Latest news with #VishwashkumarRamesh
Daily Mirror
14-07-2025
- General
- Daily Mirror
Air India crash mystery in full - medical record probe to chilling fuel theory
A preliminary report into the tragic Air India 171 crash that killed 260 people has sparked fury from grieving families and pilots alike, as it raises more questions than it does answers Families grieving the victims of the Air India plane crash have been left with more questions than answers after the official investigation into the disaster sparked a furious backlash. The preliminary report from India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau, published on Friday, found that both fuel cutoff switches were flipped shortly after takeoff, shutting down the jet's engines. The London-bound Boeing 787 Dreamliner crashed into a crowded neighbourhood just minutes after it took off from Ahmedabad Airport on June 12, exploding into a fireball and killing 241 passengers, as well as 19 people on the ground. Only one man - British-Indian passenger Vishwashkumar Ramesh - survived the horror. While the report doesn't place blame the pilots for the disaster, aviation experts have pointed out that flipping the fuel cutoff switch has to be done manually. But unfounded speculation swirling online about a potential pilot suicide has sparked anger from one pilot association who insist the crew acted in line with their training should not be vilified. Those mourning the loss of loved ones killed in the crash last month have also slammed the report, stating they are still yet to find closure as the mystery around the exact cause continues to deepen. Now, as a probe is launched to look at one of the pilot's medical records and the CEO or Air India speaks out, we look at the unanswered questions in one of the worst aviation disasters in history. Chilling cockpit audio The preliminary report into the disaster revealed the chilling conversation had in the cockpit just moments before the plane crashed and erupted into flames. It sheds light on the moment one of the pilots realised that the fuel cutoff switches had been flipped, leaving the airline with no engine power. Revealing a panicked exchange, the report said: "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." "At about 08:09:05 UTC, one of the pilots transmitted "MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY". The ATCO enquired about the call sign. ATCO did not get any response but observed the aircraft crashing outside the airport boundary and activated the emergency response." Fuel switch mystery Aviation experts have been quick to react to the report's findings that the fuel cutoff switches were seemingly flipped, with one claiming that the crew were "absolutely" the cause. Captain Mohan Ranganthan, one of India's key aviation experts, has suggested this potential cause could have been deliberate. Ranganthan, speaking to NDTV, said: "It has to be done manually, it cannot be done automatically or due to a power failure." These fuel switches have to be operated by pulling each lever upwards to unlock them before being flipped. These switches also have a protective guard bracket to protect them from accidental nudges or bumps. At the time the plane went down, one engine was regaining thrust while the other had relit but had not yet recovered power. Ranganthan added: "The fuel selectors they aren't the sliding type they are always in a slot. They are to pull them out or move them up or down, so the question of them moving inadvertently out of off position doesn't happen. It's a case of deliberate manual selection." He then claimed "nothing else" could have caused that possible explanation, adding: "It had to be deliberately done." Those investigating the crash say that the fuel switchers, which are level-locked, are designed to prevent accidental activation. "It would be almost impossible to pull both switches with a single movement of one hand, and this makes accidental deployment unlikely," an unnamed Canada-based air accidents investigator, told the BBC. Indian pilots slam 'disturbing' claims A group of Indian pilots have issued a furious statement in response to the report and the speculation it has sparked online. Defending the actions of the Air India crew, The Indian Commercial Pilots' Association (ICPA) say that staff "acted in line with their training and responsibilities under challenging conditions and the pilots shouldn't be vilified based on conjecture". "To casually suggest pilot suicide without verified evidence is a gross violation of ethical reporting and a disservice to the dignity of the profession," it fumed. The preliminary investigation does not offer any clarity on how the switches were moved before the crash, but social media users and some experts have been quick to speculate about the role of the pilots. "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," the pilot association said. "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." Troubling warning six years before crash It has also been claimed that Air India was warned about wrongly installed fuel switches more than six years before the terrifying disaster. The preliminary report into the crash said in December 2018, the US air