Latest news with #DFDR
Indian Express
21-07-2025
- General
- Indian Express
A former Pilot on Air India crash report: Foreign media are misleading the public. Wait for the final report
Written by Minoo Wadia The people of India have a right to know the truth about what happened to Air India Flight 171. The anxiety and confusion among the public following the release of the preliminary report a few days ago are, therefore, understandable. However, it is equally important to remember that the Air India crash report is exactly what it claims to be: Preliminary. Its primary purpose is to establish what happened. The why and how will be addressed in the final report, which is typically released about a year after the incident. While the public's demand for answers is entirely justified, patience remains essential. There is a rush in certain quarters to blame the pilots. Why should it come as a surprise that blame is already being directed at them? Within just two days of the crash, self-proclaimed aviation 'experts' flooded YouTube — some even donning captain's uniforms — offering detailed theories about the crash without any proximity to the site or access to verifiable information. Unsurprisingly, many of these theories centred on pilot error. Yes, pilots — like doctors, engineers, or any other professional — are human beings and capable of mistakes. In this case, however, foreign media have jumped the gun. Some agencies have highlighted a section of the report that refers to an exchange between the pilots about the 'cut-off'. But this is a normal inquiry by a pilot in a situation where, during take-off, power fails to build, and there is insufficient thrust. Moreover, all pilots are trained that, in the event of a total engine failure, the correct procedure involves switching the engine off and attempting a restart. According to the report, the pilots attempted exactly that and almost succeeded. There was a relight on one engine. However, by that time, the aircraft was at too low an altitude, which led to it crashing into buildings. It was already too late. The real question is: Why did both engines fail? The Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR) should provide those answers. It is entirely possible for engines to fail without pilot intervention. Modern aircraft rely on computers to calculate fuel flow and engine performance. It is not impossible for the system to malfunction — perhaps due to incorrect fuel ratio calculations — leading to engine failure. These systems are built with safeguards, but like any complex software, they are not infallible. Remember the case of ANA Flight NH985 from Tokyo Haneda to Osaka Itami, which suffered dual engine failure upon landing? Western investigative agencies often default to blaming the pilots, and similar stories are likely to emerge in the coming weeks. There is no doubt that the preliminary Air India crash report could have offered more clarity; for instance, it would have been helpful if the details from the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) had been made public. I have worked extensively with CVRs and DFDRs, and I know that while data retrieval is one task, proper interpretation is quite another. It takes a team of trained specialists to extract meaning: What time thrust was applied, whether the engine spooled up, how much fuel was injected — every detail can be examined. Interpretation, however, takes time. This is why we must be patient and allow the final Air India crash report to tell the full story. In the meantime, we must continue to ask the right questions. Having worked with both Boeing and Airbus, including with their production test pilots, I can say with confidence that these professionals are deeply committed to safety. That said, no system is perfect. There is always scope for improvement — and yes, for error. But that's no reason to mislead the public. This is precisely why pilot federations are coming out strongly in defence of the crew, not simply out of solidarity, but because the facts are being selectively interpreted to sensationalise and unfairly suggest pilot error. One such federation is reportedly considering legal action against The Wall Street Journal for its coverage of the crash. When I transitioned from the Air Force to civil aviation, I was shocked to discover that the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) had no aviators on its rolls. There may well be brilliant bureaucrats at the helm, but is it too much to ask for a single technical aviation expert? Similarly, there should be certified Boeing 787 pilots on the investigating team. This is one of the key things the Indian aviation ecosystem must urgently address — ensuring that technical expertise is not sidelined. The writer is the founder of the Federation of Indian Pilots and a former Air Force and Air India pilot
Indian Express
18-07-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
July 8, 1985, Forty Years Ago: Kanishka ‘Clues'
Computer analysis of the 'Kanishka' aircraft's digital flight data recorder (DFDR) gave 'definite clues' of a mid-air explosion before it plunged into the Atlantic on June 23. This further confirms the sabotage theory advanced by aviation circles and strengthened by the hearing of the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) at the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. The analysis of the DFDR tape suggested cracking of the aircraft material seconds after the explosion. Bhopal Tragedy Probe Justice N K Singh, who is inquiring into the Bhopal gas disaster, said the Madhya Pradesh government was not cooperating enough to enable him to expedite the inquiry. He said he was 'handicapped' as the government had not appointed sufficient staff to assist the commission, and the technical experts required to assist in the investigation. He also cited instances when government departments objected to the commission's requirements on financial grounds. Ahmedabad Violence Five persons were killed and more than 20 injured as large-scale violence erupted anew in the communally sensitive Kalupur and Dariapur areas of the walled city, less than 40 hours after the Army handed over control of the walled city to the police. Indefinite curfew was imposed in these two areas. However, the Director General of Police, J F Ribeiro, ruled out deployment of the Army, saying, 'no chance at all'. Deadly Collapse At least 38 persons are feared to have been killed and 42 others injured when an Army building under construction collapsed near Akhnoor, about 34 km from Jammu. Eight bodies have reportedly been recovered and the rest were still buried under the debris. The building collapsed due to the heavy downpour. The victims were labourers from Madhya Pradesh.
