Air India crash: Report may explain what went wrong; peek into final moments expected
Air India crash
.
The incident involved a Boeing 787 Dreamliner that went down just 30 seconds after takeoff in Ahmedabad on June 12, killing 241 people on board and over 30 on the ground. Only one passenger survived. The probe has been closely followed, with Bloomberg reporting fresh details citing people familiar with the matter.
While the report is likely to be factual and restrained in tone, it could provide critical early clues.
Authorities are not expected to assign blame yet, as a full investigation is ongoing. According to Bloomberg, investigators have retrieved both the cockpit voice and flight data recorders, and have extracted their contents.
Top Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) officials told the panel that the aircraft's black box and voice recorder were recovered and were being analysed. Boeing and other international experts are assisting with the ongoing investigation.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Experience Macau's spice heritage through Chef Justin Paul's cooking.
MGTO
Undo
What happened in the final 30 seconds?
The aircraft, fully loaded with fuel, lost altitude rapidly and crashed into a student hostel near the airport, leading to a massive explosion. The pilot of Flight AI 171 had issued a mayday call before the crash.
Videos of the takeoff showed the flight initially proceeding normally. But according to aerospace analyst Bjorn Fehrm, the landing gear was never retracted and the aircraft began to lose thrust shortly after liftoff.
'That's improbable like hell,' he said, referring to what appeared to be a simultaneous failure of both engines — an extremely rare event.
Focus on
fuel control switches
According to Bloomberg, one of the primary lines of inquiry is the possible movement of the fuel control switches, located in the cockpit's centre console. These switches control the fuel supply to the engines, which are made by GE Aerospace.
The Wall Street Journal has also reported that preliminary findings suggest the switches were turned off although it remains unclear whether that happened accidentally or intentionally.
Experts say that turning the switches to the cutoff position would stop fuel flow, shutting down the engines in seconds.
John Cox, a former airline pilot and now CEO of Safety Operating Systems, told Bloomberg: 'If you move those switches from run to cutoff, those engines will stop running in literally seconds.' He said the possibility of an unintentional switch movement cannot be ruled out.
No mechanical fault identified so far
According to people cited by Bloomberg, no evidence has emerged yet of a mechanical or design fault in the Boeing aircraft or GE engines.
Neither the FAA nor the manufacturers have issued safety advisories, which typically follow if a broader operational risk is detected.
Pilots say the crew likely had too little time and altitude to restart the engines. A key emergency backup device — the ram air turbine — was deployed, which further supports the theory of a dual engine failure.
Pilot experience and human factors
Investigators are also examining the background and experience of the cockpit crew, which is standard procedure.
Captain Sumeet Sabharwal had logged 8,200 flight hours, while First Officer Clive Kunder had about 1,100 hours, according to the Directorate General of Civil Aviation.
Cox told Bloomberg that accidental shutdowns have occurred in the past. In one 1980s case involving a Delta Air Lines Boeing 767, a pilot mistakenly turned off both engines but was able to restart them thanks to the aircraft's higher altitude.
Another possibility, pilots told Bloomberg, is that the fuel switches were cycled in response to a dual engine failure as part of an emergency checklist but recovery was not feasible due to the jet's low altitude.
As the investigation continues, the preliminary findings are expected to open critical discussions around human error, technical systems, and emergency protocols in modern aviation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
4 days ago
- Time of India
Ahmedabad air crash: Inside the 10-second mystery - What really brought down AI 171?