regulator Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) warned airlines that fuel switches had been installed in some Boeing 737s "with the locking feature disengaged". "If the locking feature is disengaged, the switch can be moved between the two positions without lifting the switch during transition, and the switch would be exposed to the potential of inadvertent operation," the FAA warned in a Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin. "Inadvertent operation of the switch could result in an unintended consequence, such as an in-flight engine shutdown." It recommended airlines inspect the switches, including "whether the fuel control switch can be moved between the two positions without lifting up the switch". Air India suggested such inspections were not carried out because the FAA's bulletin was "advisory and not mandatory", according to the report. The AAIB report says the fuel control switch design, including the locking feature, is similar on various Boeing airplane models including part number 4TL837-3D fitted in the 787-8 Dreamliner, the model that crashed in Ahmedabad. Switches are 'safe' As the preliminary report continues to rattle the industry, the US aviation regulator has been forced to step in and clarify that the fuel control switches in Boeing planes are safe. In response to Air India having been warned about wrongly installed switches six years ago, the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) noted that its own 2018 advisory "was based on reports that the fuel control switches were installed with the locking feature disengaged" - but it stated that it does not believe this makes the planes unsafe. "Although the fuel control switch design, including the locking feature, is similar on various Boeing airplane models, the FAA does not consider this issue to be an unsafe condition that would warrant an Airworthiness Directive on any Boeing airplane models, including the Model 787," said the authority, according to a note seen by the BBC. "The FAA will continue to share relevant information with foreign civil aviation authorities as appropriate." Medical records probe It emerged today that the medical records of one of the pilots of the doomed Air India plane are being examined after it has been claimed he suffered from poor mental health. Captain Sumeet Sabharwal was piloting the Boeing 787 Dreamliner when it crashed and aviation expert Captain Ranganathan has suggested that 'several' other pilots had allegedly claimed that he had suffered from poor mental health. Speaking to The Daily Telegraph, he claimed: "He had taken time off from flying in the last three to four years. He had taken medical leave for that." The publication said that while Air India declined to comment, an official working with their parent company, Tata Group, said that Captain Sabharwal had not taken any medical leave, with the preliminary report failing to obtain any significant findings. They added that within the last two years, both pilots onboard the flight had passed the Class I medical exam, which makes an evaluation of their psycho-physical capabilities. Air India CEO speaks out In a bid to ease growing concerns, the CEO of Air India Campbell Wilson has clarified that the preliminary report into the disaster found no mechanical or maintenance issues with the plane or its engines. An internal memo shows Mr Wilson explaining that the airline's whole 787 fleet had been inspected immediately after the crash and all planes were deemed fit for service, the Independent reports. He also stated that the pilots had passed their mandatory pre-flight breathalyser test and there were no observations regarding their medical status. Mr Wilson added that the investigation was "far from over". Grieving families desperate for truth Families of the Air India crash victims have slated the 'vague' initial investigation as they demand more clarity on the exact cause of the disaster. A relative of Dhir and Heer Baxi, who were travelling home to London after surprising their grandmother for her birthday when they died in the crash, said he was not satisfied by the report's findings. Ishan Baxi, the cousin of the two victims, said: "We're still hoping for a more transparent and honest investigation that doesn't shy away from addressing possible mechanical flaws or lapses in protocol to avoid future potential accidents. "I just hope the final report brings full clarity on what exactly failed and who's accountable. It shouldn't hide behind vague terms." And the loved ones grieving a family of three who died in the crash - Akeel Nanabawa, his wife, Hannaa Vorajee and their four-year-old daughter, Sara Nanabawa - issued a statement. "Moving forwards, we require honesty, transparency and an unwavering commitment to uncovering the full truth," they said. "We seek justice and answers, both of which are essential for us to find any sense of closure. We accept God's fate, but knowing what happened will help ease our hearts and allow us to begin the long journey of healing. 'Above all, we hope that by pursuing the truth, no other family will ever have to endure the shock, uncertainty, and profound sorrow that we have lived through this past month."
