Stitching together evidences in AI plane crash to be tedious process; probe may take time: Former AAIB DG
Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau
(AAIB) Group Captain Aurobindo Handa (Retd) spoke exclusively to PTI on the investigation process.
Handa said going by the visuals of the crash, the aircraft has been very badly damaged by fire and stitching together the evidences would be a tedious process.
"In all probability and in fairness, the investigation is likely to be a long drawn process," he told PTI.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Sunteck Sky Park, Mira Road - 2 & 3 BHK @ ₹1.33 Cr*
Sunteck Sky Park
Learn More
Undo
Handa is also the former Chairman Accident Investigation Group (AIG) of ICAO -APAC Region.
During Handa's stewardship, AAIB had closed over 100 investigations, including the fatal crash of Air India Express plane which happened in August 2020 at Kozhikode, Kerala.
Live Events
Following is the detailed interview
How much time do you envisage that the investigation into the Air India plane crash Ahmedabad would take?
Annex 13 of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as well as AAIB Rules mandate that any investigation should preferably be completed in less than a year.
Our investigators' endeavour to complete an investigation as quickly as possible so that remedial actions are instituted quickly through DGCA to avoid any recurrence.
However, going by the visuals of this accident, you would appreciate that this aircraft has been very badly damaged by fire. Therefore, corroborating and stitching together the evidences would be a tedious process. In all probability and in fairness, the investigation is likely to be a long-drawn process.
How are the probable causes zeroed in during an aircraft accident investigation?
Deep and detailed examination of meaningful evidences is a time-consuming process.
After analysing the data from the recorders, the investigators narrow down to the most probable systems and/or sub-systems that could have malfunctioned and/or contributed in a malfunction.
Step by step, each of the suspected causes for the accident are examined deeply and the unlikely causes are ruled out which is a rigorous process.
Basically, the process is driven by the 'method of elimination'.
It is akin to a physician going through pathological reports, X-Ray/MRI or other test reports before coming to a conclusion.
What is the main aim of an aircraft crash investigation?
As per Annex 13 of ICAO and AAIB Rules 2012 (as amended from time to time), the aim of the investigation is to find out the most probable root cause but not to apportion blame or liability.
What are the broad steps involved in an investigation?
The ICAO had come out with 'DOC 9756' or the Manual of Accident Investigation. Globally, the investigators follow this manual, which outlines detailed procedures to arrive at the most probable cause of an aircraft accident.
In addition, based on 'DOC 9756' and its own experiences, AAIB has prepared a document known as 'Procedure Manual' which contains the investigation process/procedures to be followed in India.
What are the priorities for AAIB investigators after reaching the aircraft accident site?
Obviously, when any unfortunate aircraft accident happens, the immediate focus of the 'first responders' such as airport staff, security personnel which includes CISF, NDRF and local police is to save lives.
AAIB takes charge of the activities as soon as its team arrives at the crash site and starts coordinating with the 'first responders' for the remaining work.
After cordoning off the general area, AAIB controls and regulates any movement at the crash site in order to make sure that the evidence is not lost inadvertently or tampered with deliberately.
AAIB's priorities are to look for survivors and/or save lives at the crash site, retrieve recorders, sift through the debris for any meaningful examination at a later date, and shift these meaningful debris to a safe and secure place.
AAIB investigators get divided into sub-groups and start segregating the debris into sub-groups such as flight recorders, airframe, propulsion, avionics and controls, among other elements.
The first and foremost task is the retrieval of recorders i.e. Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR).
Once the retrieval is affected, the next step is 'milking of raw data' from these recorders. The raw data is then converted into actionable and workable 'engineering parameters'.
Then, these engineering parameters are converted into graphs and charts for deriving meaningful and credible interpretation.
How strong are India's capabilities in analysing the data during an aircraft accident investigation?
India as a sovereign nation is quite well equipped to analyse recorders. AAIB, DGCA (Directorate General of Civil Aviation) and airlines also have their recorder labs in place.
In case, there is a need, AAIB can seek help from NAL (National Aerospace Laboratories), Bengaluru, HAL (
Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd
), Korwa, and LCA (Light Combat Aircraft) Project as they have excellent infrastructure and enough domain experts of international repute who can be co-opted to assist the aircraft accident investigations and render advice.
Also, if there is an iota of doubt that the milking of raw data from the recorders could result in erosion of data, the chief investigator under the guidance from the DG, AAIB can decide to take the recorders to their Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM).
