Fuel to Air India jet engines cut off moments before crash: probe
The report, issued by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau, did not offer any conclusions or apportion blame for the June 12 disaster, but indicated that one pilot asked the other why he cut off fuel, and the second pilot responded that he had not.
The Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner was headed from Ahmedabad in western India to London when it crashed, killing all but one of the 242 people on board as well as 19 people on the ground.
In its 15-page report, the investigation bureau said that once the aircraft achieved its top recorded speed, "the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec".
"In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff. The other pilot responded that he did not do so," it said.
The aircraft quickly began to lose altitude.
The switches then returned to the RUN position and the engines appeared to be gathering power, but "one of the pilots transmitted 'MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY'", the report said.
Air traffic controllers asked the pilots what was wrong, but then saw the plane crashing and called emergency personnel to the scene.
The bureau said there were "no recommended actions to B787-8 and/or GE GEnx-1B engine operators and manufacturers", suggesting no technical issues with the engines (GE) or the aircraft (Boeing).
The bureau said the investigation was ongoing, and that additional evidence and information has been "sought from the stakeholders".
The plane was carrying 230 passengers -- 169 Indians, 53 British, seven Portuguese and a Canadian -- along with 12 crew members.
Dozens of people on the ground were injured.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bangkok Post
6 days ago
- Bangkok Post
Strange choices of pets in Thailand
There was a report in last Monday's Post that lions are becoming popular pets in Thailand. It is believed there are about 500 captive lions mainly in Thailand's zoos, breeding farms and petting cafes, but more disturbingly, some in private homes. It doesn't need spelling out why this is not a good idea. These magnificent beasts are not designed to be pets or put in cages but should be running around free in the savannah of their homeland. Also, cuddly though they might look they can quickly transform into dangerous creatures if upset by humans. It highlights the odd choices of pets by some people. A couple of years ago Thailand banned the import of green iguanas as these lizards were damaging the environment. Iguanas had been growing in popularity as a pet but many escaped and were spotted on the loose, particularly in the Lop Buri area. Quite why anyone would want to have a pet iguana I have no idea. They are not exactly cuddly. Admittedly they have an advantage over dogs in that don't bark, although they apparently make a sort of asthmatic wheezing sound when agitated. Readers may also recall that some years ago there was a brief fad in this country for pet piranhas. However, all it took was a couple of owners being bitten by the fish to put an end to that nonsense. Pity the piggies There was a brief craze in Thailand a decade ago when it became fashionable to have tiny pigs as pets. Many of these cute-looking porkers were bought at Chatuchat market where vendors assured gullible customers the piggies would stay in their diminutive size forever. Of course they didn't and within a year these lovely little piglets had transformed into 150kg lumps of blubber, not exactly the cute pet they had in mind for running about in their townhouse. The pet pigs quickly lost their novelty appeal and many were either abandoned or sold by their owners, eventually ending up on dinner plates. British statesman Winston Churchill was known to nurture a soft spot for pigs. He once observed: "I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals." Python pal A Thai actress made headlines in the 1990s when it was revealed she shared her bed every night with her pet python, who sadly wasn't called Monty. She was photographed sitting on the bed lovingly stroking the reptile. The actress said the python always behaved itself and never wet the bed. Her boyfriend wasn't too impressed, however, and was said to be left looking for a "less complicated" relationship that didn't involve slithery reptiles. Lenny the Lion Back to the lions. When I was a kid there was a children's programme on the BBC called The Lenny the Lion Show featuring ventriloquist Terry Hall with his puppet lion Lenny. Hall was skilled at this difficult art and was the first in his profession to use an animal as his dummy. Lenny was a cheerful looking lion made of old fox fur and with a golf ball for a nose. Lenny also had a slight lisp and developed a popular catchphrase "Aw! Don't embawass me", as he lifted his paw and sighed. Gottle o' geer Speaking of Lenny got me thinking about other TV ventriloquists (vents) that were around when I was a kid. My favourite was Arthur Worsely who was a familiar figure in the 1960s. He possessed a dry sense of humour and would retain a deadpan expression throughout the show while suffering non-stop verbal abuse from his dummy Charlie Brown. You wouldn't see Worsely's lips moving despite the dummy taunting him with "I bet you can't say 'bottle of beer'", or "I can see your lips moving, yes they're moving". Part of the act featured Charlie listing a host of place-names beginning with "M" a letter that is hugely difficult for vents. So Worsley would battle his way through names like Manchester, Morecambe and Macclesfield before concluding with "and Melton Mowbray" with just a hint of a smile. Face for radio One of the strangest ventriloquist success stories was that of Peter Brough and his schoolboy dummy Archie Andrews. What made it so bizarre was that Brough performed on the radio which made his skills as a vent totally redundant. When Brough did occasionally appear on television you could see his lips moving but it didn't really matter because Archie had already become a celebrity in his own right. The Educating Archie radio show ran throughout the 1950s. Things did not always go smoothly for Archie however as he was sometimes left behind in the luggage rack on train journeys. On one occasion while Brough was sitting in the refreshment car the carriage in which he had left Archie was removed from the train and taken off to another city. Brough had to perform that night without the dummy, which must have been quite a challenge. Snarling newshounds My thanks to readers who bravely submitted their own collective nouns for journalists. The most polite offering by far was a "jury". Less flattering but perhaps more accurate was a "snarl" and another offering was a "fakery". Other contributions included a "gaggle" and a "spin", while someone suggested "pit", as in vipers. Well, it takes all sorts.
Bangkok Post
30-07-2025
- Bangkok Post
An unforgettable flight
When Ruangsak "James" Loychusak saw news of the recent Air India plane crash, he was reminded of a similar incident that took place 27 years ago. Vishwashkumar Ramesh, survivor of the June's plane crash, was seated in 11A. In 1998, Ruangsak was also seated in 11A when Thai Airways Flight 261, an Airbus A310-300 en route from Bangkok to Surat Thani, crashed leaving 101 people dead and 45 others injured. Although the two incidents took place 27 years apart, the fact that both survivors had the same seat sparked discussion on it being miraculous and how the fatal incident left emotional scars and trauma. "I lived with an intense fear of heights, fear of flying and fears triggered by even the smallest sounds that reminded me of that day. The memories echoed in my ears, lingered in my mind and became part of my daily life. As someone in the public eye, I could never escape talking about it. And each time I told the story, I had to relive it again and again. It was as if the trauma never truly ended," Ruangsak said. Ruangsak explained how the event was traumatic, both physically and emotionally. "Some passengers lost limbs, some lost their lives and those who survived, like myself, were left with wounds that ran deeper than what was visible." Physically, Ruangsak spent two full years in recovery dealing with broken bones, bleeding in the brain and damage to his lungs. "For many years, I deliberately avoided contact with anyone connected to the 1998 plane crash. Among the 41 survivors, I chose not to meet, talk or even learn about their lives because every time I did, the fear and trauma would return all over again," the singer recalled. Ruangsak acknowledged the setbacks such tragic events cause. For nearly three decades, he could not escape the incident. "The media -- newspapers, television, radio, and now online platforms -- have always wanted to hear my story. And each time I agree to an interview, I must force myself to revisit that day. I must recall every detail. And in doing so, I must endure that pain again. It never truly goes away," Ruangsak said. Personal Life Ruangsak's family was surprised by what happened and also heartbroken. Even though nearly 30 years have passed, James believes that incident still lingers in their hearts. He said: "It was, and still is, a nightmare -- not just for me, but for everyone close to me." Ruangsak expressed how "sometimes life presents us with patterns that seem meaningful, but not everything needs to be explained beyond what it is". Professional Career Before the plane crash, Ruangsak was living what many would call the golden era of his life. His music career had reached its peak -- he was well-known across the country and fans eagerly packed out concert halls to see him perform. He admits that he "achieved a level of success that every artist dreams of". So when the accident happened, he received an overwhelming amount of support and love from people all over Thailand. His name was on the front pages of newspapers almost daily. Ruangsak was constantly in the spotlight -- every channel, every day, for weeks and even months. Fans wrote letters, sent encouragement and prayed for Ruangsak's speedy recovery. That outpouring of support became Ruangsak's reason to fight. He knew he had to recover -- not just for himself but for the people who believed in him. He went through a full year of treatment and rehabilitation. Eventually, he was able to return to the stage and sing again. "It wasn't easy. There were moments of pain, sorrow and doubt. But I knew in my heart that I still had a role to play as a singer and as someone who brings