Tragedy Strikes: June 12, 2025

On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight AI171, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner en route from Ahmedabad to London Gateway, crashed just 32 seconds after takeoff, slamming into a medical hostel in the Meghani Nagar neighborhood of Ahmedabad. The devastating crash resulted in the loss of 241 of the 242 people on board, and 19 fatalities on the ground.

The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) released its preliminary report on July 8, shedding light on what might have gone wrong during this tragic flight.

Flight and Aircraft Overview

Aircraft : Boeing 787 Dreamliner

: Boeing 787 Dreamliner Age : Approximately 11 years

: Approximately 11 years Route : Ahmedabad (Runway 23) to London Gateway

: Ahmedabad (Runway 23) to London Gateway Occupants : 230 passengers and 12 crew

: 230 passengers and 12 crew Fuel on Board : Approx. 54,200 kg

: Approx. 54,200 kg Takeoff Weight: Around 213,000 kg (within permissible limits)

Shortly after departure, the flight crew issued a Mayday call, reporting loss of engine power and thrust, and an inability to climb. The aircraft impacted a hostel complex, leading to India’s deadliest aviation disaster in recent years.

Preliminary Findings: A Deepening Mystery

Fuel Supply Cut-Off

The AAIB’s initial analysis indicates that both engine fuel control switches were manually turned off, just one second apart—then later turned back on. This sequence of actions has become the central focus of the investigation.

The Boeing 787’s fuel switches are protected by a locking mechanism, making it extremely difficult to shut them off accidentally. The manual fuel shutoff raised serious questions, particularly since both pilots were experienced professionals trained not to touch these controls during takeoff.

Voice recordings captured from the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) further intensified the mystery:

Pilot 1: “Why did you shut off the fuel?”

Pilot 2: “I didn’t shut it off.”

This exchange suggests either a critical misunderstanding, accidental activation, or a potential systems anomaly.

Technical Systems: What Else Went Wrong?

Further investigation has ruled out fuel contamination—samples tested clean and met quality standards. There were also no immediate mechanical or design faults found with the Boeing 787 or its GE Aerospace GEnx engines, which are widely regarded as some of the most advanced in commercial aviation.

However, investigators noted:

Landing gear failed to fully retract , possibly due to hydraulic system failure

, possibly due to Ram Air Turbine (RAT) —an emergency power generator—was deployed, indicating a catastrophic loss of hydraulic or electrical power

—an emergency power generator—was deployed, indicating a Flaps and slats were extended at the time of the crash, suggesting the aircraft followed standard takeoff procedures

Black Box Recovery and Data Analysis

Both the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and Flight Data Recorder (FDR) were recovered and successfully decrypted at the AAIB lab in Delhi by June 25, 2025. A “golden chassis” method was used to ensure full data integrity during extraction.

The analysis is ongoing and focuses on:

Pilot actions and communications

Engine behavior

Fuel control switch operation

Electrical and hydraulic system performance

Simulation and Safety Reviews

Simulations run by Air India pilots suggest that even with landing gear deployment issues, the aircraft should have been able to remain airborne. This points to more complex system failures, possibly a combination of engine flameout, power loss, and shutdown mechanisms being triggered.

As a result, the investigation is widening its scope to explore:

Crew psychological condition

Recent maintenance activities

Possible software or system malfunction

Security or sabotage concerns (though none confirmed so far)

The First Hull Loss of a Boeing 787

This tragic incident marks the first total hull loss of a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, a type known for its cutting-edge technology and high safety record. The crash has sent shockwaves through the aviation industry and prompted renewed discussions on flight system safeguards, crew training, and technical audit standards.

Ongoing Investigation: Still No Final Conclusion

As of now, the AAIB emphasizes that the report is preliminary and non-exhaustive. More information will surface in the coming weeks as investigators continue working alongside international aviation experts.

There is still no conclusive evidence pointing to human error, mechanical failure, or external interference. However, the manual shutdown of the fuel supply is a major point of concern—and understanding why and how it occurred will be key to preventing future tragedies.

Final Thoughts and Call to Action

This catastrophic event is not just a blow to Air India—it is a warning sign for the global aviation community. Whether due to a rare technical fault, a human factor, or an unexpected system failure, this crash has triggered intense scrutiny of cockpit protocols, fail-safe systems, and emergency handling procedures.

We’ll continue to follow the developments closely and bring you verified updates as more details emerge.

What do you think caused the mysterious fuel shutoff in Air India’s Boeing 787 cockpit?

Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

And don’t forget to stay tuned—we’ll be covering upcoming investigation findings in future reports.

The preliminary investigation report into the crash of Air India Flight AI171 was released this week, providing the first official account of what led to the June 12 disaster near Ahmedabad. The aircraft, a Boeing 787-8 powered by GE GEnx engines, crashed less than a minute after takeoff, killing all 241 people onboard and 29 people on the ground.