NDTV
17-07-2025
- NDTV
"These Are Not 2 People On Tinder Date": Expert Defends Dreamliner Pilots
New Delhi: Serious pilots in India who are closely watching the unfolding events linked to the investigation into the crash of Air India's Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner are upset about the whole situation due to a perceived slant towards blaming the pilots, a top aviation expert and a pilot himself told NDTV on Thursday. Captain Sam Thomas, who heads the Airline Pilots' Association of India (ALPA India), said two things are bothering serious experts who have been tracking the investigation - speculation, and alleged absence of any qualified expert in the report by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB). "As far as speculation is concerned, we are okay with the media speculating. We believe speculation is a good part of investigative journalism. However, we object to pilots or so-called pilots or so-called experts who came on board and speculate," Mr Thomas told NDTV. "On day one, they said it's a bird hit. On day two, they said it's an overloaded airplane. On day three, they said something else. What we are objecting to is why did you call them on day four? You called them on day five, six, till such time that they insinuated this is something the captain has done with a motive to end his own life, which is farthest from the truth," Mr Thomas said. He said they don't believe the report "is completely Indian controlled", that it seemed like "a dictated sort of letter". "And you released that in the middle of the night. You cannot even get the full form of FADEC correctly. And you cannot get the issue date of [pilot] Sumit's licence correct. How do I expect you to go through the entire report? I don't want to see past those three lines. And you have released one line selectively at the order of somebody. Now, we don't know who said to whom. And there is a tonality to a conversation. These are not two people on a Tinder date. So please be responsible," Mr Thomas said. He said they would like to go through the entire report or the digital flight data recorder (DFDR) to throw better light, rather than using people who are non-technical and from a non-civilian background. On a report by the Wall Street Journal that appeared to question the pilot's actions, Mr Thomas said it is likely the American newspaper has been "fed that information". "... And it's our fault. It's not their fault. If I were to be heading this committee, I would have sat there and given a piece of paper to each of those NTSB and Boeing investigators and said, 'sign this, whatever goes out of this room goes out through me and not through anybody else. If you cannot maintain that confidentiality, get out of here'," Mr Thomas said. "[But] they have set the narrative in such a calculated manner that no matter what proof I give you, they will still nail the pilot. They have already done that. Half the world thinks that, and half the world thinks Indian pilots are morons. This has happened because of the shoddy investigation and the shoddy way things have proceeded in India." He referred to the Boeing 737 MAX controversy over the MCAS-linked crashes. "... With the 737 Max crash, what about the first crash? If you had woken up at that time and had a conscience, you would have said, hey, I need something to set my airplane. All right. You kept quiet. Unfortunately, the Ethiopian accident happened. "Luckily, the Ethiopians were much more intelligent than all of us. They did their in-house investigation and that's when it came out that you could not avoid the existence of MCAS, which is a renegade system that crashes your airplane. So there are many, many vested interests, not just one. Let's not just look at the OEM or some investigating body. Everybody who is not telling the truth has something to gain. And this is the narrative that is being told," the veteran pilot told NDTV. The Air India Boeing 787 crashed seconds after take-off from Ahmedabad airport, killing 260 people.
