Human error? engine fault? Air India chairman urges patience amid AI171 crash theories
Tata Sons and Air India chairman N Chandrasekaran on Wednesday said that the ill-fated Air India flight AI171, which crashed in Ahmedabad on June 12 killing over 270 people, had no prior red flags, and both its engines were in good condition. Calling it an 'extremely difficult situation', he added that investigators must wait for the black box analysis to uncover the truth.
An Air India flight AI171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner headed for London with 242 passengers including crew onboard, crashed into a medical college complex in Ahmedabad seconds after takeoff on June 12. The crash killed 241 of the 241 passengers onboard and several others on ground.
'It is an extremely difficult situation where I have no words to express to console any of the families of those who died,' Chandrasekaran said, in an interview with Times Now, and extended apologies over the tragedy.
'I deeply regret that this accident happened in a Tata-run airline. And I feel very sorry. All we can do is to be with the families at this time, grieve with them and we will do everything to support them at this hour and beyond,' Chandrasekaran said in a statement.
When asked about the possible causes of the accident and whether Air India had any initial findings, he said, 'One would have to wait for the probe to conclude.'
The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau is currently leading the investigation, with a high-level government-appointed committee also involved. Chandrasekaran indicated that preliminary findings could take up to a month.
On the pilots' credentials, Chandrasekaran stated, 'Both pilots were exceptional. Captain Sabharwal had more than 11,500 hours of flying experience, the first officer Clive (Kundar) had more than 3,400 hours of flying experience. What I hear from colleagues is that they were excellent pilots and great professionals. So, we can't jump to any conclusions. I am told by all the experts that the black box and recorders will definitely tell the story. So, we just have to wait for that.'
Addressing various theories around the crash, Tata Sons' chairman said, 'There are speculation about human error, speculation about airlines, speculation about engines, maintenance, all kinds.' He emphasised that the aircraft had no history of issues and provided engine details: the right engine was newly installed in March 2025, while the left engine had last been serviced in 2023 and was due for maintenance in December 2025.
Responding to questions about previous show-cause notices and penalties imposed by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), Chandrasekaran clarified that these were unrelated to the crashed aircraft. 'These are different from safety issues. If there is a safety issue, there is no way the DGCA will allow us to fly,' he said.
Responding to former civil aviation minister Praful Patel's comments questioning Singapore Airlines' silence, Chandrasekaran said, 'Singapore Airlines has been a great partner... their CEO is in constant touch with me... they have been offering all the help they can.'
He also addressed concerns over Boeing's manufacturing practices following whistleblower allegations, saying, 'These are things that are being dealt with by investigative agencies in the US... we have not had any red flags in our checks.'
Amid reports of a Turkish maintenance link, Chandrasekaran firmly denied it, stating, 'None of them (the 33 Dreamliners) are maintained by Turkish Technic. Most of them are maintained by AIESL (AI Engineering Services Limited) or SIA Engineering Company.'
Following the crash, multiple Air India flights have faced delays or cancellations, sparking customer dissatisfaction. Chandrasekaran acknowledged the need for better communication, stating, 'We've got to do a better job at communication. We have put a strategic communications team in the last three days.'
He confirmed meetings with senior executives at Boeing and GE, saying, 'I did connect with both Boeing and GE at the highest levels... I have asked them to check and tell us if there have been issues with any of the aircraft or engines.'
The June 12 crash remains one of the deadliest in India's aviation history.
