Latest news with #flightAI171
BBC News
20 hours ago
- General
- BBC News
Air India: Black box found at Ahmedabad crash site as families wait for answers
A black box has been found at the site of the Air India plane crash in Ahmedabad, India's civil aviation minister said on Friday. The flight data recorder was recovered within 28 hours by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), Ram Mohan Naidu Kinjarapu confirmed. All but one of the 242 people on the London-bound flight died when it crashed into a residential area less than 60 seconds after take-off on Thursday. An official told the BBC that at least eight people on the ground were also killed."The [recovery of the black box] marks an important step forward in the investigation" and will "significantly aid the inquiry" into the disaster, Mr Kinjarapu said. Live updates as investigators search plane's wreckageBBC Verify on what could have caused the crashEverything we know so far about flight AI171Watch: How the day unfoldedAs details continue to emerge, who are the victims?Analysis: What does this mean for Boeing? Planes usually carry two black boxes - small but tough electronic data recorders. One records flight data, such as altitude and speed. The other records sound from the cockpit, so investigators can hear what the pilots are saying and listen for any unusual is leading the inquiry into the cause of the crash, helped by teams from the US and UK. Boeing's chief executive, Kelly Ortberg, said the company was supporting the investigation. Air India said there were 169 Indian nationals, 53 Britons, seven Portuguese and one Canadian on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft when it crashed moments after taking off from Ahmedabad's Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport at 13:39 local time (08:09 GMT). It was scheduled to land at London's Gatwick airport at 18:25 Friday, the wreckage was still scattered across the crash site, including the blackened wing of the plane, with large pieces of the aircraft stuck in arrived at the scene and crowds were moved further away from the wreckage. A doctor told the BBC that they are relying on DNA from relatives to identify the victims. A police official at the post-mortem room told the BBC that the remains of six people had been released to families so far, as their relatives were able to identify them based on facial sole survivor of the crash, British national Vishwashkumar Ramesh, who was in seat 11A on the flight, is still recovering in hospital. "I still cannot believe how I made it out alive," he told India's state broadcaster DD News on Thursday."At first, I thought I was going to die. I managed to open my eyes, unfastened my seat belt and tried to exit the plane."Mr Ramesh, 40, who sustained burn injuries on his left hand, said he saw the aircraft crew and its passengers die in front of his desperate families are still waiting for news of their relatives. Imtiaz Ali, whose brother Javed and his family were on the flight, said that until he sees his brother's body, he will not believe he has died."If I get sad and start crying, then I'll be uncontrollable," he told the BBC. "No-one will be able to stop me... my heart might burst." The plane crashed in a residential area called Meghani Nagar and, even though it had just taken off, the impact was severe. Wreckage spread over 200m (656ft), according to responders. It is still unclear exactly how many were killed on the ground, but the BBC has been told that at least eight people, who were not on the aircraft, have died. Dr Minakshi Parikh, the dean of the BJ Medical College and Civil Hospital, said four of their students died as the plane crashed into buildings on the campus."There were also four relatives of our doctors who were on the campus when the aircraft crashed - they too were killed," Dr Parikh said."We are relying only on DNA matching to identify them and it is something where we simply cannot rush or afford mistakes. "We are working with sincerity. We want relatives to understand, and be a bit patient. We want to hand over [the bodies] as soon as possible." On Friday, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi spent around 20 minutes at the site of the plane crash. He did not speak to reporters afterwards but a video posted on his YouTube channel showed him walking around the site and inspecting the also visited the location of a now-viral image that shows the tail of the crashed plane lodged in a building. Earlier on Friday, Air India CEO Campbell Wilson also went to the crash site, later describing the visit as "deeply moving".According to data by tracking website, Flightradar24, the Boeing Dreamliner 787-8 had completed more than 700 flights in the year leading up to the Thursday's disaster. The Air India plane was 11 years old and its most common routes included flights between Mumbai and Dubai, as well as the capital New Delhi and European destinations such as Milan, Paris and plane had operated 25 flights from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick in the past two years.
