Air India crash prelim report sparks criticism, debate: ‘Bias toward pilot error, shrouded in secrecy'
While many pointed out that the report raised many questions and provided few answers, some already began a blame game.
New Delhi: Soon after the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) of India came out with its 15-page report on the AI-171 crash, reactions started pouring in, despite Minister of State for Civil Aviation warning that this was just a preliminary report and people should not jump to conclusions.
Minister of State for Civil Aviation Murlidhar Mohol's warned after the report was made public: 'The AAIB has brought out a preliminary report. This is not the final report. Until
the final report comes out, we should not arrive at any conclusion. AAIB is an
autonomous authority, and the ministry does not interfere in their work.'
But despite this, the detailed findings in the report have already sparked public debate and raised serious concerns.
'The Preliminary Report on the accident of B787 of Airlines raises more
questions than answers,' said Aviation expert and former Head of Operations at
Indian Airlines, Shakti Lumba, reacting to the findings in a post on X.
'What I find interesting is this observation: Any such action is the purview of
@DGCAIndia, and giving a clean chit to @BoeingAirplanes, @airindia, and
@GeneralElectric sours the whole investigation—especially given the fact that
the Service Bulletin (SB) on the fuel switches was ignored. A safe airline would
have carried it out no matter what,' Lumba added.
The report also mentions that the aircraft accelerated normally during takeoff. But
seconds later both engines of the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner shut down one
second apart. This caused the aircraft to lose altitude rapidly and crash near the boundary of Ahmedabad's Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport.
'Does the takeoff roll and critical gates (V1, Vr) versus time indicate a normal
acceleration till liftoff? There's nothing in the CVR or prelim report that says it
doesn't. Why would any trained crew operate a fuel switch at that critical juncture?' asks K.P. Sanjeev Kumar, widely known as Kaypius, is a former Indian Navy test pilot.
'Lack of transparency'
In response to the AAIB's preliminary report, the ALPA-India (The Association of Licensed Pilots of India) has issued an official statement expressing serious concerns over the investigation process and the manner in which the report was presented to the public.
'Investigations continue to be shrouded in secrecy, undermining credibility and
public trust. Qualified, experienced personnel—especially line pilots—are still not
being included in the investigation team,' said ALPA-India.
ALPA-I also raised concerns over a recent Wall Street Journal article that
mentioned the inadvertent movement of fuel control switches, questioning how
such sensitive details were leaked to international media while the investigation
was still ongoing.
ALPA-India also rejected any presumption of pilot guilt. 'The investigation suggests a bias toward pilot error, we reject this presumption and insist on a fair, fact-based inquiry,' the statement further said.
Preliminary rep sparks debate
Reactions—not only from the general public and families of victims, but also from aviation officials and industry experts—are mixed.
Former Union Civil Aviation Minister and BJP leader Syed Shahnawaz Hussain said, 'This report is an eye-opener about how the aircraft engine was not getting fuel.'
Families of those who lost their lives in the tragic Air India Flight AI-171 crash
have also expressed concerns following the release of the AAIB's report.
Speaking to ANI, Yashpal Singh Vansdiya, who lost both his parents in the crash, raised questions about the findings. 'I have certain questions to ask the government and the investigation agencies. Based on the report, which mentions one pilot asking the other if he
has turned off the switch, it means there were some technical issues. Were all
preventive checks of the aircraft done? I hope I get answers to all these
questions,' he said.
As the report was released a month after the incident, there are questions also on the timing of its release. 'Like everything the Modi government does, the report was released late in the night—at 2 am—under the cover and silence of darkness,' said Rajya Sabha MP
and All India Trinamool Congress (TMC) national spokesperson Saket Gokhale.