Aircraft manufacturers do not manufacture recorders and these are outsourced from other companies like Honeywell.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
an hour ago
- The Print
Indian aviation has a ‘safety culture' problem. Airline carriers, training institutes share blame
SpiceJet, the inquiry found, had not 'meticulously' followed procedures for monitoring and controlling recurring defects. Sixty such defects were reported in its Boeing 737 fleet equipped with the Honeywell RDR-4B weather radar system, 15 of which occurred prior to the 1 May incident. Three years later, the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) in its final report put out in May pointed at poor crew coordination, erroneous decision-making by pilots and passengers ignoring seat belt signs among other factors for the episode. But, it also flagged deeper issues—recurring maintenance lapses and non-compliance with basic reporting protocol. New Delhi: On 1 May 2022, a regular flight from Mumbai to Durgapur turned into a mid-air nightmare for the passengers and crew of the SpiceJet plane as it flew into a storm while landing. The severe turbulence jolted several passengers who were not wearing seat belts. One passenger succumbed to a spinal injury later, while three others too were grievously hurt. Notably, three defects involving the weather radar system were reported just days before, between 14 and 30 April, although none of them officially pertained to that particular aircraft. Several media reports suggested that pilots had raised doubts on the dependability of the weather radar system of this fleet. Moreover, post the May incident, SpiceJet had returned the aircraft to its lessor without obtaining the necessary clearance from the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) or AAIB, and before complete information from the airline could be obtained regarding repeated weather radar related snags, the final report said. Such lapses and violations are not one-offs. Oversight failures by aircraft operators, glider clubs, etc are as endemic as they are persistent. And the picture is no better in the training ecosystem. The 12 June crash of Air India flight 171—one of the worst civil aviation disasters in the country in decades—has put an uneasy spotlight on the airline industry. After the AAIB released its preliminary report—which put both Air India and Boeing in the clear for now—questions about safety, protocol, pilot and crew training, maintenance of aircraft and previously reported snags, etc took centrestage. Last month, the AAIB drew flak over its preliminary findings. A particular point of contention was a brief mention about a conversation between the two Air India pilots on the fuel switches, wherein one of them asks the other on why he cut off fuel supply to the engines, and the latter denies doing so. After the report was released, there have been many takes on what exactly happened, including several questions on Boeing and Air India. The AAIB had slammed several Western media reports suggesting pilot error or deliberate action by one pilot. ThePrint has analysed 68 AAIB final reports on aircraft accidents since 2012. Part 1 of this three-part series looks at how the investigating body has repeatedly flagged violations by both airline operators and Flight Training Organisations (FTOs). 'AAIB does not classify occurrences immediately unless there are casualties. The first responders which may comprise DGCA and/or AAIB officials, tasked by the DG AAIB, then reach the spot and an initial report is prepared in case there is no clarity on the nature of the occurrence. The DG, AAIB has the final say in which classification the occurrence will fall under and that is binding. If there are casualties, then the AAIB team reaches the spot directly,' Group Captain Aurobindo Handa (retired), a former director general of the AAIB, told The Print. 'The responsibility of cobbling up the investigating team rests with the DG, AAIB. Aviation crash investigators are a scarce resource not just in India but also across the world. The DG, AAIB decides the composition of the team and is empowered to pick people—domain experts from different domains as deemed necessary. The investigator in charge may also be called from outside the investigating body,' he added. Overall, 101 AAIB investigation reports, including 27 of helicopters (both preliminary and final reports) and six preliminary reports of fixed aircraft accidents, are in the public domain. An analysis of the final reports show that in at least 47 percent of the cases, the AAIB has found out violations or lapses by operators and made remarks about them. These, however, may or may not have been found to be directly linked to aircraft accidents. In at least a dozen accidents, mechanical failures were reported even if they weren't cited as direct causes and in at least five of them, the AAIB couldn't even conclude what led to the failure or the chain of events. Some form of pilot action or decision leading up to the accident are mentioned in nearly 67 percent of these final reports by the AAIB. Even though these reports put some spotlight on inflight erroneous actions or judgements by pilots, they don't necessarily attribute or directly link all of these accidents to pilot errors. A detailed report on this aspect will be taken up in Part 2 of this series. ThePrint's analysis of the AAIB findings point to a broader pattern of not just irregular oversight by aircraft operators, but also of them often neglecting SOPs and