The Guardian
a day ago
- General
- The Guardian
From bird strike to sabotage, experts offer range of theories for India air crash
A full investigation into Air India flight AI171 will be necessary to determine what caused it to crash shortly after taking off from Ahmedabad but aviation experts say a range of potential factors could have been at play. Air India 171 – a Boeing 787-8, also known as a Dreamliner – issued a mayday call to air traffic control moments after takeoff. According to the Flightradar24 website, its tracking signal was lost when the plane had reached 625ft (190 metres). Footage has emerged appearing to show the plane take off, rise slowly with its nose up, then begin to descend seconds later, gliding downwards before crashing into a building and exploding into a ball of fire. The sole survivor out of the 242 people onboard, 40-year-old Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, has said he has 'no idea' how he lived to walk out of the wreckage. Aviation experts cautioned against jumping to conclusions less than 24 hours after the crash, insisting only a thorough investigation including examination of the black box and flight data recorder would give a definitive picture. However, aviation analysts have put forward a range of theories as to what led to the tragedy, in what is the first such fatal incident involving the Dreamliner. Dr Sonya Brown, a senior lecturer in aerospace design at the University of New South Wales, said the footage suggested the plane had stalled. 'It does look to me like a significant loss of thrust. Thrust effectively makes you go faster, and aircraft lift is proportional to speed, so if you don't have thrust and you lose speed – and radar data suggests after the initial short climb it was losing speed – you can stall,' Brown said. What caused the lack of thrust remained unclear, Brown said. Some interpreted video footage as showing the wing flaps were not extended during takeoff, with suggestions this could have been a pilot error and factor in the crash. These panels on the wings of a plane can be extended to help generate lift and are key during takeoff and landing. Brown said she was unsure of the flap status after watching the footage, and that even if reviewing the black box and flight data recorders showed flaps were not deployed, a stall could still be avoided with increased thrust. Brown said incorrect thrust settings due to human error could be one cause. She also noted that while the plane was modern, it was 11 years old, so the potential for inadequate maintenance could be investigated. Neil Hansford, a former pilot and chair of the Strategic Aviation Solutions consultancy, said that while pilot error could have been a factor, the crew and airline were respected. 'The captain and first officer were very experienced. This is a superior plane, we're not talking about a cowboy airline here,' Hansford said. Bird strikes, a common occurrence in aviation where wildlife interferes with a plane's engine, is one early theory, with engine failure plausibly leading the plane to stall. The Boeing 787 is a two-engine plane but is able to fly on one engine, one of many layers of redundancy baked into modern aviation that has made it one of the statistically safest forms of transport. While it is rare for a bird strike to take out two engines simultaneously, it can happen. Bird strikes took out both engines of US Airways flight 1549 in 2009, forcing the captain, Sully Sullenberger, into a landing on New York's Hudson river. Hansford noted a history of hundreds of bird strikes at Ahmedabad airport, and that there were warm temperatures on Thursday morning – conditions that make bird strikes more likely. Ramesh, the sole survivor, told the Hindustan Times that '30 seconds after takeoff there was a loud noise'. Hansford said a loud bang could occur when birds entered an engine and caused it to fail, but he believed if both engines failed, there would have been two loud bangs. Brown, as well as Dr Jason Knight, a senior lecturer in fluid mechanics at the University of Portsmouth, also said bird strikes could be responsible. Knight said: 'The most likely cause of the crash is a double engine failure. Because the altitude was so low, the pilot would have had very little time to do an emergency landing. The most likely cause of a double engine failure is a bird strike, which would take out the engine.' While extremely rare, when plane crashes did happen, takeoff and landing were when it was most likely something could go wrong, said Hansford. Prof John McDermid, the Lloyd's Register chair of safety at University of York, said: 'Pilots can abort takeoff until quite late in the takeoff roll, so it seems like the problem occurred very suddenly in the final part of the takeoff roll, or shortly after takeoff, and was sufficiently serious to be unmanageable.' The many layers of redundancy, such as backup power sources and computer monitoring systems such as autopilot, and, when all else fails, the ability for a plane to glide – which was seen briefly on Thursday before impact – may have been less helpful in helping the pilots to avoid crashing due to the lack of altitude. Brown said: 'All of these things are more effective if you have time, but this happened so soon after takeoff. If you had the same issue at 40,000ft, it's very different to 400ft. There's just not many layers of redundancy at that altitude.' Hansford believed other theories the investigators should examine were potential sabotage, noting political tensions in Gujarat state, of which Ahmedabad is the capital. Contaminated fuel was another possibility, he said. The plane's fuel tank was reportedly near-full, but Hansford said contaminants could lead to clogging. 'Blocking fuel could cause an engine problem,' he said.
