What led to the tragic crash of an Air India Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, resulting in the loss of 260 lives? Six months later, investigators still haven’t clarified the cause, sparking disputes among pilots, the airline, and the manufacturer.
As mandated by international law, India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) released a preliminary report a month after the June 12 incident, where the aircraft erupted into flames shortly after departing from Ahmedabad in western India.
This report provided some technical data, but the investigation continues.
Stay informed with the latest updates. Follow KT on WhatsApp Channels.
Incident Overview
Air India flight 171 departed at 1.38 pm from Ahmedabad airport with 230 passengers and 12 crew members onboard, heading to London Gatwick Airport.
Just seconds later, it crashed into a medical university campus, situated a few hundred meters from the runway.
Video footage captures the aircraft taking off, failing to climb, and crashing in a fireball.
The crash resulted in the deaths of 241 of the 242 people onboard and 19 on the ground.
Only one passenger survived, albeit with severe injuries.
The deceased included 200 Indians, 52 British nationals, seven Portuguese, and one Canadian.
Preliminary Findings
The July 12 AAIB report stated that the fuel supply switches for both engines were almost simultaneously turned “off” shortly after takeoff.
The cockpit voice recording reveals one pilot questioning the other about cutting off the fuel supply. The other pilot denied doing so, according to the report.
The aircraft then began to descend.
The report also mentions the automatic deployment of an auxiliary power unit, meant to supply power if engines fail.
Both switches were returned to “on” less than 10 seconds later.
Soon after, “one of the pilots” was able to issue “Mayday, Mayday, Mayday,” before the plane crashed.
The 15-page report does not clarify if the fuel switch-off was due to pilot action or a malfunction.
Controversy
The report faced immediate backlash upon release.
Pilot associations argue that the dialogue between the captain and co-pilot, which the report paraphrases, insinuates human error without evidence.
They noted the AAIB did not suggest any controls on the aircraft or engines, effectively dismissing the idea of technical faults or maintenance issues.
A heated debate ensued between victims’ families, legal representatives, pilots, and the airline and manufacturer.
The father of a pilot took the matter to the Supreme Court.
Pushkaraj Sabharwal, 91, father of pilot Sumeet Sabharwal, called the preliminary investigation “deeply flawed”.
In his petition, seen by AFP, he claimed it appeared to “unfairly focus on the deceased pilots, who cannot defend themselves, while neglecting other plausible technical and procedural causes of the crash”.
Theories
British lawyer Sarah Stewart, representing about 50 victim families, supports a scenario excluding pilot error.
“The factual details suggest the troubling possibility of an uncommanded fuel cut-off, indicating a potential Boeing system failure,” she stated.
Air India CEO Campbell Wilson, in a speech on September 10, mentioned that the “preliminary report shows no issues with the aircraft, engines, or the airline’s operation”.
However, some experts question this.
“Electrical issues were reported on this plane before the crash,” former commercial pilot Amit Singh, founder of Safety Matters Foundation, informed AFP.
“The report’s narrative seems biased towards blaming the pilots” despite “unsourced data,” he added.
The final report “could be subject to manipulation,” he warned.
Aviation expert Mark Martin took it further, calling it a “cleverly orchestrated cover-up”.
“Boeing did the same after the 737 MAX incidents—blaming pilots,” he said, referencing the 2018 and 2019 accidents, later attributed to design flaws.
“Boeing cannot afford to accept responsibility for this crash,” Martin asserted.
The US aircraft manufacturer declined to comment when contacted by AFP.