The Hindu
12-07-2025
- The Hindu
Report points to human intervention as cause of crash
The preliminary report on the tragic fatal crash of Air India's London flight (flight no. AI 171) soon after taking off from Ahmedabad on June 12 was released late last night. Did the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) release it voluntarily or under intense International pressure? The stories in Air Current and the Wall Street Journal about fuel switches and the threatened walkout by U.S. National Transportation Safety Board and maybe by the AAIB of the U.K. from the investigation seem to have accelerated the release. The report has given details, but there are several issues that are not covered. For the past one month, the electronic media had been full of YouTube narratives painting the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, the type of the aircraft that crashed, with a black brush. But the aircraft is safe, and several other factors could have caused the crash. When authorities appointed a Director-General of Police in the inquiry committee and threw in a sabotage angle, it harked back to several cases of pilot suicide events. The preliminary report, with several shortcomings, does give an indication in that direction. Page 14 of the report, which has an image from the CCTV footage of AI 171 taking off and an inset, shows that the RAM air turbine was deployed. This image was available to the authorities even on the day of the accident. The digital flight data recorded (DFDR) is not required to identify its deployment. Thirty days of misinformation since the accident have increased anxiety among passengers and stress levels of operating crew on Dreamliners worldwide. Clarity needed The report contains several vague statements. On Page 13, it is clearly mentioned that the captain was pilot monitoring and the first officer was the pilot flying. The pilot flying handles the controls during take-off, and both his hands will be on the control column during take-off and climb, until autopilot is engaged. The only pilot whose hands are free is the pilot monitoring — in this case, the captain. The report attempts to give an impression that either of them could have manipulated the fuel switches. Only the captain could have moved the fuel selector to cut-off position and not the first officer. The report says, 'In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cut off the fuel. The other pilot responded that he did not do so!' This is such an amateurish attempt to hide the fact. It is mandatory for all pilots to wear their headphones during take-off or landing. The cockpit voice recorder will record any transmission from the captain's mike as CAM 1 and the copilot's as CAM 2. The investigator can identify, positively, who said what. Here again, a very poor attempt to divert from facts is seen. Page 11 of the report gives another clear indication of wrong information being mentioned. In Item 7, the details about the captain mentions he is an airline transport pilots licence holder. His licence number is not mentioned. The date of issue of the licence is May 14, 2021. His flying experience on Boeing 787s is given as 8,596.43 hours and as pilot-in-command on this type of aircraft is 8,260.43 hours. To fly any large aircraft, the airline transport licence is mandatory. The captain's licence was issued on May 14, 2021, and the crash was on June 12, 2025. By the Civil Aviation Requirements on flight and duty time limitations of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation, a pilot can fly a maximum of 1,000 hours a year. The report indicates the captain has flown more than 8,200 hours in four years and 21 days. Can one believe any of the figures given in the report as authentic? On the day of the crash, the DGCA had given the experience level of the captain as 8,200 hours and the first office as 1,100 hours. This report gives the captain's total hours as 15,638 hours and the first officer's as 3,403 hours. The report, as in all air accidents over the years, do not conform to International Civil Aviation Organization Annex 13 Standards, and India's aviation sector is thus proving to be an embarrassment to the safety world. Airport services There is no mention of findings on the airport and its deficiencies in mandatory safety features and facilities. The notices to airmen, NOTAMS, issued immediately after the crash clearly mentions RFFS ZERO. This means that rescue and fire fighting services at the airport is zero, meaning all the foam and chemicals required for fighting a fuel fire was zero. ICAO Annex 14, Volume 1 Standards mandates that the Ahmedabad airport required CATEGORY 9 RFFS. When the foam and chemicals used during the firefighting of the crash is replenished to make the RFFS to Category 9, the airport authorities must issue