Despite the severity of the accident, Boeing and General Electric (GE) stocks remained stable and even rose slightly after the report became public.

Boeing And GE Stocks

Boeing’s stock closed at $226.84 on July 12, up 0.75 points or 0.33%, while GE’s stock ended at $255.42, gaining 2.85 points or 1.13%. The report was released after US stock market hours, which means the immediate trading reaction was limited to after-hours and the following day’s session.

One reason for the lack of a sharp decline is that the report did not directly assign blame to Boeing or GE, and it contained no immediate regulatory action.

What Report Said?

The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) stated, “At this stage of investigation, there are no recommended actions to B787-8 and/or GE GEnx-1B engine operators and manufacturers.”

This sentence was important to investors because it confirmed that no grounding orders, design changes, or urgent safety directives had been issued. However, the report did point to a known issue with Boeing’s fuel control switch design.

It stated that both engine fuel cutoff switches moved from RUN to CUTOFF position seconds after takeoff, “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 report linked this to a 2018 FAA advisory bulletin, which warned that the switch locking feature could disengage unexpectedly: “The FAA issued Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin… regarding the potential disengagement of the fuel control switch locking feature.”

The switches used in the Air India aircraft were the same type, but no mandatory inspection had been enforced.

The report stated, “As per the information from Air India, the suggested inspections were not carried out as the SAIB was advisory and not mandatory.”

Engine Failure?

For GE, the report found no evidence of engine failure due to a mechanical defect. The engines shut down only because the switches cut off fuel flow. Investigators confirmed that thrust levers remained in the takeoff position until impact, meaning the engines were delivering full power before the fuel was cut.

Because no new design failure was identified, and no regulators required action against Boeing or GE, investors largely viewed the incident as an isolated event rather than a sign of broader risk to other aircraft. This contributed to the calm market response.

It is important to note that since the report was released after the US trading day ended, most trading activity and analysis happened the next day. Even then, the stocks stayed steady.

The investigation is still ongoing, and more findings could follow. The AAIB noted, “Investigation is continuing and the investigation team will review and examine additional evidence, records and information.”

The plane rammed into the dining hall of a medical college before exploding in flames. Altogether, more than 270 people were killed, including dozens on the ground, officials said. It was India’s worst aviation disaster since 1996.

The supply of fuel to the engine is controlled by two switches in the flight deck. Starting about 10 seconds after the fuel was cut off on Flight 171, the data recorder shows, the switches were moved to turn the fuel back on. But the plane could not gain power quickly enough to stop its descent.

Each switch is equipped with a locking mechanism that is supposed to prevent accidental movement, experts said. To turn the fuel supply on, the switch must be pulled outward and then moved to a “RUN” position, where it is released and settles back into a locked position. To turn the fuel supply off, the switch must be pulled outward again, moved to the “CUTOFF” position and then released again.

According to the report, the fuel control switches were turned off “one after another” about a second apart, and “the aircraft started to lose altitude before crossing the airport perimeter wall.”

Safety experts said it appeared unlikely that the switches were moved without human involvement, whether intentional or accidental.

ShortShifter Senior – BHPian

Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Hyderabad Posts: 1,048 Thanked: 1,908 Times

View My Garage

Re: Air India Flight AI171 crashes near Ahmedabad airport

It is part of the closed loop/isolated system architecture that the Boeing 787 uses, It is clear to me one of the pilots deliberately pulled the switches and the other tried to reverse the horrific actions, the switch toggle sound and aircraft alarms consequent to the actions along with the ensuing fight/tussle between the pilots to re-initiate the cut off switches to “run” position would have been recorded in the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR), transcripts of which are yet to be released.

The FAA directive for Honeywell manufactured 4TL837‑3D switches only says “few aircrafts did not have the locking feature functional” which would have obviously been reported long ago by the pilots of VT-ANB or another 787 back in 2018 itself when the directive was put out, which clearly did not occur till date. Even if the locking mechanism failed, the power needed to pull and engage this switches due to the spring action system holding the switches would be immense, way more than Takeoff/Rotate cabin vibration can accidentally induce.

Post crash analysis images of the switches clearly shows above that the final resting position of the switches were in “Run”, so this implies even the forces of the crash impact did not move/budge the position of the switches, this suggests there was no fault mechanically in the switches as suggested by most here.

The FDR data and no technical directive to Boeing/GE strongly suggests and confirms the above scenario. Remember the weakest link always, is mostly human not machines.

AAIB also clearly knows exactly which pilot would have engaged the cut off switches as well but pending investigation has decided not to release the CVR transcripts for confirmation. I would also commend AAIB of releasing a highly technical, well detailed and transparent Preliminary report of International standards.

Definitely not the kind of fate 259 lost souls would have ever imagined even in their worst nightmares. Om Shanti to the departed souls. Dear fellow countrymen, I hate to break it to you but this is turning out to be India’s version of German Wings. There is absolutely no way in a billion odds that these fuel control switches can be operated inadvertently due to software or hardware issue without manual-human input, these are fail safe mechanical switches which are connected directly to FADEC.It is part of the closed loop/isolated system architecture that the Boeing 787 uses, It is clear to me one of the pilots deliberately pulled the switches and the other tried to reverse the horrific actions, the switch toggle sound and aircraft alarms consequent to the actions along with the ensuing fight/tussle between the pilots to re-initiate the cut off switches to “run” position would have been recorded in the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR), transcripts of which are yet to be released.The FAA directive for Honeywell manufactured 4TL837‑3D switches only says “few aircrafts did not have the locking feature functional” which would have obviously been reported long ago by the pilots of VT-ANB or another 787 back in 2018 itself when the directive was put out, which clearly did not occur till date. Even if the locking mechanism failed, the power needed to pull and engage this switches due to the spring action system holding the switches would be immense, way more than Takeoff/Rotate cabin vibration can accidentally induce.Post crash analysis images of the switches clearly shows above that the final resting position of the switches were in “Run”, so this implies even the forces of the crash impact did not move/budge the position of the switches, this suggests there was no fault mechanically in the switches as suggested by most here.The FDR data and no technical directive to Boeing/GE strongly suggests and confirms the above scenario. Remember the weakest link always, is mostly human not machines.AAIB also clearly knows exactly which pilot would have engaged the cut off switches as well but pending investigation has decided not to release the CVR transcripts for confirmation. I would also commend AAIB of releasing a highly technical, well detailed and transparent Preliminary report of International standards.Definitely not the kind of fate 259 lost souls would have ever imagined even in their worst nightmares. Om Shanti to the departed souls. Last edited by ShortShifter : 12th July 2025 at 11:55 .

Published : Jul 12, 2025 14:46 IST – 4 MINS READ

The preliminary report on the June 12 Air India crash in Ahmedabad, submitted by the Air Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) to the Ministry of Civil Aviation exactly in the last hour of the last day that it was mandated to be released, has clearly established that the fuel to both engines was cut off soon after take-off. It is too early to conclude if this was a mechanical error or a human error. That conclusion can be drawn only if all details of the cockpit voice recorder are analysed.

This line of investigation by the AAIB rules out the “sabotage” theory recently proffered by a Union Minister.

Also Read | Ahmedabad Dreamliner crash raises new questions about Boeing’s safety culture

On July 9, the aviation journal The Air Current claimed that investigators probing the June 12 crash were focussing on the movement of the engine fuel control switches in the seconds before the accident. This line of inquiry suggested the probe was considering a possible mechanical failure or human error prior to both engines losing thrust and shutting down.

The report, a copy of which was accessed by Frontline, confirms that both fuel switches were turned off within a second of each other. One pilot can be heard asking about it. A few seconds later, the fuel supply was turned back on. Experts says it is unlikely that it was the junior pilot who did it without being noticed because turning the fuel switch back involves a gap of 4 seconds between the two engines. But that is likely the time that a pilot would need to turn them off unless he used both hands, which is not possible without the other pilot noticing and asking about it.

The report records the sequence of events thus: “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. In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff. The other pilots responded that he did not do so.”

A pilot, who requested anonymity, said: “It does seem like some mechanical vibration or something else caused both fuel switches to turn of. If they release the entire CVR audio, it will help the world understand if there’s any possibility of pilot suicide.”

This flaw in fuel switches was not unknown. On December 17, 2018, the United States Federal Aviation Administration flagged a crucial design oversight on disengagement of the fuel control switch locking feature in some Boeing aircraft.

The December 2018 alert (Special Airworthiness information bulletin No NM-18-33) noted with concern: “The fuel control switches on certain Boeing models, including the Boeing 787-8, could be installed with the locking mechanism disengaged, increasing the risk of unintentional shutdown.” But the status of this notice was labelled “Advisory only”. Since this was not mandatory, it did not result in an Airworthiness directive, which would have forced all Boeing planes to make changes.

Also Read | Dreamliners and Boeing come under scrutiny, yet again

Because it was advisory in nature, Air India did not act upon it and instead said: “No action or inspection was taken on VT-ANB [the plane involved in the accident.]” The report also notes that “scrutiny of maintenance records revealed that the throttle control module was replaced on VT-ANB in 2019 and 2023. However, the reason for the replacement was not linked to the fuel control switch. There has been no defect reported pertaining to the fuel control switch since 2023 on VT-ANB.”

An experienced pilot, Steve Giordano, said that the fuel control switches on the 787 were no different from that of other versions of Boeing, such as 777, 757 or 767. “They have to be lifted over a little gate to change position—it’s not something that a trained pilot can accidentally do. They move up to run for start, and cut-off for shutdown,” he said.

The wait to understand what led to the worst aviation accident in India in recent decades continues.