guidelines. Other issues that find mention are ambiguous tech logs, maintenance issues, serious lapses in procedures such as maintaining fuel and oil consumption records, outdated regulations, non-adherence to safety recommendations cited in earlier accidents, lack of discipline, poor safety culture, and even inefficient training of pilots. A similar pattern is seen with FTOs—DGCA-approved institutes that impart training to those looking to secure pilot licences. This pertains to oversight including improper briefing procedures, vague tech logs, substandard training, lack of weather monitoring mechanisms, faulty maintenance, flying instructors not sticking to SOPs, not incorporating night flying SOP, non-existent SOPs for radio telephony communications between ground and flight staff, lack of CCTV inside FTO premises, etc. Take for example the 2016 accident of a glider aircraft during a routine flight: the AAIB had flagged various concerns about the Hadapsar Gliding Centre, that was run by the DGCA till December last year. The centre didn't have SOPs in place for emergency situations, the Bureau said in its report, adding that the DGCA hadn't uploaded its own glider circulars on the website to be readily accessed by glider training institutes. ThePrint reached AAIB, DGCA, and airlines—Air India Express, Air India, SpiceJet, and IndiGo—via email and messages for comments. This report will be updated as and when responses are received. Also Read: 'No mechanical, maintenance issues with aircraft'—Air India CEO tells employees post prelim crash probe Pressure, poor training & safety warnings ignored 'Safety culture' finds mention multiple times in the AAIB inquiry report of the Air India Express plane crash at Kozhikode in August 2020. Nineteen passengers as well as both pilots were killed after the Boeing 737 skidded off the wet runway, fell down an embankment, and broke into three sections. Though pilot errors were listed as the probable cause, the AAIB also observed that Air India Express had a 'faulty' HR policy, which it said placed undue pressure on the pilots. Originally on standby, the pilot in command (PIC) was reassigned last-minute due to shortage of captains. His flight next morning was delayed to fit duty hours, putting pressure on him to land in Kozhikode on time. The captain has the final say over aircraft operation, while the first officer assists throughout all phases of the journey. Air India Express's HR policy failed to align crew base assignments with operational needs, leaving just one captain against 26 first officers at Kozhikode. The PIC's decision to return to Kozhikode was driven by a misplaced urgency to operate the next morning's flight, the AAIB report said. 'In case of diversion of flight AXB 1344, the PIC would have exceeded his Flight Duty Time Limitations (FDTL) and would not have been available for the following day morning flight. This would have resulted in shortage of PIC at Kozhikode for operating the three scheduled flights ex-Kozhikode the next day.' 'AIXL (Air India Express Limited) policies of upper level management have led to a lack of supervision in training, operations and safety practices, resulting in deficiencies at various levels causing repeated human error accidents,' it further noted, adding that although poor crew resource management had emerged as a major contributor in a previous major accident and serious incidents involving Air India Express, CRM training failed to generate its desired results and continued to be the causal factor in this crash as well. Data from cockpit voice recorder (CVR) revealed that the plane's windshield wiper wasn't working properly and that the crew was aware of it but the malfunction wasn't mentioned in the technical log. The report notes probably a verbal briefing about it could have taken place which highlights the non-standard practice of reporting on snags. Training standards were also flagged: simulator maintenance was substandard, and mandatory exercises weren't always checked. Pilots lacked access to Onboard Performance Tool (OPT) for quick landing calculations. Despite Civil Aviation Requirements (CARs) and repeated DGCA audits, Air India Express also failed to fully monitor Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR) data—a crucial factor to avoid accidents. Issued by the DGCA, CARs are a set of mandatory standards and procedures laid down for aviation operations which include flight data monitoring, maintenance, safety management, training among other things. While probing an accident reported at Mumbai airport in July 2019, the AAIB noted that SpiceJet hadn't adhered to the safety recommendations in spite of incidents and accidents under similar conditions including similar errors by the flight crew. The plane had overshot the main runway while landing amid heavy rains. 'In the past, there have been occurrences (incidents and accidents) to the aircraft operated by the organisation under similar circumstances and more or less due to the same inactions/errors by the flight crew,' the AAIB said. 'The investigation of these occurrences and those to the aircraft operated by other organisations had given recommendations to obviate these occurrences in future. It was observed that the majority of the safety recommendations were either not implemented in true letter and spirit or the action taken has withered away with passage of time.' SpiceJet, the Bureau found, also didn't have an active flight watch or monitoring programme. 