Sydney Morning Herald
a day ago
- General
- Sydney Morning Herald
The experts' theories on why flight AI171 went down
It could take weeks, if not months, for the exact cause of the plane crash that killed at least 260 people to become clear. But the pilot's mayday call of 'no thrust' and a 'lack of power' indicates a mechanical, electrical, or external issue likely plagued the General Electric engines of the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner on take-off. A lack of thrust, perhaps worsened by other factors, could have brought about the aircraft's demise. Experts have already outlined a number of possible reasons why flight AI171 crashed in a ball of fire after less than a minute in the air. 'A very surprising accident' Professor John McDermid, Lloyd's Register chair of safety at the University of York, said: 'Take-off and landing are the most dangerous phases of flight – accidents from cruise are very unusual. 'However, that said, it's surprising that the accident occurred before the aircraft had even got to 200 metres [in] altitude. 'Pilots can abort take-off until quite late in the take-off roll, so it seems like the problem occurred very suddenly in the final part of the take-off roll, or shortly after take-off, and was sufficiently serious to be unmanageable. 'Given the levels of redundancy in systems, the fact that aircraft are designed to climb out on only one engine, etc, on initial sight this seems a very surprising accident.' BS Siwach, the former director general of Aviation Safety India, said: 'The pilots were highly qualified and accomplished professionals. The unfortunate thing which happened is that at about 400-odd feet, the aircraft suffered loss of power.' Technical error or engine failure A significant loss of thrust, as appears to be indicated in the stricken plane's mayday call, could have resulted from a number of causes. A wholesale engine failure – especially of the 'uncontained' variety, where a turbine disintegrates due to failed bearings or blades – can be catastrophic, flinging out debris that shatters the engine casing and penetrates the fuselage. However, evidence of such an event should have been visible in the video footage, which showed no obvious signs of engine problems other than the plane's struggle to gain altitude. Engine failure could also have resulted from a less dramatic issue, such as a fuel-related problem. Given that the plane had been prepared for a long-haul flight – and the size of the fireball when it came down – it could hardly have been out of kerosene. But fuel contamination or mis-fuelling of some kind could have led the turbines to underperform. Technical or engineering issues – such a fuel pump failure or malfunction of engine controls – could also have conceivably led to the disaster. While there has never been a major incident with the 787, which represented a step change in design and build quality when it was introduced, such a level of complexity and automation can bring its own problems. It also means that the exact fault behind the loss of power, if that proves to have been the reason for the crash, may be difficult to ascertain, although readings from the plane's black box flight data recorder, once recovered, should provide vital information. If the plane is found to have been brought down by a fundamental flaw, then the entire fleet could face grounding, though with the model in service for so long without incident a maintenance-related glitch may be more likely than a manufacturing or design error. Dr Jason Knight, a senior lecturer in fluid mechanics at the University of Portsmouth, reviewed the CCTV footage of the plane's ill-fated journey and told the London Telegraph: 'It appears from the video, there is a cloud of dust just after take-off [it shows the aircraft going behind the building]. 'The aircraft then seems to lose power and the pilot appears to increase its angle of attack to try and stay airborne for longer. 'The aircraft could fly perfectly well on one engine. But without any power, the pilot has no choice but to do an emergency landing. 'I'm not sure, but it appears as though the cloud of dust could be from the engines as they both fail.' Bird strikes A bird strike having taken out both the General Electric engines is another possibility behind the crash. In January 2021, a 787-8 Dreamliner had to abort a take-off in Mexico after birds flew into one of its engines as it readied to leave the tarmac. And in March 2024, a Saudia Airlines flight on a similar plane model flying from Jeddah to Heathrow suffered significant damage to its left wing from a bird strike. Ahmedabad airport, the main city in Gujarat, is also notorious for having an issue with bird strikes due to being near an urban area. A study in 2018 found the airport has 'a high potential of bird-aircraft collision hazards'. Official data shows that in 2023 it had the second most bird strikes in India with its 81 reported instances behind only the 169 of Delhi. This is despite operating only a quarter of the number of flights. Salil Colge, a lecturer in aviation management at University College Birmingham who was born in Mumbai, told the London Telegraph: 'Historically there have been reports of several bird strikes in this area and that could be one of the possibilities. 