(Edited by Viny Mishra)
Also read: Fuel switches transitioned to 'cut-off' 1 second apart for both engines—Air India crash preliminary report
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
40 minutes ago
- Mint
Doha-bound Air India Express flight returns to Calicut airport 2 hours after take-off due to technical issues
A Doha-bound Air India Express flight was forced to return to Calicut International Airport on Wednesday morning, approximately two hours after its departure, owing to a technical fault, the airline confirmed. The flight, IX 375, carrying 188 passengers including pilots and crew, took off from Calicut at around 9:07 am but landed back at 11:12 am after the crew noticed a technical issue mid-air. 'There was some technical issue in the aircraft's cabin AC. It was not an emergency landing,' an airport official clarified. The passengers were safely deboarded upon return. An Air India Express spokesperson described the return as a 'precautionary landing' due to a technical error. 'One of our flights returned to Kozhikode after take-off due to a technical issue,' the airline spokesperson said in an official statement. The airline acted promptly to manage the disruption. 'We arranged an alternative aircraft on priority, provided the guests with refreshments during the delay and the flight has since departed. We regret the inconvenience and reiterate that safety remains our top priority in every aspect of our operations,' the statement added. Further, the spokesperson reassured passengers that the alternate flight was scheduled to depart by 1:30 pm. 'Till then all arrangements, like food and water, have been made for the passengers at the airport,' the spokesperson confirmed. Air India Express emphasised that it is committed to maintaining the highest standards of passenger safety and operational reliability. Airport officials also indicated that engineers would either rectify the technical issue or an alternative aircraft would be used to complete the journey. This incident adds to the growing list of precautionary landings in recent months, underscoring the importance of stringent safety protocols within Indian aviation. (This is a developing story. More updates to follow.)
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Mid-air disruption: Doha-bound Air India Express flight faces technical snag; plane makes precautionary landing
NEW DELHI: A Doha-bound Air India Express flight from Calicut International Airport was forced to return on Wednesday morning due to a technical fault, airport officials confirmed. The aircraft was carrying 188 passengers, including crew and pilots. The plane landed safely back at the airport after a two-hour journey. Flight IX 375 took off from Calicut at around 9.07 am but made a return landing at 11.12 am due to a fault in the cabin air conditioning system. 'There was some technical issue in the aircraft's cabin AC. It was not an emergency landing,' an airport official clarified. Passengers were safely deboarded upon return. According to the airline, engineers were working to either rectify the issue or provide a replacement aircraft. An Air India Express spokesperson said it was a 'precautionary landing' and that an alternative flight would be arranged for the passengers by 1.30 pm. 'Till then all arrangements, like food and water, have been made for the passengers at the airport,' the spokesperson added. No injuries or emergencies were reported.
The Print
3 hours ago
- The Print
Air India crash report shows an institutional reform of AAIB and aviation ministry is in order
Firstly, this was the world's first major air crash involving a Boeing Dreamliner. Naturally, global attention was focused on the investigation into this accident and its findings. Interest in this investigation was high also because this accident involving a Boeing aircraft came after a few other accidents and malfunctioning reports involving Boeing planes, although of different types. Boeing was interested in the investigation report, perhaps more than anyone else, as passengers' perception and airlines' choice of its aircraft would have been influenced by the kind of responsibilities that the findings would have fixed on it. Make no mistake about the enormity of the accident that took place within half a minute of Air India 171 taking off from Ahmedabad and crashing into a hostel that housed medical students. This enormity arose not just because of the number of casualties. There were many other factors that perhaps were ignored by the authorities. Even as the country reels from the loss of 260 lives in the tragic crash of Air India's flight from Ahmedabad to London on June 12, there is a growing sense of unease over the way the investigation into the accident has been conducted. A quick assessment of recent developments would suggest that such unease and concern have been caused by the authorities' failure to anticipate the huge consequences and ramifications of this accident and take necessary steps in advance to ensure a competent handling of its investigation and management of the external environment. Secondly, this was the first time the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), a department under the Union ministry of civil aviation, conducted the investigation of a major air crash within India's shores. Earlier, the cockpit voice record and the flight data record would be sent abroad for retrieval and for eventually arriving at a conclusion. The AAIB had recently acquired domestic capacity to retrieve such records, which was an achievement. Yet, it