'It is vital that AAIB closes the loop with critical recommendations and directives post incident and accident investigation to all operators and such directives enforced with stringent regulations by the DGCA so as to ensure minimal compromise in safety in aviation. Safety culture, which is reporting culture, is virtually non-existent in India. Aircraft operators along with helicopter operators are the worst offenders of safety and airworthiness norms,' said Mark D. Martin, CEO of Martin Consulting, an aviation advisory and risk firm. Also Read: Too much traffic & too little control, why Char Dham route is a hotbed for chopper crashes Faulty fuel checks & on-paper maintenance In another instance reported in May 2021, an uninsured aircraft operated by the Directorate of Aviation (DoA), Madhya Pradesh, had incorrect CAR references in the operator's Operations Manual. The DoA had also not sought exemption from the DCGA to carry a passenger in cargo and not in the cabin of the Beechcraft King Air 250 aircraft that crash-landed at Gwalior airport and injured all three occupants, including the two pilots. Another violation of basic protocols was reported in a case from June 2020 in which an IndiGo aircraft flying from Dammam, Saudi Arabia encountered turbulence during descent to Cochin. A cabin crew member had sustained serious injuries. IndiGo, the AAIB noted, hadn't preserved the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) data, which is crucial to analyse the causes behind accidents. In March 2023, a 'joy ride sortie' conducted by the Jharkhand Flying Institute ended in a crash after engine failure due to fuel starvation. Joy ride sorties can be conducted either on smaller aircraft or helicopters for sightseeing or recreational purposes. Both fuel valves located inside the cockpit were found unnoticed, left in closed positions. Both the pilot and the 14-year-old passenger suffered injuries after the Sinus 912 motor glider crashed-landed at a residential area in Dhanbad. While the AAIB noted that the flight was initiated in haste, with no pre-flight inspection, it also mentions that there was a lack of safety culture in the organisation, among other things. Fuel starvation leading to engine starvation isn't really uncommon, the AAIB investigation reports show. Such a situation refers to the engines not being fed with fuel, leading them to either shut down or go into some sort of mechanical failure. This can have catastrophic consequences. In its final report on a February 2019 accident in Baramati during a solo training sortie of a Cessna 172S aircraft, the AAIB mentioned that fuel and oil records were not maintained according to the CAR guideline, and that the pilot was not imparted adequate training in fuel assessment. Fuel assessment is the process of calculating the amount of fuel required to complete the trip, the quantity on board and then accessing it with the route vis-à-vis how much will be needed to complete the flight. The process includes checking the fuel quantity as well as quality (for contamination), functioning of the fuel system for checks on any leaks, fuel pumps, routing of the fuel without any blockades to the engines and proper valve positions. For modern commercial aircraft, there are fuel quantity indication systems and pilots also check cross-check dispatch fuel slips. This is a critical task done not just before but also during the flight, as part of routine checks/monitoring during intervals. The FTO in this case was Academy of Carver Aviation. A similar case was reported in May 2016 when an air ambulance with five people on board, crash-landed at Delhi's Najafgarh area. The operator, Alchemist Air Pvt. Ltd, had not followed established procedures in assessing fuel consumption of aircraft, the AAIB found. Last year, the DGCA cancelled the FTO approval of Alchemist after audits revealed serious lapses in compliance of regulatory provisions. The action came after an instructor and a trainee pilot were killed in an air crash near Jamshedpur in August, 2024. Another accident involving an air ambulance was reported at Mumbai airport in May 2021. The inquiry revealed that the positions of quality manager and the chief of flight safety have been at a 'higher attrition rate than the others within the company — Jet Serve Aviation'. 'The chief of flight safety post has been inconsistent since 2019 and was lying vacant as on the date of the accident,' the AAIB noted. Jet Serve Aviation also had approval to operate as an FTO. While the AAIB noted that the aircraft suffered a mechanical failure, it couldn't ascertain the root cause of this failure. Both cases involved Beechcraft King Air C90 A aircraft. In January 2023, Falcon Aviation Academy lost a chief flight instructor in a crash at Rewa while the trainee pilot was grievously injured. Investigators found the Cessna 152 aircraft had taken off in night conditions in spite of the stipulated visuality. Falcon had no local visibility arrangements in Rewa and didn't follow set protocols for coordination with ATC in Varanasi. Notably, in an accident in February 2022 wherein a trainee pilot lost his life in Nalgonda, the AAIB found out that the FTO—Flytech Aviation Academy—during maintenance and inspections failed to detect the deteriorated conditions of control cables and other instruments of the Cessna 152 aircraft. But the operator's records showed all scheduled inspections had been completed, the inspection of the wreckage showed that the aircraft was not maintained as those records claimed. The AAIB couldn't fully ascertain the exact cause of the accident, but suggested that it was due to technical faults with the aircraft. 'While no snag was documented pending on the aircraft prior to the accident flight, the investigation team found a number of deficiencies in maintenance,' the report said. 'As per the documents maintained by the operator, all Inspection Schedules (Operations) were compiled on the aircraft. However, wreckage examination revealed that aircraft condition prior to the accident was not in line with work completed under those schedules. Conditions of a few control cables and associated components were found beyond the limits. Lack of lubrication, corrosion and groove marks were noticed on a few pulleys,' the AAIB said. (Edited by Tony Rai) Also Read: Recurring aircraft defects to faded runway lines, DGCA check reveals safety lapses at key airports