Representative Image NEW DELHI: The fatal crash of Air India Flight AI 171 has drawn intense attention to a brief but pivotal sequence in the cockpit—ten seconds that may explain how a routine takeoff ended in disaster. As investigators dig into the timeline, a Bloomberg report says that the unexplained actions and delays during this window are now central to understanding what went wrong with Boeing's advanced 787 Dreamliner. On June 12, Flight AI 171 departed Ahmedabad for London with 242 people on board. Both pilots, senior captain Sumeet Sabharwal and junior co-pilot Clive Kunder, were cleared for duty and the aircraft's initial climb appeared normal. But within seconds, a sudden loss of engine power set off a chain of events that the crew could not recover from, despite their efforts. The unexplained 10 seconds • Just three seconds after takeoff, the 787 Dreamliner reached its maximum recorded airspeed. • Both engine fuel switches were inexplicably set to cutoff within a single second, shutting down fuel flow to the engines. • Confusion erupted in the cockpit, with each pilot denying responsibility for moving the fuel switches, according to Bloomberg's reporting. • There was a 10-second delay before the first fuel switch was reset, and another four seconds before the second was restored. • The aircraft was too low and slow for the engines to be reignited in time to regain thrust. •The significance of the ensuing 10-second delay cannot be overstated. As retired FAA inspector Michael Daniel told Bloomberg, 'The 10 seconds are crucial because the aircraft was simply too low and too slow to re-ignite the engines to gain thrust in order to climb.' • The sudden shutdown triggered a barrage of cockpit alarms, possibly causing a psychological 'startle effect' and momentary freeze in pilot response. • Emergency systems like the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) provided minimal power, but only to the captain's controls, forcing a rapid transfer of control from co-pilot to captain. • Despite resetting the switches, the crew ran out of time; a 'Mayday' was sent, but the plane crashed just outside the airport, killing 260 people. The preliminary report, as cited by Bloomberg, has left investigators with more questions than answers. While Air India's CEO said that fleet-wide safety checks found no anomalies, the focus remains on what happened inside the cockpit during those critical seconds. Human factors—including confusion, sensory overload, and psychological shock—are now under close scrutiny, as experts seek to determine whether these played a critical role in the delay that doomed the flight.
NDTV
4 days ago
- NDTV
Air India Crash: We're All Terrified Of Flying Now, Thanks To Conspiracy Theories
The investigation into the tragic crash of Air India flight AI 171 last month has become a subject of intense speculation, memes and long posts on social media. It has also quickly eroded public trust in the investigator as well as the process of investigation. This is a sad state of affairs and also a bit scary, since erosion of trust has triggered apprehensions among the travelling public about air travel. I know of many erstwhile frequent fliers, who thought nothing before taking a flight for work or leisure, now hesitating before making the next flight booking. Some have been barred from flying by families, others remain confused over which aircraft type to fly and whether to risk a long-haul flight, weighing the option of postponing the flight altogether. Took a flight today and the panic post Air India is real - My neighbour was like what's the smoke when they initially spray the disinfectant (I think) - People were extremely attentive to the instructions sitting at the exit door - The air hostess had to literally explain why… — Kirtan A Shah, CFP® (@KirtanShahCFP) June 20, 2025 Speculation Abounds A million theories of what went wrong had already been circulated when the buzz reached a crescendo last week, after the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) released a preliminary report. In a poorly worded and somewhat verbose report, the AAIB indicated that the cockpit crew could be responsible for the tragic accident, while seemingly absolving the aircraft manufacturer and other stakeholders. Two specific words or phrases in the report are telling. One, the use of the word "transitioned" in reference to fuel cutoff switches. Second, the report has quoted a part of the conversation between the two pilots, in which one is heard asking the other whether he "cut off". The report says the aircraft "achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 Knots IAS at about 08:08:42 UTC and immediately thereafter, 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". What does "transitioned" mean? Were they moved, or did the switches malfunction? Unless the AAIB was prepared to go further and clarify this, either way, what was the crying need to even mention the 'transitioning' of fuel switches in a preliminary report? The Cost Of Dilly-Dallying As per ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) guidelines, a preliminary report of any accident should ideally be released within 30 days, and the investigator is expected to share "critical initial facts" to enable immediate safety actions globally. The 30-day deadline is meant to compel investigators to prioritise the collection and reporting of readily available, verified factual and circumstantial information, rather than