(With PTI inputs)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
42 minutes ago
- NDTV
Air India 'Black Box' Damaged, May Have To Be Sent Abroad: Sources
The 'black box' of Air India's Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner plane that crashed on June 12 in Ahmedabad has sustained damage and may have to be sent to the United States to continue the data extraction process, sources have said, adding that the government will take the final call. The 'black box' is in fact two devices in itself - the Cockpit Voice Recorder, or CVR, and the Flight Data Recorder, or FDR. The 'black box' recovered from the crashed Air India flight could be sent to the National Transportation Safety Board in Washington DC for inspection. According to sources, in the event that the 'black box' is sent to the US, a contingent of Indian officials will accompany the black box to ensure all protocols have been followed. The Air India Flight AI171 crashed moments after takeoff from Ahmedabad's Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport en route to London's Gatwick Airport. The aircraft plunged into a medical college hostel complex in the Meghani Nagar area at 1:40 pm, sparking a massive blaze. Out of 242 on board, only one survived. The 'black box' from the doomed Air India flight was recovered Monday, 28 hours after the crash. The 'black boxes' are actually bright orange in colour to help locate them from debris and wreckage. The Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) captures up to 25 hours of cockpit conversations, noise, radio calls with air traffic control, and audible alerts in newer aircraft models. However, AI-171 was operating a Boeing 787 delivered in 2014, prior to the 2021 mandate for 25-hour CVR storage. Therefore, the recorder likely had a two-hour recording capacity. The Flight Data Recorder (FDR), on the other hand, collects parameters such as altitude, airspeed, heading, vertical acceleration, and control surface movements, among others. In modern jets like the 787-8, FDRs can record thousands of parameters simultaneously and loop for over 25 hours. A Timeline According to the Aviation Ministry, the aircraft took off at 1:39 PM local time on June 12. It reached a height of less than 600 feet before its climb stalled. Thirty-six seconds into the flight, a distress call was received from the cockpit. The transmission was reportedly received by Ahmedabad ATC but was followed by complete radio silence. Seconds later, the aircraft crashed into residential structures bordering the airport's northeastern perimeter. Ground fatalities included 33 civilians in the BJ Medical College hostel. Only one passenger, a British-Indian man in seat 11A, survived the crash.
India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
Video Captures Last 3 Seconds Before Ahmedabad Crash: Did Air India Flight Suffer Total Power Failure?
Ahmedabad: Nine national and international aviation bodies are now investigating the tragic June 12 crash of an Air India flight in Ahmedabad. A crucial clue may lie in a 19-second rooftop video shot by a teenager, which purportedly captured a rare and telling detail just seconds before impact – the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) system deployed mid-air. Group Captain Mohit Chaturvedi (retd), a former IAF pilot who now flies VVIP aircraft, analysed the video and flagged the RAT deployment as a potential sign that all main engines and power sources failed during takeoff. 'This hints at total electrical system failure,' he said. Chaturvedi explained that commercial aircraft like the Boeing 787 have multiple power safeguards. Normally, power is generated through two Integrated Drive Generators (IDG) on the engines and a third unit in the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) located in the tail. If all three fail, each engine still carries a backup generator. If those fail too, the load shifts to two small Permanent Magnetic Generators (PMGs) used to power essentials like landing lights. But if even PMGs go offline, only one last failsafe remains – the RAT system. Mounted behind the landing gear, it works like a wind turbine, deploying automatically in emergencies to generate enough power to run flight-critical systems. 'The RAT being visible in the crash video means that all primary and backup systems failed. This was not a normal technical snag,' Chaturvedi said. He believes the pilot issued a Mayday call and likely said 'loss of thrust', but did not get time to relay further details. 'Without AC power, even a second's delay can knock out flight displays. If the pilot cannot see ahead, control is impossible,' he said. Chaturvedi also pointed out a key design change in the Boeing 787 – unlike older models that used hydraulic systems powered by engine bleed-air, the 787 uses electric pumps to generate hydraulic pressure. This saves weight but makes the aircraft more dependent on uninterrupted electrical supply. If AC power is lost entirely, landing gear, flight controls and nose-wheel steering could stop responding. 'If the APU and both IDGs failed, the gear would not retract. And that would disrupt the aircraft's aerodynamic balance during climb,' he explained. He noted that the plane appeared to veer left shortly before crashing. 