joy through music. And that belief, fuelled by the love of my fans, helped me move forward." Life Beyond The Tragic Plane Crash The plane crash completely changed Ruangsak's perspective on life and perhaps that's the one reason he continues to agree to interviews even though every conversation forces him to revisit a memory he would rather leave behind. "I won't lie. It's painful to go back there. But what I gained from that experience is something I believe is worth sharing because not everyone gets the kind of wake-up call I did." Ruangsak learned that life should not be taken for granted. The only certainty in life is uncertainty itself. He counsels and wishes for people to follow their dreams, without waiting for the right opportunity because you never know if the next minute, the next hour, or even the next day is still promised to you. "If my story can remind someone -- anyone -- not to delay living fully, then perhaps reliving the pain in these interviews is worth it." Miracle, Healing And Gratitude Ruangsak was surprised by the coincidence with the Air India crash but he does not believe it meant that this particular seat is the safest or the luckiest. To him it's just a statistical anomaly -- an outcome of nature and nothing more. When a plane crash occurs, chances of survival are generally very low. Ruangsak said that a specific seat does not hold an advantage or disadvantage. He elucidated that the cause and nature of each crash are unique. No two incidents are ever the same. Ruangsak acknowledged some people see it through a spiritual lens or hold personal beliefs about fate, destiny or divine protection. Message To The Aviation Industry Ruangsak believes the airline industry across all carriers prioritises safety at the highest level, including Thai Airways. Despite what happened, Ruangsak still has complete confidence in Thai Airways as one of the world's safest airlines. What occurred that day was a tragic and unforeseen incident. It was an outlier compared to the sheer volume of successful flights that take place every day. Today, Ruangsak continues to travel by air with confidence on any airline. He follows every in-flight rule and safety instruction strictly. He knows those guidelines are there for passenger's protection and he respects the care that airlines take for their passengers. "Whenever I'm on a plane, I stay mindful. I pay attention to where the safety equipment is, where the emergency exits are and how the evacuation process works just in case the unexpected ever happens again." Lesson Learned Ruangsak wants to encourage everyone to live with mindfulness as when we are present in the moment, we give ourself the best chance to overcome any hardship that life presents. Mindfulness doesn't eliminate problems, but it helps us face people with clarity and calm, which often leads to better outcomes. And when accidents do happen -- whether on land, sea or in the air -- being mindful in those moments can make a crucial difference. It can increase your chances of survival and help you respond more effectively. "For those who travel by plane, I sincerely urge you to follow all aviation safety rules carefully. These regulations exist to protect you. Your attention to them could save your life," he concluded.
Bangkok Post
12-07-2025
- Bangkok Post
Fuel to Air India jet engines cut off moments before crash: probe
NEW DELHI — Fuel control switches to the engines of an Air India flight that crashed shortly after takeoff, killing 260 people, were moved from the "run" to the "cutoff" position moments before impact, a preliminary investigation report said early Saturday. The report, issued by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau, did not offer any conclusions or apportion blame for the June 12 disaster, but indicated that one pilot asked the other why he cut off fuel, and the second pilot responded that he had not. The Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner was headed from Ahmedabad in western India to London when it crashed, killing all but one of the 242 people on board as well as 19 people on the ground. In its 15-page report, the investigation bureau said that once the aircraft achieved its top recorded speed, "the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec". "In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff. The other pilot responded that he did not do so," it said. The aircraft quickly began to lose altitude. The switches then returned to the RUN position and the engines appeared to be gathering power, but "one of the pilots transmitted 'MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY'", the report said. Air traffic controllers asked the pilots what was wrong, but then saw the plane crashing and called emergency personnel to the scene. The bureau said there were "no recommended actions to B787-8 and/or GE GEnx-1B engine operators and manufacturers", suggesting no technical issues with the engines (GE) or the aircraft (Boeing). The bureau said the investigation was ongoing, and that additional evidence and information has been "sought from the stakeholders". The plane was carrying 230 passengers -- 169 Indians, 53 British, seven Portuguese and a Canadian -- along with 12 crew members. Dozens of people on the ground were injured.