'The airport had managed to control this significantly with a decrease in bird strike incidences in 2024. Did the aircraft have multiple bird strikes after take-off causing the engines to lose power?' Knight thought the most likely cause of the engine failure was a bird strike affecting both engines. He said that the 787-8 was designed and certified to be able to fly and climb with just one engine to allow the plane to land safely, and that only simultaneous double failure could be to blame. He added: 'This could be for a number of reasons, but in my opinion, the most likely is a bird strike in both engines. The black box will have all the flight data to confirm what happened.' Flap issues Experts have suggested that video footage of the flight's final seconds showed that its wing flaps were incorrectly set for a standard take-off climb. Flaps affect an aircraft's aerodynamics by changing the shape of the wing, and play a crucial role in getting it airborne. Yet based on some interpretations of the video evidence they were fully retracted, a position in which they would provide minimal lift. The aircraft's landing gear also remained deployed throughout the short flight, when on a 787 the wheels are normally withdrawn as soon as they leave the runway. One possibility is that the landing gear became stuck and that the pilots responded by partially retracting the flaps to reduce drag and maintain the climb. If the adjustment was overdone the plane would lose lift and begin to descend. At some point the 787's wing would have stalled – the term for when the airflow is separated from the wing's surface – through the combination of insufficient lift and excessive drag. A more straightforward explanation may be that the flaps themselves malfunctioned, failing to respond to inputs from the cockpit. The Boeing 787 has experienced flap issues in the past. An American Airlines plane was forced to return to Amsterdam in January after a problem was detected shortly after take-off for Philadelphia. The aircraft dumped fuel over the North Sea before landing at Schiphol airport at a higher than normal speed attributed to the flaps problem. That flight was rescheduled to depart the following day but was cancelled after the crew discovered a hydraulics issue. Over the following three weeks, the same plane was forced to abort flights to Philadelphia from Dublin, Barcelona and Zurich, with the diversions punctuated by cancellations and at other times by successful flights. The aircraft concerned was almost eight years old and had completed more than 4000 flights. Pilot error The 787-8 is a modern, highly sophisticated plane which one expert described as a 'power plant on wheels'. Much of the processes are highly automated, with human pilots making only key decisions. However, at this stage human error cannot be ruled out. It is believed the co-pilot, Clive Kundar, had more than 1000 hours of flying experience and made a mayday call shortly after take-off. He was flying with a trained instructor with more than 8000 hours experience, the captain Sumeet Sabharwal. Radar tracking of the plane suggests the pilots did not use the full length of the runway when taking off, instead joining at an intersection around half way. Estimates suggest the amount of runway utilised by the pilots was slightly less than 2000 metres. Experts said that on a hot day, loaded almost to full capacity and with enough fuel on board for a nine-hour flight, the recommended runway length would likely be around 2500 metres as a minimum. Some individuals on PPRuNe, a pilot's forum, suggested the shortened runway was on the lower threshold of what may have been advisable. This practice is often used by pilots to avoid traffic jams and air-traffic control delays, and is permitted if deemed safe. Planes get less lift on a hot day due to lower air density, and therefore they need to go faster to get as much lift as on a cooler day. Flight AI171 took off in 40°C heat in the early afternoon sunshine of Gujarat. A plane struggling with insufficient speed or lift could hit a low obstacle or fail to overcome its inertia if lifting off early. Overloading It is possible the cause of the crash was that it was too heavy to take-off. The weather, again, is a factor in this as it dictates how much ground velocity a plane needs to generate enough lift to get airborne. However, this is checked by the airline ahead of take-off and experts say unless there was egregious oversight or error, it is improbable as a root cause. 'It is very unlikely the plane was overweight or carrying too much fuel – there are careful checks on this,' said McDermid.