'This could be linked to asymmetric thrust or disrupted control surfaces,' he added. Regarding takeoff protocol, he stressed that both pilots perform precise calculations before liftoff, accounting for runway length, aircraft weight, temperature and humidity. These parameters determine the takeoff speed and angle. Could the crash be due to pilot error during input? 'Highly unlikely,' Chaturvedi said and added, 'Even if flaps were wrongly configured, the system triggers a warning. The computer will not accept incorrect settings.' He dismissed theories about fuel sabotage: 'That is baseless. The fuel tank is centrally located, but controls are in the cockpit. No one outside can cut off fuel. Also, fuel is loaded via external bowsers, and DGCA rules mandate that all such units be seized after a crash.' He added, 'A Boeing 787 can fly 45 minutes on a single engine. Each one delivers 53,000 pounds of thrust. One engine failure would not have brought it down, especially right after takeoff.' Another expert, Group Captain Chandraprakash Dwivedi (retd), who has logged over 3,000 flying hours, agreed. 'Most crashes occur during landing or takeoff, but dual-engine failure is extremely rare. Only seven such cases have occurred globally. In 2009, both engines failed on a US flight and the pilot landed safely in the Hudson River,' he said. He believes Ahmedabad's crash points to a serious technical breakdown. 'Both engines failing at the same time is nearly impossible in Indian aviation history. The investigation will confirm what exactly went wrong,' he added. Both experts suggest that a complete electrical collapse, not a simple pilot error or fuel glitch, may have led to a fatal failure of systems. The RAT deployment, captured just three seconds before impact, could be the most important clue investigators have.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Air India crash effects: Houses near airport will be demolished if... Check civil aviation regulator DGCA's new draft rules
In the wake of the catastrophic Air India crash that killed 241 people, including former Gujarat Chief Minister Vijay Rupani, the Ministry of Civil Aviation has released a draft of the Aircraft ( Demolition of Obstructions ) Rules, 2025 to tighten controls on structures that pose a threat to aircraft safety near airports. The move is seen as a preventive step following the June 12 tragedy, in which a London-bound Air India Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner crashed into the hostel complex of BJ Medical College in Ahmedabad's Meghani Nagar area shortly after takeoff from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport. The draft rules, issued on June 18 will take effect upon publication in the Official Gazette, aim to empower authorities to take immediate action against buildings, trees, or other objects that violate prescribed height limits in designated aerodrome zones. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like [Click Here] 2025 Top Trending local enterprise accounting software Esseps Learn More Undo Also Read: DGCA inspection finds no major fault with Air India's 787 planes Under the new regulations, if the officer-in-charge of an aerodrome has reason to believe that a building or tree exceeds allowed height limits, they are authorized to issue a formal notice to the owner, citing the relevant government notification under Section 18(1) of the Act. Owners must respond within 60 days with detailed information including structure dimensions and site plans. Failure to comply may lead to enforcement measures such as height reduction or demolition. Live Events The rules also have an appeal mechanism. Affected individuals may appeal to the First or Second Appellate Officer , submitting the prescribed form, supporting documents, and a ₹1,000 fee. However, only those who comply with orders will be eligible to claim compensation under Section 22 of the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam, 2024. Structures erected in violation after the issuance of the notification will not qualify for any compensation. The Civil Aviation Ministry has invited objections or suggestions from the public within twenty days of the draft's notification. Responses are to be submitted to the Director General of Civil Aviation for review. Also Read: Air India to cut long haul international flights by 15% The draft further mandates that any violation be reported to the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) or an authorised official. Aerodrome officers will have the power to enter premises during daylight hours for physical verification, after providing reasonable prior notice. If owners fail to cooperate, verification may proceed based on available information, and the case can be referred to the DGCA. In instances of continued non-compliance, the matter must be forwarded to the District Collector, who will be responsible for ensuring that corrective action—such as trimming trees or demolishing structures—is carried out in accordance with the order. This process will mirror existing procedures for removing unauthorised constructions.