The Print
12-07-2025
- General
- The Print
Air India crash spotlights 2018 advisory on Boeing switches installed with locking feature disengaged
On 12 June, Air India Flight 171, scheduled to fly from Ahmedabad to London, tragically crashed soon after take-off, resulting in the death of all 241 individuals on board, including 229 passengers and 12 crew members. The sole survivor was passenger Vishwashkumar Ramesh, who escaped through the emergency exit. Considering people on the ground, at least 275 lives were lost. This design of fuel control switches with the locking mechanism is also present in other Boeing models, including the 787 series. B787-8 aircraft VT-ANB, the Dreamliner that crashed, has the same component, 4TL837-3D, as confirmed in the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau's (AAIB's) preliminary report. Aircraft that run on two engines have two toggle switches for fuel control. New Delhi: Operators of Boeing Model 737 had reported to the Boeing Company that the fuel control switches installed in their aircraft have the locking mechanism disengaged—a feature that leaves room for inadvertent operation—according to a December 2018 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin. The AAIB report refers to a cockpit conversation between the two AI 171 pilots regarding the fuel switches. Seconds after the flight took off, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel switches transitioned from the 'run' position to the 'cut off' position, one after another, within a gap of one second, the report says. One of the pilots asked the other why he 'cut off'. The latter replied that he did not. Speaking to ThePrint, a pilot—familiar with the aircraft—explained that under no circumstances can fuel switches move on their own, and only in case of dual-engine failure, both switches are 'cut off' and 'run' in a cycle. Experts say the fuel switches remain guarded in a locking mechanism, leaving little to no room for inadvertently applying pressure. Moreover, the Enhanced Airborne Flight Recorders (EAFR) data of AI 171 shows the switches of both engines of AI 171 transitioned back from 'cut off' to 'run', indicating that the pilots attempted to save the aircraft seconds before the crash. One engine restarted, but the other did not. The two-page FAA bulletin—sent to registered owners and operators of several Boeing models, including the 787 series—asked them to inspect the fuel control switch locking feature for possible disengagement. It, however, did not come with an airworthiness directive as data was limited, and the feature was considered 'not' unsafe. The preliminary report on the 12 June crash mentions that Air India informed investigators that the suggested inspection did not take place for AI 171 since it was not mandatory. The background of the bulletin, however, mentioned that fuel control switches have a locking feature, which should remain engaged to prevent 'inadvertent operation that could result in unintended switch movement between the fuel supply and fuel cutoff positions'. So, when the lock is engaged, the pilot must lift the switch to change its position. However, if the locking feature remains disengaged, the switch can move between the two positions 'without lifting the switch'. The switch remains exposed to potential 'inadvertent operation' and could have an 'unintended consequence, such as an in-flight engine shutdown'. (Edited by Madhurita Goswami) Also Read: Inside the final moments of Air India 171—the hrs leading up to take-off & the 32 seconds before crash
The Print
12-07-2025
- General
- The Print
Inside the final moments of Air India 171—the hrs leading up to take-off & the 32 seconds before crash
The report reveals what happened in the run-up to the aircraft take-off and the crucial 32 seconds after its take-off. AI 171, scheduled to fly from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick, tragically crashed soon after take-off, resulting in the loss of 275 lives. This includes all 241 individuals aboard—229 passengers and 12 crew members—and people on the ground. The sole survivor was passenger Vishwashkumar Ramesh, who managed to escape through the emergency exit. New Delhi: The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) has released a preliminary report of the initial investigation into the 12 June crash of Air India Flight AI 171 in Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Before take-off 11:17:00 IST The aircraft concerned—a Boeing 787-8, VT-ANB—touched down at Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport and was parked at Bay 34. 11:55:00 The crew of flight AI 171 arrived at the airport, and breath analyser tests found all of them fit to fly. 12:10:00 The aircraft was released for flight after Air India's on-duty Aircraft Maintenance Engineer carried out troubleshooting, according to the Flight Information Manual. The crew of the previous flight, AI423, using the aircraft, had made a 'pilot defect report' entry related to a stabiliser sensor—status message 'STAB POS XDCR'—in the tech log. 12:35:00 The boarding gate CCTV recording showed the AI171 crew arriving for duty. The flight crew included a pilot-in-command holding an airline transport pilot licence, a co-pilot holding a commercial pilot licence, and 10 cabin crew. 13:10:00 The scheduled start time for AI171-related operations. The co-pilot was supposed to fly, and the senior pilot was to monitor the flight. They arrived in Ahmedabad from Mumbai on 11 June and had adequate rest. 13:13:00 AI171—a Boeing 787-8, VT-ANB—requested pushback and startup. There were 230 passengers on board. Fuel on board was 54,200 kg, and the take-off weight was 2,13,401 kg—within the limit allowed. There were no 'dangerous goods' on board the aircraft. 13:13:13 Air Traffic Control (ATC) approved pushback. 13:16:59 ATC approved engine startup clearance. 13:18:38 ATC queried if the aircraft required the full length of the runway, and the aircraft confirmed the requirement of the full length of Runway 23. The aircraft was observed departing from Bay 34. 13:25:15 The aircraft requested taxi clearance, and the ATC granted it. 13:26:08 Aircraft taxied from the bay towards Runway 23 via Taxiway R4. 13:32:03 The aircraft control was transferred from 'Ground' to 'Tower'. 13:33:45 Aircraft was instructed to line up on Runway 23. 