should have recognised the need for exercising greater vigilance, at least for two reasons. This investigation was its first such exercise and, therefore, would have come under closer scrutiny by global stakeholders in the aviation sector. Equally important, even a remote suggestion that absolved either the aircraft manufacturer or the airline operating it, or the pilots commanding that ill-fated flight would have been inherently controversial. Thirdly, the crash of Air India 171 was the first such accident that took place after the airline was privatised in January 2022. Since the Tatas took over Air India, its services have been under watch. There were many incidents involving passenger misbehaviour during flights, which could have been handled more maturely and carefully. There were also reports of aircraft-related incidents, which raised questions about how well the planes had been maintained from a safety point of view. Even though Air India was no longer a state-owned enterprise, the responsibility of the civil aviation ministry was no less than before the ownership change. Finally, the accident took place in Ahmedabad, the capital city of Gujarat. The death of so many people in an aircraft crash in any part of the country would be mourned as a national tragedy. But Gujarat is also the state whose leading politicians are at the helm of the Union government in New Delhi. Indeed, one of the casualties of this accident was a former chief minister of Gujarat, Vijay Rupani. Home Minister Amit Shah visited Ahmedabad the same day of the crash and Prime Minister Narendra Modi was in the city the following day. Beyond the tragic loss of so many lives in the aircraft and on the ground, the political sensitivity of this accident could hardly be underestimated. Yet, the manner in which the AAIB has handled the investigation would seem to suggest that it was oblivious to the many ramifications of the four factors that made the Ahmedabad air crash uniquely significant. Going by reports, for instance, the composition of the AAIB committee left much to be desired. According to experts, the absence of a pilot knowledgeable about a Dreamliner, which is highly reliant on electronic systems, was quite jarring. Of course, the AAIB should be complimented for the time-bound manner in which it finalised the preliminary report within one month of the accident. But what was the need for releasing the report late in the evening on a Friday? Apart from meeting a deadline, it served no other purpose. On the contrary, it gave rise to needless speculation over what the report revealed, which the AAIB or the aviation ministry made no effort to scotch through an official briefing. The AAIB report was not even signed by any of the members who were part of the committee that investigated the crash and prepared the preliminary report. Some experts have also indicated that the preliminary report failed to capture critical segments of the conversation the two pilots had in the cockpit. Indeed, they have argued that interpreting the entire 40 minutes of the cockpit voice recorder or the flight data recorder would not have taken more than two hours. So, why wasn't that task undertaken to lend clarity to what really happened? Worse, sections of the foreign media seemed to have accessed some segments of the pilots' conversation to present a different perspective on why the aircraft crashed. In a competitive media environment, such reports have fuelled further speculation over the causes of the crash. To be sure, the AAIB has explained in its report that its objective is not to reach conclusions about the reasons of the crash, but to shed light on what happened during those crucial minutes before the plane went down. Both the AAIB and the National Transportation Safety Board of the US have described those media reports about the probable causes of the crash as premature and speculative, based on selective and unverified reporting. But incalculable damage has already been done to the morale of pilots in the industry and to the confidence of ordinary fliers in the country. Could the authorities have prevented such unfortunate developments in the wake of the report on the aircraft crash? Perhaps the civil aviation ministry could have recognised the enormity of this crash and prepared the AAIB and its investigating team for its sensitivities. Perhaps senior retired pilots with experience in flying such state-of-the-art aircraft like the Dreamliner could have been inducted into the investigation committee or their expert views obtained before finalising the report. Perhaps, the ministry and the AAIB could have held more frequent and even informal media interactions to explain the intricacies and dimensions of the accident. Keeping them under wraps and promising to reveal them in the final report after a year was not a good idea. An institutional reform of the AAIB and even the ministry is in order. Undertaking such reforms can be easier if the ministry takes the primary step of filling nearly half the technical posts in its regulatory arm, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation. India is not short of technical people or pilots. Having more of these experts on these bodies would only improve their efficacy and enhance their ability to handle such emergency tasks of conducting investigations into an aircraft crash. And there should be no compromise on making communication faster and more effective. AK Bhattacharya is the Editorial Director, Business Standard. He tweets @AshokAkaybee. Views are personal.
