Tragedy in the Skies, Investigators Dig Deep
On June 12, 2025, tragedy struck India’s aviation sector when Air India Flight AI171—a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner en route to London—crashed shortly after take-off from Ahmedabad. The disaster claimed 260 lives, including 241 onboard and 19 on the ground, leaving behind one lone survivor. In the aftermath of one of the deadliest air crashes in Indian history, the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) released a preliminary report shedding light on a sequence of alarming technical anomalies and unexplained cockpit actions. While no immediate action has been recommended, the report lays the groundwork for deeper analysis.
Search for Answers Begins: Sequence of Catastrophe – A Timeline in Seconds
The report reconstructs the final moments of AI171 with chilling precision:
13:37:37 IST: Aircraft begins its roll down the runway.
13:38:39 IST: Liftoff is achieved. Air/ground sensors confirm flight.
13:38:42 IST: The aircraft hits 180 knots. Both engine fuel switches suddenly move to “CUT-OFF”, halting fuel supply.
13:38:47 IST: Engines drop below idle; the Ram Air Turbine activates.
13:38:52–13:38:56 IST: Both switches return to “RUN” and the APU autostart begins. Engines try to relight.
13:39:05 IST: A “MAYDAY” distress call is issued.
13:39:11 IST: All flight data recording ceases.
13:44:44 IST: Emergency services reach the wreckage.
The jet crashed before gaining sufficient altitude to clear the airport perimeter, tearing through a densely populated neighborhood and igniting a massive fire.
The Engine Mystery – Fuel Cut-Offs Under Scrutiny
The most confounding aspect of the crash is the simultaneous movement of both fuel switches to the “CUT-OFF” position, just seconds after take-off—something typically done only post-landing.
The cockpit voice recorder reveals an unsettling exchange:
· Pilot 1: “Why did you cut off?”
· Pilot 2: “I did not do so.”
However, the recording doesn’t clarify which pilot spoke which line. At the time, the co-pilot had control of the aircraft while the captain was monitoring. Investigators are perplexed because the fuel switches are designed to be tamper-proof. They must be physically lifted and moved—making accidental activation extremely unlikely.
A Canadian air safety expert commented that simultaneous activation of both switches with one hand is nearly impossible, hinting at either a deliberate action or a severe, previously unidentified system malfunction.
Key Findings from the Probe – 10 Points of Investigation
The AAIB’s preliminary report outlines ten primary areas of focus:
· Wreckage Analysis: Drone-assisted documentation is complete; debris is stored securely near the airport.
· Engine Retrieval: Both engines have been quarantined for detailed forensic examination.
· Component Isolation: Key aircraft components have been identified and set aside for deeper analysis.
· Fuel Testing: Fuel samples from the aircraft and ground sources were found to be uncontaminated.
· APU Fuel Sample: Limited samples from the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) will be tested in specialized facilities.
· Flight Recorder Data: Engine and airframe data from the forward EAFR (Enhanced Airborne Flight Recorder) is under analysis.
· Eyewitness Accounts: Statements from ground witnesses and the sole survivor have been recorded.
· Postmortem Correlation: Medical reports of passengers and crew are being compared with technical findings.
· Extended Evidence Search: Additional leads are being pursued based on early findings.
· No Action Yet: Currently, no operational or technical faults have been assigned to Boeing or GE, and no preventive measures have been advised.
What the Preliminary Report Does—and Doesn’t—Say
While thorough in its scope, the report stops short of placing blame. It carefully notes that both Boeing (the aircraft manufacturer) and GE (the engine maker) bear no evident fault based on current findings. The engines, after cutting off, began relighting—a sign they were still functional.
Curiously, the fuel switches were found in the “RUN” position at the crash site, despite mid-flight data showing they had been moved to “CUT-OFF”. This suggests they may have been returned to “RUN” in the frantic final seconds, though too late to prevent catastrophe.
The report further confirms that safety protocols were followed both pre-flight and during takeoff, lending credence to the theory that what occurred was either a deeply anomalous system error or an unexplained cockpit action.
A Search for Truth Amid Devastation
The AI171 crash has cast a long shadow over India’s aviation industry, not just for its tragic toll but for the deeply unsettling questions it raises. The sudden shutdown of both engines due to fuel cut-off—executed in a manner resistant to accident or malfunction—points to the need for a more granular and possibly uncomfortable investigation into cockpit dynamics, crew behavior, and any underlying system fault.
While no immediate recommendations have been issued, the AAIB’s measured and methodical approach underscores the importance of restraint until all evidence is reviewed. For now, the mystery surrounding those fatal seconds after liftoff remains unresolved. But as more data is analyzed and external aviation experts weigh in, what’s ultimately at stake is more than accountability—it’s restoring confidence in an aviation system tasked with safeguarding millions of lives.
(With agency inputs)