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- General
- Daily Mail
Revealed: Air India pilot's desperate mayday call seconds before devastating crash as experts raise fears wing flaps 'didn't look right' amid hunt for second black box
The pilot of the Air India crash frantically warned the plane was 'losing power' just moments before it crashed into a building, killing at least 260 people. The London-bound Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner plunged into the busy suburb just seconds after taking off from Ahmedabad Airport on Thursday morning, claiming the lives of all but one passenger. Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, who had 8,200 hours of flying experience, desperately cried 'Mayday…no thrust, losing power, unable to lift' before the aircraft went down and hit a residential property. Air India later confirmed that 241 of the 242 people aboard flight AI171 died in the crash. Miracle British survivor Viswashkumar Ramesh, who was flying alongside his brother, remembers 'a loud the plane crashed'. The Boeing was not much more than 400ft above ground when the two experienced pilots onboard apparently lost power in both engines. They then had 17 agonising seconds to wrestle with the controls before their state-of-the-art plane smashed into a medical college packed with doctors, sending a fireball soaring into the sky. Distressing video footage shows the jet's fateful last moments as it rapidly lost altitude and speed, which would have filled the cockpit with a cacophony of terrifying alarms. Captain Sabharwal and Clive Kundar, his co-pilot with 1,100 hours of experience, issued a desperate mayday call warning the plane was 'losing power'. The footage appears to show them hopelessly trying to nudge up the nose of their sinking aircraft moments before the devastating impact. Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, who had 8,200 hours of flying experience, desperately cried 'Mayday…no thrust, losing power, unable to lift' before the aircraft went down and hit a residential property Officer Clive Kunder, from Mumbai, was also on the doomed Air India flight that crashed moments after take-off Passangers' luggage lies at the crash site after the plane, bound for London's Gatwick Airport, crashed during take-off from Ahmedabad Airport A video posted to social media appeared to show the plane descending in a controlled manner with a high nose angle and landing gear deployed The plane momentarily disappeared from view behind trees and buildings before a massive fireball erupted on the horizon Instead of its scheduled 4,200-mile, nine-hour 50-minute non-stop journey to Gatwick, the Air India flight came down just 1.5 miles beyond the end of the runway, in the densely-populated Meghaninagar neighbourhood of the city in Gujarat, northwest India. The jet smashed into the doctors' hostel of BJ Medical College, sending debris, smoke and fire hundreds of feet into the air, and turning the whole area into what looked like a war zone. As well as most on board, at least 50 people on the ground are said to have been killed and scores more injured. Doctors, students and staff were having lunch in the hostel's canteen when the Boeing 787's landing gear embedded itself in the hall with a deafening boom. Hellish video showed shellshocked diners fleeing amid tables laid out with abandoned lunches. Aviation experts put forward two leading theories: a flock of birds being sucked into the engines, disabling them both when needed most, and a mystery over the aircraft's 'flaps'. Captain Saurabh Bhatnagar, a former senior pilot, said the engines may have failed after a bird-strike, similar to the Jeju Air crash in South Korea last December. He said: 'From the footage I have seen, it looks like prima facie the case of multiple bird hits. The takeoff was perfect.' Salil Colge, a lecturer in aviation management at University College Birmingham, added: 'Historically there have been reports of several bird strikes in this area in the past, and that could be one of the possibilities.' But others said there were no puffs of smoke from engines in the video footage, which might be expected from bird-strikes. Marco Chan, of Buckinghamshire New University, in Wycombe, queried the apparent position of the flaps on the wings. There was speculation the plane was not correctly set up for takeoff, with the flaps not properly deployed. They are segments of the wing that can be extended to assist with lift. If set wrongly, they could stall the plane. Terry Tozer, a former pilot and author of the book 'Why planes crash', told Sky News an issue with the flaps was 'a reasonably logical explanation for a well-designed aircraft sinking to the earth in this way.' The tail end of the 186-foot fuselage was pictured sticking out of an upper storey of the college, and other large chunks including a severed wing were scattered around the neighbourhood. Some five or six nearby buildings were instantly turned into infernos