a fresh NOTAM cancelling the earlier one and indicating that Category 9 is available. There was no such NOTAM issued when the airport was opened for operation in just three hours. Flights were departing and arriving with zero firefighting and rescue services available. This is a grave safety violation and the report is silent on airport failings. Every airline that operated flights after the crash without rescue and fire fighting available has endangered the lives of all on board. None of the pilots who operated those flights had not even noticed such a serious deficiency, and had not been aware of the danger to everyone. Data in the digital flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder have been downloaded and the details are available with the investigators. It is the international agencies that have pushed the preliminary report to mention the movement of the fuel control switches. The vague language deployed by the AAIB has left people wondering why the fuel selectors moved, and raised doubts about the safety of the Boeing 787s. It is time India published factual reports and addressed the human factor in monitoring of crew instead of treating them like machines. The regulator, airlines and even judiciary must understand that fatigue and stress of any kind can be a dangerous cocktail. India has suffered a major tragedy, and the families of the departed souls deserve a honest closure. Many more such accidents will follow unless these issues are addressed urgently. Let us move from the ego-filled commercial aviation system to civil aviation with a heart for the human factors affecting the crew. Captain A. (Mohan) Ranganathan is a former airline instructor pilot and aviation safety adviser. He is also a former member of the Civil Aviation Safety Advisory Council, India
Hans India
29-06-2025
- Automotive
- Hans India
Dreamliner crash exposes India's aviation weak links
India's aviation ambitions are also being undermined by inadequate Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul (MRO) infrastructure — especially for wide-body aircraft. The Black Box—comprising the Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR) and Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) — of Air India Flight 171 was recovered on June 13, a day after the crash. The device has suffered extensive damage, and the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) lab at Udaan Bhawan, Delhi, will work on retrieving the information. The lab, billed as a ₹9-crore 'state-of-the-art' facility, was inaugurated just two months ago. If it fails to retrieve the data, the Black Box may be sent to the United States for decoding. While major players like Air India Engineering Services Limited (AIESL), GMR Aero Technic, and Tata Advanced Systems have a strong presence in the MRO space, most of their expertise is centered on narrow-body aircraft like the Airbus A320 and Boeing 737. There is a serious shortage of facilities equipped to handle wide-body aircraft and the latest generation of engines. In addition, many existing MROs need major upgrades to meet international standards. Industry insiders also point to a lack of skilled engineers and high import duties on essential spare parts. Indian carriers continue to rely heavily on foreign facilities for major repairs — delaying turnarounds and raising costs. Airframe & Wing Parts: Firms like Aequs, Dynamatic Technologies, Gardner, and Mahindra Aerospace supply parts for the Airbus A320neo, A330neo, and A350 programs. Cargo doors: Tata Advanced Systems manufactures cargo and bulk cargo doors for the A320neo. Rear Fuselage: Dynamatic Technologies has tied up with Deutsche Aircraft to produce the rear fuselage for the D328eco regional turboprop. Helicopter Fuselages: Tata (in partnership with Boeing) is making fuselages for Apache helicopters, while Mahindra Aerostructures is building those for Airbus' H130. Composite Parts: Boeing sources high-end composite parts from its Bengaluru facility to support its global supply chain. India's aircraft components market touched $16.22 billion in 2024 and is projected to nearly double by 2033, propelled by localisation drives, policy support, and growing global partnerships. Over $2 billion worth of components are exported annually to global giants like Airbus and Boeing—thanks to Indian MSMEs and aerospace start-ups. The Dreamliner crash has jolted India's aviation sector out of its comfort zone. As the country aims for the skies, it must further strengthen the ground it takes off from. India Moves Towards Defence Self-Reliance, Cuts Imports, Boosts Exports Traditionally heavily reliant on foreign suppliers for defence equipment, India has significantly reduced its dependence on defence imports over the last 14 years, marking a major shift in its defence strategy and policy.