News18
a day ago
- News18
Families Demand Transparency And Accountability In Air India Crash Investigation : Attorney Mike
Families Demand Transparency And Accountability In Air India Crash Investigation : Attorney Mike Last Updated: India Videos | US attorney Mike, representing 85 families, tells CNN News18 victims' kin face bureaucratic hurdles in compensation & demand transparency. He calls AAIB's report 'speculative' and warns against unfairly blaming pilots, urging release of full FDR & CVR data. n18oc_india News18 Mobile App -
News18
a day ago
- News18
AI Crash: Boeing 787's Redundant Systems, Power Disruption Due To Water Leak In Focus, Says Attorney
'Documents from FAA and Boeing indicate defects in coupling systems in parts of water supply and water tanks near electrical equipment rooms,' Mike Andrews tells CNN-News18 Mike Andrews, attorney with the law firm Beasley Allen, who is representing 85 families of the Ahmedabad Air India crash, told CNN-News18 exclusively that documents from Boeing and Federal Aviation Administration suggest multiple redundant systems on this aircraft (Boeing 787), specifically with respect to water leakages in areas above and adjacent to electrical equipment that could affect electrical continuity. 'Documents available from FAA – the U.S. federal agency that regulates civil aviation – and Boeing indicate that there are defects in the coupling systems in parts of water supply and water tanks above, around and adjacent to electrical equipment rooms…reports speak of water leaking in the areas that can affect electrical continuity and cause short circuits," Andrews said in an interview to CNN-News18. Asked if he will be suing Boeing in a US court, Andrews said what happened here is traced back to manufacturing or design defects. 'If we can determine that it is a causative factor here, we will be certainly looking at holding those issues responsible," he said during the interaction. On access to data from Air India and Boeing Asked whether he has access to data from Air India and Boeing, the attorney said, 'We have not been given access to flight data recorder yet. We have been able to locate copies from Boeing and FAA which refer to previous issues with 787…We don't know yet what caused the issues here. This aircraft has multiple redundant systems in both engines and throughout the plane." Talking of accessing data, he added that in terms of Air India, he would be looking at maintenance records, information regarding any replacement of parts, any information on replacement of couplings in water lines or water systems. He further said that the most important evidence to investigate this crash would be the flight data recorder. 'Beyond that service bulletins from Boeing, maintenance records from Air India, records from the FAA regarding prior incidents of the 787 are crucial evidence that will allow us to put the puzzle back together." Asked whether he was satisfied with the AAIB India's preliminary investigation report, Andrews said, they have publicly called for release of data by the AAIB. 'We are looking into the final data. We think AAIB's preliminary report is open to speculations as only small piece of information was released. Whenever context is derived from small piece of information it can be misinterpreted," he added. On the pilots being blamed for the AI171 crash, Andrews added that it appears to be a low-hanging fruit. 'It is easy to blame a deceased pilot who cannot speak for himself. But here we feel there is a broader issue going on so blaming pilots is premature and speculated." What the families want Andrews is representing 85 families of the crash victims and was recently in Ahmedabad, where the flight AI171 met its tragic fate. He met family members to know their concerns and also held a meeting with the lone survivor of the crash. 'Each family has asked us for transparency and accountability…they want to know what happened, why it happened and how to prevent this from ever happening again. There were earlier some issues with the administrative set up of the compensation package but that appears to have improved, however, there are families that are running into bureaucratic type issues in receiving compensation, having to go through multiple steps and paper works," he said. 'Our focus has been on helping them understand the process going forward and what information we need to have," Andrews added. tags : Air India crash Boeing 787 Dreamliner news18 specials view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: August 17, 2025, 17:22 IST News india AI Crash: Boeing 787's Redundant Systems, Power Disruption Due To Water Leak In Focus, Says Attorney 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.