by the catastrophic fireball; the Air India plane had been laden with 80 to 90 tons of aviation fuel for the long journey to London. Your browser does not support iframes. Viswashkumar Ramesh video called his family with a bloodied face after walking away from the burning aircraft Officer Clive Kunder, from Mumbai, was also on the doomed Air India flight that crashed moments after take-off Police said they had found a lone survivor who had been sitting in seat 11A when Flight 171 crashed shortly after takeoff in India on Thursday morning Astonishing footage showed the man walking away from the scene with some visible injuries to his face Members of a local community stand outside the Leicester family home of Viswash, the British survivor of the London-bound Air India aircraft crash People stand outside the survivor's family home in Leicester on Thursday after news of the crash Plumes of billowing black smoke could be seen for miles around and emergency services battled for hours to contain multiple blazes. Somehow, amid this firestorm of death and chaos, out walked the 'luckiest man in the world'. Mr Ramesh, from the Dreamliner's Seat 11A, seemingly displayed barely any visible serious injuries as he was filmed hobbling from the disaster zone. The British father's miraculous survival is all the more astonishing given that, not only did he get off a crashed plane, he then apparently managed to navigate a raging inferno. He walked unaided from a neighbourhood that was an apocalyptic scene. Charred bodies were scattered among twisted metal and scorched earth. Suitcases - some incongruously unscathed - were strewn among the debris, and blackened trees lay upended and smouldering. Mr Ramesh's brother Nayan, from Leicester, said he was meant to be collecting his siblings from Gatwick. 'We were going to have a party on the weekend, a family gathering,' he told Sky News. The last time he spoke to his brother Ajay - who was tragically also on the plane - was the day before when they were arranging plans for pickup at the airport. 'He was like, 'I'll see you tomorrow', those were his last words to me,' Nayan said. Indian TV showed pictures of victims being rushed away on stretchers to ambulances. Vidhi Chaudhary, a top state police commissioner, said the dead included medical students, adding: 'Most of the bodies have been charred beyond recognition.' Last night as the scale of destruction was becoming clear, acrid smoke hung in the air as hundreds of rescue workers toiled through the night under searchlights seeking survivors. Authorities faced a grim task of identifying corpses, with relatives urged to supply DNA samples to help. Locals who had witnessed their ordinary day turn to carnage in a split-second were struggling to come to terms with a disaster that has been compared to the day in 1988 when 207 lives were lost at Lockerbie, Scotland, when Pan Am 103 was blown out of the sky. A woman called Ramila told the Ani news agency: 'My son had gone to the hostel during lunch break, and the plane crashed there. He jumped from the second floor, so he suffered some injuries.' Neighbour Raju Prajapati added: 'We heard a huge explosion and rushed out of our homes. There were thick plumes of black smoke rising into the sky. People were shouting and running in all directions. Rescue team members work as smoke rises at the site in Ahmedabad, India, June 12, 2025 People look at the debris of an Air India plane crashed in Ahmedabad of India's Gujarat state Members of local community stand outside the family home of Viswash, the British survivor of the London-bound Air India aircraft crash The number of fatalities is not yet known but rescuers said at least 30 bodies have so far been recovered from a building Firefighters work at the site of the crash near Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport 'Ambulance after ambulance has been arriving. The police and army have cordoned off the area and are not allowing anyone near the wreckage. There is panic and confusion. 'We are about two kilometres away now, and even here the smoke is still visible.' Another resident said: 'We saw people from the building jumping from the second and third floor to save themselves. The plane was in flames.' A doctor named Krishna who rescued around 15 students with his colleagues said that 'the nose and front wheel landed on the canteen building where students were having lunch' and that he saw 'about 15 to 20 burnt bodies'. At Ahmedabad Airport, families who had just waved off loved-ones faced the gut-wrenching view of smoke rising on the horizon. Distraught Poonam Patel said: 'My sister-in-law was going to London. The plane has crashed. We don't know anything.' Teams of international air accident investigators have begun the process of recovering and examining the 'black box' recorders of flight data and cockpit conversations to work out what went wrong. According to local reports, the Boeing aircraft had undergone a service as recently as March.
