure problems. The severe overcrowding exacerbates these challenges for prison officers. Lyon-Corbas prison currently houses almost 1,220 inmates despite its 678-person capacity. A May report by the Lyon bar association urged immediate action to address overcrowding and maintain basic human rights. The French prison system accommodates 85,000 inmates in facilities designed for under 63,000 people. Cauwel noted that vacant cells are immediately filled, potentially contributing to oversight failures. According to a 2024 Council of Europe assessment, French prisons rank third in EU overcrowding rates, behind Cyprus and Romania. The country has witnessed numerous dramatic escapes, including about 20 helicopter breakouts since the 1980s, reported The Guardian. The prison service faces a shortage of at least 5,000 officers. Recent incidents include armed attacks on prison facilities, with 21 arrests in April following assaults, including gunfire at Toulon prison's entrance. Drug cartels have targeted prison facilities, damaging officers' housing and burning vehicles, responding to increased government enforcement and stricter regulations for imprisoned crime leaders.