13:37:33 Aircraft was cleared for take-off from Runway 23. The wind was coming from 240 degrees (west-southwest) at a speed of six knots. 13:37:37 AI171 started rolling. 13:38:33 The aircraft crossed the take-off decision speed (V1)—the point beyond which take-off must continue even if an issue arises—and subsequently achieved 153 knots indicated airspeed (IAS), indicating a commitment to take-off and sufficient speed for liftoff or rotation, according to the enhanced airborne flight recorder (EAFR). 13:38:35 The aircraft reached the Vr speed of 155 knots—the rotation speed at which the pilot begins to gently lift the nose wheel off the runway, initiating the aircraft's take-off and transition to flight. 13:38:39 The aircraft air/ground sensors transitioned to air mode, consistent with liftoff. Everything was normal up to this point. After take-off 13:38:42 IST The aircraft reached its maximum recorded airspeed of 180 knots indicated airspeed, representing the highest speed measured by the aircraft's instruments. Immediately after, the fuel switches for Engine 1 and Engine 2 were turned off one after the other, just one second apart. As the engines stopped getting fuel, their speeds began dropping from the take-off levels. According to the cockpit audio, one pilot asked the other why he turned the fuel off, and the other pilot replied that he didn't do it. The airport's CCTV footage showed the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) deployed right after the plane took off during its initial climb. At the time, there were no signs of birds near the flight path. The aircraft began to lose height before it even passed the airport's perimeter fence. 13:38:47 Both engines slowed down below the lowest speed required to run properly, so the small emergency turbine called the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) started working to supply hydraulic power and keep important systems functioning, according to the EAFR. 13:38:52 The fuel switch for Engine 1 was turned back on from the off position (cutoff) to the on position (run), meaning fuel started flowing to the engine again, according to the EAFR. 13:38:54 The Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) inlet door started to open automatically, i.e., the system was getting ready to start the APU on its own. 13:38:56 The fuel switch for Engine 2 was turned back on from off (cutoff) to on (run). When this happens during flight, the engine's automatic control system—FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control)—takes over to restart the engine and bring its power back by managing the fuel and ignition. The temperature at the back of both engines—EGT (Exhaust Gas Temperature)—went up, indicating that the engines were trying to restart. Engine 1 stopped slowing down and started getting back to normal speed. Engine 2 managed to restart but kept slowing down, so the system kept adding fuel again and again to try to speed it up and recover properly. 13:39:11 The EAFR recording stopped. Crash 13:39:05 IST One of the pilots transmitted 'Mayday Mayday Mayday'. The air traffic control officer (ATCO) enquired about the call sign. The ATCO did not get any response but observed the aircraft crashing outside the airport boundary and activated the emergency response. 13:44:44 Crash fire tender left the airport premises for rescue and firefighting, with the fire and rescue services of the local administration joining them. (Edited by Madhurita Goswami) Also Read: Why do airplanes still crash?
Yahoo
12-07-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Fuel switches cut off before Air India crash that killed 260, preliminary report says
A preliminary report into the Air India crash last month casts light on the pilots' actions Both fuel control switches - which are used to turn the engines off - were moved to the cut-off position, the report says It says that in the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why he "did the cut-off". The other pilot, it says, responded that he did not do so It is not specified which voice is which. At the time the aircraft took off, the co-pilot was flying the plane, while the captain was monitoring An Air India spokesperson says it continues to "fully cooperate" with authorities At least 260 people were killed in the crash, the sole survivor - British national Vishwashkumar Ramesh - escaped the wreckage through an opening in the fuselage Fuel switches cut off before Air India crash that killed 260, preliminary report says
New Indian Express
11-07-2025
- General
- New Indian Express
Both engines of Air India Flight 171 shut down almost after take-off: Preliminary report
How did the Air India Flight 171 scheduled to fly from Ahmedabad to London June 12 crash almost instantly after take off, killing 241 of the 242 people on board? A preliminary report of the investigation has confirmed that both engines of the plane did shut down within seconds of take-off. An excerpt from the report noted this: "The aircraft achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 Knots IAS (Indicated Airspeed) at about 08:08:42 UTC (Universal Time - 1:38 pm IST) 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 cutoff. "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." The report doesn't identify which pilot said what, but states, according to the BBC, that the switches were then moved back into their normal inflight position. This would have automatically started the process of reviving the engines. The report observes that one engine was "in the process of regaining thrust at the time the aircraft crashed. The other was relit but was not yet regaining thrust". The preliminary report also did not find any "significant fault with the plane or its engines". It noted that "at this stage of investigation, there are no recommended actions to B787-8 and/or GE GEnx-1B engine operators and manufacturers, suggesting that no significant fault has been found with the plane or its engines." The report went on to underline that no conclusions have been drawn and that the investigations are continuing. The lone 'miracle' survivor of the crash was Vishwashkumar Ramesh, a British national. One hundred sixty nine Indians, 52 Britishers, seven Portuguese nationals, one Canadian and 12 crew members were among the 241 dead.