The Age
2 days ago
- General
- The Age
The experts' theories on why flight AI171 went down
It could take weeks, if not months, for the exact cause of the plane crash that killed at least 260 people to become clear. But the pilot's mayday call of 'no thrust' and a 'lack of power' indicates a mechanical, electrical, or external issue likely plagued the General Electric engines of the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner on take-off. A lack of thrust, perhaps worsened by other factors, could have brought about the aircraft's demise. Experts have already outlined a number of possible reasons why flight AI171 crashed in a ball of fire after less than a minute in the air. 'A very surprising accident' Professor John McDermid, Lloyd's Register chair of safety at the University of York, said: 'Take-off and landing are the most dangerous phases of flight – accidents from cruise are very unusual. 'However, that said, it's surprising that the accident occurred before the aircraft had even got to 200 metres [in] altitude. 'Pilots can abort take-off until quite late in the take-off roll, so it seems like the problem occurred very suddenly in the final part of the take-off roll, or shortly after take-off, and was sufficiently serious to be unmanageable. 'Given the levels of redundancy in systems, the fact that aircraft are designed to climb out on only one engine, etc, on initial sight this seems a very surprising accident.' BS Siwach, the former director general of Aviation Safety India, said: 'The pilots were highly qualified and accomplished professionals. The unfortunate thing which happened is that at about 400-odd feet, the aircraft suffered loss of power.' Technical error or engine failure A significant loss of thrust, as appears to be indicated in the stricken plane's mayday call, could have resulted from a number of causes. A wholesale engine failure – especially of the 'uncontained' variety, where a turbine disintegrates due to failed bearings or blades – can be catastrophic, flinging out debris that shatters the engine casing and penetrates the fuselage. However, evidence of such an event should have been visible in the video footage, which showed no obvious signs of engine problems other than the plane's struggle to gain altitude. Engine failure could also have resulted from a less dramatic issue, such as a fuel-related problem. Given that the plane had been prepared for a long-haul flight – and the size of the fireball when it came down – it could hardly have been out of kerosene. But fuel contamination or mis-fuelling of some kind could have led the turbines to underperform. Technical or engineering issues – such a fuel pump failure or malfunction of engine controls – could also have conceivably led to the disaster. While there has never been a major incident with the 787, which represented a step change in design and build quality when it was introduced, such a level of complexity and automation can bring its own problems. It also means that the exact fault behind the loss of power, if that proves to have been the reason for the crash, may be difficult to ascertain, although readings from the plane's black box flight data recorder, once recovered, should provide vital information. If the plane is found to have been brought down by a fundamental flaw, then the entire fleet could face grounding, though with the model in service for so long without incident a maintenance-related glitch may be more likely than a manufacturing or design error. Dr Jason Knight, a senior lecturer in fluid mechanics at the University of Portsmouth, reviewed the CCTV footage of the plane's ill-fated journey and told the London Telegraph: 'It appears from the video, there is a cloud of dust just after take-off [it shows the aircraft going behind the building]. 'The aircraft then seems to lose power and the pilot appears to increase its angle of attack to try and stay airborne for longer. 'The aircraft could fly perfectly well on one engine. But without any power, the pilot has no choice but to do an emergency landing. 'I'm not sure, but it appears as though the cloud of dust could be from the engines as they both fail.' Bird strikes A bird strike having taken out both the General Electric engines is another possibility behind the crash. In January 2021, a 787-8 Dreamliner had to abort a take-off in Mexico after birds flew into one of its engines as it readied to leave the tarmac. And in March 2024, a Saudia Airlines flight on a similar plane model flying from Jeddah to Heathrow suffered significant damage to its left wing from a bird strike. Ahmedabad airport, the main city in Gujarat, is also notorious for having an issue with bird strikes due to being near an urban area. A study in 2018 found the airport has 'a high potential of bird-aircraft collision hazards'. Official data shows that in 2023 it had the second most bird strikes in India with its 81 reported instances behind only the 169 of Delhi. This is despite operating only a quarter of the number of flights. Salil Colge, a lecturer in aviation management at University College Birmingham who was born in Mumbai, told the London Telegraph: 'Historically there have been reports of several bird strikes in this area and that could be one of the possibilities. 