waiting for exhaustive analysis. Obviously, then, the deadline is not meant to encourage speculation, which the AAIB seems to have encouraged, knowingly or unknowingly, by using vague terms like fuel switch transition. Besides, experts have pointed out that while the ICAO norms encourage a preliminary report within 30 days, the AAIB charter has no such requirement, and in at least one previous air crash, the AAIB did not release any preliminary report at all. So, the agency actually had the option of not going through the paces and releasing anything at all. That it chose to do so on the 30th day, past midnight, points to myriad pressures on the investigating team. The Western media thereafter made matters worse by speculating further on pilot suicide theories, quoting unnamed sources. Then, the second word or phrase which stands out in the preliminary report is the mention of a part of the conversation in the cockpit. The AAIB has chosen to reveal that one pilot asked the other about why he "cut off," and the latter replied he did not. Without spelling out which pilot posed the question and which one answered, a Pandora's box has been opened. Not only does providing just a sentence of the conversation in the cockpit fail to give the full picture of what transpired, but there is no clarity on what the pilots were actually talking about. Questions With No Answers Was this conversation about fuel cutoff or something else? If it was about fuel cutoff, which pilot posed the question? AAIB has itself said that it recovered two hours of audio from the flight data recorders. The words "cut off" could have referred to anything - engine, instruments, etc, not necessarily fuel switches. What the preliminary report has also done is this: it has provided a virtual clean chit to Boeing & Co. The report says that at this stage of the investigation, "there are no recommended actions to B787-8 and/or GEnx-1B engine operators and manufacturers". No one wants to fly Air India anymore. For years, people tolerated bad service, delays, rats and broken TV systems etc, but now it's about existential threat to life. Brand is badly damaged. Tata took it easy and focused on bells & whistles changes instead of improving customer… — Rajesh Sawhney 🇮🇳 (@rajeshsawhney) June 15, 2025 Again, a mere preliminary report need not have been in such undue haste to absolve either Boeing or any other stakeholder of negligence or faults. The report should have stuck to facts. It should have given out the sequence of events; details of the number of crew involved and their experience (without identifying them); number of casualties and number of injured; and the fact that both aircraft engines flamed out. Nothing else was needed in the preliminary report. Flaws are emerging even in the constitution of the probe team. Until recently, no senior pilot had been included in the team, since only Air India has a fleet of Dreamliners, and the AAIB probably wanted to avoid allegations of any bias. Then, despite more than a month having elapsed, the AAIB has not found the time to launch an appeal for the public to depose with any evidence about the crash. The Buzz In Parliament As the buzz about the crash and the AAIB's insinuations gets louder, Union Civil Aviation Minister Kinjarapu Rammohan Naidu has had to assert in Parliament that the AAIB is unbiased and has been conducting a probe based on rules and regulations. His comments follow an appeal by the AAIB itself, urging the media and the public to refrain from "spreading premature narratives that risk undermining the integrity of the investigative process". There are really only two options now to mend the situation: either AAIB release further details of the cockpit conversation and reasons for the crash, or it follow the dictum of 'Mum's the Word' and carry out further investigation out of public glare. Rebuilding public trust in the probe - and Indian aviation- itself is the need of the hour.
Indian Express
4 days ago
- Indian Express
Air India crash aftermath: What are the steps Centre is taking to strengthen India's aviation sector? Union Minister answers
Air India Flight 171 crash: The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) has recently released its preliminary report of the investigation into the June 12 Air India plane crash at Ahmedabad (AI-171). However, a detailed investigation is in progress to determine the probable cause(s)/ contributory factor(s) leading to the accident. The tragic accident killed 260 people (241 on board and 19 on the ground). In a written reply to Rajya Sabha, Murlidhar Mohol, MoS, Civil Aviation said that the data from one of the Flight Recorders of AI-171 (VT-ANB) has been downloaded in the Flight Recorder Lab of the AAIB at Udaan Bhawan. He also stated that the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has undertaken several efforts to strengthen the country's aviation safety on a regular basis. 'An Investigation has been ordered by Director General (DG), Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) under Rule 11 of the Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents & Incidents) Rules, 2017 to determine the probable cause(s)/ contributory factor(s) leading to the accident. Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) – India has a robust mechanism to enhance the aviation safety to ensure the safe operations,' the Union Minister said. A look at the steps taken by the DGCA for ensuring safe flight operations in the country:
