Latest news with #VishwasKumarRamesh
India.com
20-07-2025
- India.com
Air India plane crash: New revelations emerge suggesting fuel cut off was..., tail section was not...
New Delhi: After the initial report of the Ahmedabad plane crash came out, the western media started blaming the pilots. It was being claimed in the western media that one pilot had deliberately cut off the fuel supply to the engine. However, now a new angle has come out in this investigation, which has completely rejected the claims of the western media. Some shocking evidence has been found from the wreckage of Air India's plane AI171, which crashed within seconds of taking off in Ahmedabad on June 12. The rear part (tail) of the plane was not burnt in the fire, which shows signs of electric fire. What does the new report say? According to investigating officials, there was a disturbance in the power supply of the plane before the crash. Vishwas Kumar Ramesh, the only surviving passenger in the accident, has also told that before the plane crash, the lights of the plane were going off repeatedly, which indicates a fault in the power supply. What happened in the rear end of plane? The tail of the plane was saved from the fire in the plane crash and the body of a cabin crew member has also been recovered here, who was tied with a seat belt and died due to the collision. This body, found 72 hours after the accident, had decayed due to firefighting chemicals. However, it became clear that the objects present in the rear part of the plane were also safe. What kind of fault was it? Before flying from Ahmedabad to London, this flight went from Delhi to Ahmedabad. During this time, there was a technical fault in the STAB POS XDCR of the plane, which was fixed in Ahmedabad. This component was present in the rear part of the plane. Apart from this, the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) present in the tail of the plane is also safe, which is used to start the engine and provide power backup. There are also signs of electric fire in this part of the plane. The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) has kept all the parts safely in Ahmedabad, which are being closely examined. What is fuel cut off theory? According to aviation experts, the fuel cut off must have happened due to disruption in power supply. Possibly, in an attempt to restart the plane, the pilots may have thought of turning the fuel on-off, but after cutting off, they did not get a chance to run, and the plane crashed before that. It takes only 1 second for fuel cut off and running. In such a situation, even if a pilot had cut off the fuel by mistake, the other pilot had enough time to restart the fuel. It is clear from this that fuel cut off is not the whole truth of the plane crash.
Hindustan Times
13-07-2025
- Hindustan Times
Allegations of human error 'deeply insensitive': Pilots' body after Air India crash report
In the wake of the Air India crash report, the Indian Commercial Pilots' Association has raised its concerns regarding the accusations against the pilots of flight AI 171. Air India flight 171 was headed for London's Gatwick airport on June 12, when it crashed minutes after taking off from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport in Ahmedabad, Gujarat.(PTI) In an official statement, the ICPA called the accusations and allegations against the pilots and flight crew a "gross violation" and "disservice to the profession." "In the aftermath of this incident, we are deeply disturbed by speculative narratives emerging in sections of the media and public discourse—particularly the reckless and unfounded insinuation of pilot suicide," said ICPA. Also Read: Pilots' body rebuts AI crash preliminary report, hints at bias "Let us be unequivocally clear: there is absolutely no basis for such a claim at this stage, and invoking such a serious allegation based on incomplete or preliminary information is not only irresponsible—it is deeply insensitive to the individuals and families involved," it added further. Any mention of pilot error or suicide "in the absence of verified evidence is a gross violation of ethical reporting and a disservice to the dignity of the profession." Air India flight 171 was headed for London's Gatwick airport on June 12, when it crashed minutes after taking off from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport in Ahmedabad, Gujarat. The flight, which had 242 passengers on board (including cabin crew), crashed into BJ Medical College in Ahmedabad. The accident, which is among the deadliest aviation accidents recorded, killed a total of 260 people - 241 on board and 19 on the ground at the crash site. The sole survivor of the plane has been identified as a 40-year-old British national Vishwas Kumar Ramesh. Air India crash report released The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) has released its 15-page preliminary report on the Air India crash on Saturday, July 12. In the report, the sequence of events for the ill-fated flight was laid out, offering the first official insight into what may have happened. Also Read: Key to fatal Air India crash mystery: 32 seconds in flight deck As per the report, the fuel to both engines was cut off shortly after takeoff. Based on the AAIB report, the fuel control switches were found in the "cutoff" position. "At about 08:08:42 UTC (1:38pm, 42 seconds) 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,' stated the report. '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 sp," the report added further.
The Print
13-07-2025
- General
- The Print
Air India crash should push India to create independent board for transport safety oversight
I was on a 'deadheading' flight to Surat (VASU) just as the first newsbreaks of the crash erupted on social media. Fortunately, our crew were on 'airplane mode' and blissfully unaware about the horrific crash till we landed at Surat about an hour later. The immediate aftermath of any major air accident is often dominated by shock, confusion, devastation, (mass) casualties and, in a country like India with 1.4 bn population, a flood of curious onlookers and volunteers trying to help or rescue. Such first aid efforts must soon make way for professional rescue and fire fighting efforts. This should be followed by securing of the accident site for initial investigation. AAIB spells it out clearly on their website: ' the primary aim for the initial investigation is to gather and preserve perishable evidence, for subsequent analysis, that may be lost over time and not available to the Investigators after a delay '. This is the first fatal accident and hull loss of Boeing's Dreamliner which, as per Boeing Company website 'has carried more than one billion passengers, faster than any other widebody jet in aviation history' in over 5 million flights. Air India's ill-fated VT-ANB was manufactured in 2013 and had flown 41868 hours. On June 12, 2025, VT-ANB, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner operated by Air India as AI-171 from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick, crashed soon after takeoff from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport's (VAAH) Runway 23 at about 0809 UTC (1339 IST). Amateur videos, CCTV grabs and eyewitness accounts indicated a distinct loss of thrust immediately after liftoff. The aircraft went into the ground wings level, nose up, landing gear down and impacted BJ Medical College Hostel, about 0.9 NM from departure end of RW 23. 241 of the 242 onboard (12 crew + 229 pax) and 19 on the ground perished in the crash. One passenger, Mr Vishwas Kumar Ramesh, miraculously survived with minor injuries and walked away from the burning wreckage (report classifies his injuries as 'serious'). Disaster tourism impacts investigation A team from AAIB headed by the DG himself reached Ahmedabad on the same day. It is likely that dusk/night would have set in by that time, leaving the quick reaction team from AAIB struggling to retrieve evidence from a site literally and metaphorically draped in darkness. This is about the time in India most VVIPs finalise their plan to visit accident sites. As expected, PM Modi and his entourage arrived at the crash site the very next day (Jun 13). Amidst a mountain of debris, flaming avcat, strewn body parts and pieces of wreckage screaming 'evidence', I leave it to the readers to estimate what impact such kind of catastrophe porn will have on an investigative process in its most important and fragile phase. They were literally walking all over the evidence. Such visits by political leaders are party-agnostic and maybe meant to assuage shocked citizens but it takes a bulldozer to the investigative process. Careful collection & preservation of all evidence is key to any investigation. Anyone not directly involved with rescue or investigation, incl VIPs, should keep away from the crash site. It does not happen in any part of the developed world. It should be proscribed by law in my view. AAIB India In India, the authority designated by the State as responsible for aircraft accident and incident investigations within the framework of ICAO Annex 13 is the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) headed by a Director General (DG). The AAIB works as an attached office to Government of India, Ministry of Civil Aviation. The DG, AAIB reports to Secretary, Ministry of Civil Aviation. AAIB India is relatively new, so is the current DG, an IAF officer on deputation to the AAIB who took over on 18 Dec 2023. The investigation is conducted under the framework defined in Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Rules, 2017. Lack of timely updates After such an accident with mass casualties, victims' families, air travelers, and all stakeholders deserve timely updates on how the accident investigation is proceeding. Nobody expects a running commentary but in the absence of timely factual data from authorities, there is a serious risk of conspiracy theories and speculation running riot. That is exactly what happened after AI-171. An information blackout followed till release of the first update on 26th June, clear two weeks after the crash. By this time, keyboard warriors and air crash influencers flooded the space with speculation, notching up millions of views per video and driving the 'narrative war'. The sketchy information shared by Indian media (sample below) only added to the embarrasment. For instance, in which country does air accident investigation wait for the prime minister's suggestion on due process to be followed? There were absolutely no briefs, no updates worth the loss. The usual drama & violation of crash site by ministers for photo ops, wreckage snagging in trees during transportation etc. inspired little confidence. Meanwhile a news scoop by a foreign media The Air Current couple of days prior to release of the preliminary report by AAIB at about 0200 IST on 12 Jun 25 exposed the leaky system we have. Here is what I can glean from the preliminary report Technical Scrutiny of the aircraft journey log book detailed in the prelim report does not indicate any major issues. It is not unusual for aircraft to fly with Minimum Equipment List (MEL) invoked. It includes equipment 'which may be inoperative and yet maintain an acceptable level of safety by appropriate conditions and limitations'. The approved company MEL is drawn up from the manufacturer's Master MEL and duly approved by the regulator (in this case DGCA). The category of MEL indicates the repair interval of the equipment and permissible window for operation with MEL invoked. VT-ANB was flying with four Cat C and one Cat A MEL invoked. None of them appear to have a direct bearing on the accident. All applicable airworthiness directives (AD) and Alert Service Bulletins (ASB) were complied with on the aircraft and its systems. Fuel samples taken from the bowsers and tanks used to refuel the aircraft were tested and found satisfactory. The aircraft was fully configured for takeoff, well within performance limits for that day, and used full usable length of the runway. This puts paid to needless speculation around fuel contamination, early flap retraction etc. that flew thick and fast in the wake of the accident. Pilots Both pilots were qualified and in current flying practice. The total cockpit experience was a solid 19000h (9700h on type). The pilot-in-command was highly experienced with multiple endorsements including B787, B777 and A310. He was the Pilot Monitoring (PM) while the copilot with about 3400h (1128h on type) was the Pilot Flying (PF). Both pilots had adequate rest period before their duty roster and cleared preflight breathalyser tests. Postmortem examination findings of the crew are being analysed 'to corroborate aeromedical findings with the engineering appreciation'. This is usual practice in any accident investigation. EAFR VT-ANB was equipped with dual Enhanced Airborne Flight Recorders (EAFR) in two distinct locations, forward and aft. The prelim report analyses are likely based on data retrieved from the forward EAFR, which owing to its independent power source continues to record digital flight data and cockpit voice even in the event of a total power loss. This will be important in reconstructing the events preceding and immediately following the dual engine rollback due to its uninterrupted recording capability. The aft EAFR suffered extensive damage and could not be downloaded, as per the report. Also read: Uttarakhand crash shows how cheap a pilgrim's life is. Helicopter rides cheaper than pony The final moments The aircraft started up, taxied out, backtracked and lined up on Runway 23 as per normal procedure. The takeoff roll commenced at 08:07:37 UTC and liftoff was achieved roughly a minute later at 08:08:39 UTC. The report has time-stamped data of critical speeds achieved during the takeoff roll (V1, Vr, V2). There seems to be nothing unusual while the aircraft was still in 'ground' mode. The accident sequence unravelled about 3 seconds after liftoff, immediately after the aircraft's air/ground sensors transitioned to 'air' mode. The highlighted para from AAIB report below is likely to be the focal point of further investigation: 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. The Engine N1 and N2 began to decrease from their take-off values as the fuel supply to the engines was cut off. From that point onwards, AI-171 was doomed. The first cockpit exchange following the uncommanded engine roll back is also very unusual given that both pilots would be scanning areas in and out of the cockpit that doesn't include the thrust lever quadrant. Even if the fuel switches move from RUN to CUTOFF, it would have set off a series of failure captions, audio voice warnings and loss of thrust that demand immediate action rather than the query recorded in the report below: 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. Thrust lever and fuel switch movement till impact indicate a last-ditch effort to relight the engine, which includes recycling the fuel switches from CUTOFF to RUN. By then it was too late. No wide-body aircraft can safely recover from a dual engine failure at that low height. Impact, death and destruction were imminent, but there was no sign of any sharp change in attitude or a wing drop. One of the pilots transmitted a MAYDAY call 5 seconds before impact. The crew likely flew the aircraft all the way till impact. There is no sign of any kind of startle response or pilot incapacitation. How/why did the fuel control switches roll back? There is science and human factors behind the engineering design of every single switch in a cockpit. A host of safeguards such as location, shape, tactile feel, guard, detent, etc. are used to reduce or preclude inadvertent or incorrect operation of any safety critical switch or lever. It is inconceivable that ANY sane pilot would inadvertently or intentionally move a critical engine control to CUTOFF at such a point during takeoff. The trans-cockpit authority gradient was hardly shallow with a senior 15000h PIC and a 3400h first officer. Since the younger, less experienced copilot was the PF, the query 'why did he (you) cutoff' likely came from the PM. The fuel switches are nowhere near the yoke; there is no reason for the PF to reach down to the two fuel switches at that critical point in takeoff. His reply that 'he (i) did not do so' also leaves a critical question unanswered — was the 'transition'of fuel switches from RUN to CUTOFF commanded or uncommanded? The last minute relight effort also runs counter to a deliberate shut down. It also bears mention that no guarded switch with pull detent will roll back on its own. This is where the crux of the investigation lies, going forward. See the highlighted extract from the report attached below: Safety bulletins unactioned It is apparent from the report that Boeing in their wisdom decided that providing such a critical switch (with potential for inadvertent operation) with a 'pull-detent' or mechanical lock should be a Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin rather than an Airworthiness Directive or Alert Service Bulletin. This by itself is questionable. Air India, the Maharaja who had just found its new clothes, decided to not implement Boeing's SAIB NM-18-33, thus setting the stage for this disaster (as it appears at this stage). Another line from the report, viz. 'there has been no defect reported pertaining to the fuel control switch since 2023 on VT-ANB' raises more questions than it answers. This line when read with reference to SAIB NM-18-33 of Dec 2018 reveals possible operation of fuel switch in an unintended manner since Air India had not complied with the SAIB. These switches also double up as engine start switches and are used only twice in a normal flight (one for starting, second for switching off at the ramp). Without acting on SAIB NM-18-33, did Boeing and Air India set up the 'black swan' event of uncommanded or inadvertent operation of the two switches is something AAIB will have to probe deep into. On first look, this is going the B737 Max route. The usual suspects — Boeing, FAA, DGCA, and a transitioning major carrier, are at play. So are pilot shaming, conspiracy theories, scale of tragedy & dependency on Boeing, NTSB & FAA on crucial aspects related to airworthiness and certification of a critical flight/engine control. A lot to unpack. Are we prepared? AAIB has a lot on their plate with this crash. It will test the bandwidth of this nascent organisation that runs key departments on borrowed expertise. Implanting a serving air force officer cannot be expected to lift the agency out of the deep morass DGCA and MoCA have created for itself and its progeny over the years. My immediate thought after news of the crash broke was 'are they even prepared for the scale of this tragedy?' People vested with such serious, technical, investigative work should not be beholden to ministers & bureaucrats. William P. Rogers, during a pause in the proceedings of the Rogers Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster of Jan 28, 1986 famously said of an empaneled Nobel Laureate SME member: 'Feynman is becoming a real pain in the ass.' As per AAIB's preliminary report, VT-ANB crash investigation team comprises 'Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh as Investigator-in-Charge, Mr. Jasbir Singh Larhga as Chief Investigator and, Mr. Vipin Venu Varakoth, Mr. Veeraragavan K and Mr. Vaishnav Vijayakumar as Investigators. Experienced Pilots, Engineers, Aviation Medicine Specialist, Aviation Psychologist and Flight Recorder Specialists have been taken on board as Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to assist the Investigation in the area of their domain expertise'. The area of expertise of investigation team or SMEs has not been mentioned, but one expects AAIB to cover all bases while also ensuring no conflict of interest. Under a MoCA run by bureaucrats, with a regime known to be economical with facts & hard data, the only hope for a deep, impartial investigation rests with at least a few 'pain in the a**' members who are loyal only to science and truth, not any maharaja (emperor). Let us not forget how biased media & Boeing aficionados tried to push the blame for 737 Max on Lion Air & Ethiopian pilots till evidence hit them on the nose. It is far too early, indeed malicious, to blame pilots of AI171. Let AAIB do its work. GoI on its part must ensure zero interference. Much as the preliminary report sounds ominous in content, stranger things have happened. Remember 'kid in the cockpit'? AI-171 is a national tragedy, but hopefully one that should spur India to set up an independent transportation safety board that will serve the cause of promoting safety across ALL modes of transportation, including space travel. The existing system of silos is incompatible with needs & aspirations of 1.4bn. In closing, with the available information at this stage, I complement AAIB India on not bucking to pressure, quietly doing their duty and presenting factual information within the prescribed framework of ICAO Annex 13. I look forward to the final report with a hope spelt out by former NTSB Chair Robert Sumwalt: 'human error should be the start point of any investigation and not its end'. Cdr KP Sanjeev Kumar is a former Navy test pilot and alumnus of Air Force Test Pilots School, ASTE. He has flown over 5,000 hours on 24 types of aircraft and helicopters. He calls himself 'full-time aviator, part-time writer' and blogs at Views are personal.
Hindustan Times
12-07-2025
- General
- Hindustan Times
'Doesn't talk, struggles to sleep': Lone Air India crash survivor battles trauma, taking psychiatric help
Probably the luckiest man alive for some, Vishwas Kumar Ramesh, the lone survivor of the June 12 Air India crash that killed 241 others on board and several others who were on ground, is reportedly struggling to cope up with the trauma of the harrowing day. Lone survivor of the AI-171 flight crash, Vishwas Ramesh Kumar, mourns the death of his brother Ajay Ramesh(ANI Grab ) Vishwas Kumar Ramesh was the only one out of the 242 passengers of the ill-fated London-Ahmedabad flight who walked out of the crash alive, shocking the world. He is now taking a psychiatrist's help to find a way of coping with the traumatic experience, his cousin said, according to news agency PTI. The London-bound Boeing 787-7 Dreamliner went down just seconds after taking off from Ahmedabad airport on June 12. Vishwas, seated in 11A near the emergency exit, was the only passenger who survived, with was his own brother, Ajay, being among the 241 others onboard who died. Another 19 people were killed on the ground. Vishwas Kumar Ramesh devastated The aftermath has left Vishwas emotionally devastated. Vishwas's cousin said he wakes up in the middle of the night and finds it difficult to fall back asleep. "Many people, including our relatives living abroad, call us to inquire about Vishwas's well-being. But he does not talk to anyone. He is yet to overcome the mental trauma of the crash and the death of his brother," PTI quoted his cousin Sunny as saying. "He still wakes up in the middle of the night and finds it difficult to fall asleep again. We took him to a psychiatrist two days ago to find remedy. He has not made any plans yet to return to London because his treatment has just begun," Sunny added. Vishwas was discharged from Ahmedabad Civil Hospital on June 17 - the same day his family received Ajay's body after a DNA match. The brothers had been returning to London after visiting their family in Diu, part of the Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu. In a video widely shared on social media, Vishwas was seen carrying his brother's mortal remains on his shoulders to the cremation ground in Diu on June 18. This was just one of the many videos of Vishwas post the crash that stunned the world. Some videos from the crash day showed Vishwas walking out of the tragedy site. In another viral video taken just after the crash, Vishwas is seen walking toward an ambulance, away from the debris. Surviving that moment. Prime Minister Narendra Modi met Vishwas at the hospital a day after the crash and enquired about his condition. In an interview to Doordarshan after the Air India crash, Vishwas recounted the terrifying seconds before impact. "Luckily, the portion of the plane where I was seated fell on the ground floor of the [medical college] hostel premises after the plane crash-landed. When I saw that the door was broken, I told myself that I can try and get out. Eventually, I came out," he had told reporters.
Hindustan Times
12-07-2025
- General
- Hindustan Times
Air India crash: Fuel switches abruptly moving to 'cut-off' may have triggered calamity, reveals AAIB preliminary report
A month since India's worst aviation accident in decades, answers of a vague nature have finally began trickling in to explain Air India flight 171's crash on June 12 this year. The London-bound Boeing 787 Dreamliner was airborne for less than 40 seconds after taking off from Ahmedabad's Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport, before it nosedived into the hostel block of the city's B. J. Medical College. The catastrophe saw only 1 survivor, Vishwas Kumar Ramesh, with the remaining 229 passengers on board, 12 crew members perishing. The on-ground casualties for the crash was estimated to be 19, bringing the total death toll to 260. AAIB preliminary report finds fuel being 'cut-off' to Air India flight 171, seconds before crash In the early hours of July 12, the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau released its 15-page preliminary report, which reveals the trigger behind the crash to be quite ominous and inexplicable. As per cockpit voice recordings retrieved, one pilot realised that the fuel switches, set to 'run' when a plane takes off and is airborne, had been switched to 'cut-off'. This prompted him to ask the other pilot, "Why did you cut off?", to which the latter replied, "I did not do so". For clarity, the fuel switches of a plane are set to 'cut-off' following the plane's landing and at no point in-between. Aviation expert John Cox has weighed in on the situation via Reuters, clarifying that a pilot could not accidentally move the fuel switches. The seemingly foolproof mechanism is actually much more nuanced. A BBC report outlines that the fuel switches are actually safeguarded with a lever-lock mechanism, specifically designed to prevent accidental activation. Speaking to them, a Canada-based air accidents investigator further affirmed, "It would be almost impossible to pull both switches with a single movement of one hand, and this makes accidental deployment unlikely". Following the crash, Boeing, owing to its growing history of faulty aircraft, came under severe backlash. Their official statement on the matter so far reads, "We will defer to the AAIB to provide information about AI171, in adherence with the United Nations International Civil Aviation Organization protocol known as Annex 13".