'The airport had managed to control this significantly with a decrease in bird strike incidences in 2024. Did the aircraft have multiple bird strikes after take-off causing the engines to lose power?' Knight thought the most likely cause of the engine failure was a bird strike affecting both engines. He said that the 787-8 was designed and certified to be able to fly and climb with just one engine to allow the plane to land safely, and that only simultaneous double failure could be to blame. He added: 'This could be for a number of reasons, but in my opinion, the most likely is a bird strike in both engines. The black box will have all the flight data to confirm what happened.' Flap issues Experts have suggested that video footage of the flight's final seconds showed that its wing flaps were incorrectly set for a standard take-off climb. Flaps affect an aircraft's aerodynamics by changing the shape of the wing, and play a crucial role in getting it airborne. Yet based on some interpretations of the video evidence they were fully retracted, a position in which they would provide minimal lift. The aircraft's landing gear also remained deployed throughout the short flight, when on a 787 the wheels are normally withdrawn as soon as they leave the runway. One possibility is that the landing gear became stuck and that the pilots responded by partially retracting the flaps to reduce drag and maintain the climb. If the adjustment was overdone the plane would lose lift and begin to descend. At some point the 787's wing would have stalled – the term for when the airflow is separated from the wing's surface – through the combination of insufficient lift and excessive drag. A more straightforward explanation may be that the flaps themselves malfunctioned, failing to respond to inputs from the cockpit. The Boeing 787 has experienced flap issues in the past. An American Airlines plane was forced to return to Amsterdam in January after a problem was detected shortly after take-off for Philadelphia. The aircraft dumped fuel over the North Sea before landing at Schiphol airport at a higher than normal speed attributed to the flaps problem. That flight was rescheduled to depart the following day but was cancelled after the crew discovered a hydraulics issue. Over the following three weeks, the same plane was forced to abort flights to Philadelphia from Dublin, Barcelona and Zurich, with the diversions punctuated by cancellations and at other times by successful flights. The aircraft concerned was almost eight years old and had completed more than 4000 flights. Pilot error The 787-8 is a modern, highly sophisticated plane which one expert described as a 'power plant on wheels'. Much of the processes are highly automated, with human pilots making only key decisions. However, at this stage human error cannot be ruled out. It is believed the co-pilot, Clive Kundar, had more than 1000 hours of flying experience and made a mayday call shortly after take-off. He was flying with a trained instructor with more than 8000 hours experience, the captain Sumeet Sabharwal. Radar tracking of the plane suggests the pilots did not use the full length of the runway when taking off, instead joining at an intersection around half way. Estimates suggest the amount of runway utilised by the pilots was slightly less than 2000 metres. Experts said that on a hot day, loaded almost to full capacity and with enough fuel on board for a nine-hour flight, the recommended runway length would likely be around 2500 metres as a minimum. Some individuals on PPRuNe, a pilot's forum, suggested the shortened runway was on the lower threshold of what may have been advisable. This practice is often used by pilots to avoid traffic jams and air-traffic control delays, and is permitted if deemed safe. Planes get less lift on a hot day due to lower air density, and therefore they need to go faster to get as much lift as on a cooler day. Flight AI171 took off in 40°C heat in the early afternoon sunshine of Gujarat. A plane struggling with insufficient speed or lift could hit a low obstacle or fail to overcome its inertia if lifting off early. Overloading It is possible the cause of the crash was that it was too heavy to take-off. The weather, again, is a factor in this as it dictates how much ground velocity a plane needs to generate enough lift to get airborne. However, this is checked by the airline ahead of take-off and experts say unless there was egregious oversight or error, it is improbable as a root cause. 'It is very unlikely the plane was overweight or carrying too much fuel – there are careful checks on this,' said McDermid.
