
The Unexplained 10 Seconds Before the Deadly Air India Crash
How did your country report this? Share your view in the comments.
Diverging Reports Breakdown
Everything we know about the Air India crash points to an uncomfortable truth
The Air India 171 crash is one of the deadliest aviation incidents in recent history. The Boeing 787 crashed into a medical college complex in Ahmedabad, India, killing all but one of its 242 occupants. A preliminary report has pinpointed a dark and disturbing factor as the reason for the crash. Shortly after takeoff, someone or something cut the flow of fuel to both engines, almost simultaneously. This caused a brief but fatal dual engine shutdown that proved impossible for the plane to recover from. The implications of that double shutdown are quite bleak — but there’s still a lot we don’t know, as the report is not yet clear on what caused the crash or what caused it to happen in the first place. It is not known yet what the fuel cutoff switch was used to turn off the two engines at the same time, or how it was switched from “on” to “run” They were moved immediately after the airplane reached its maximum takeoff speed of 180 knots, or about 207 miles per hour.
Video of the June 12 incident had previously captured the Boeing 787 taking off successfully from Ahmedabad bound for London, only to rapidly descend, crash into a medical college complex, and explode into flames. The crash killed all but one of the plane’s 242 occupants. It also damaged five buildings, killed 19 people on the ground, and injured over 60 more.
The weeks that followed saw rampant speculation, AI-generated hoaxes, and conspiracy theories. Finally, on July 11 India’s air safety organization, the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), issued a preliminary report into the cause of the disaster. The 15-page report pinpointed a dark and disturbing factor as the reason for the crash: Shortly after takeoff, someone or something cut the flow of fuel to both engines, almost simultaneously. This caused a brief but fatal dual engine shutdown that proved impossible for the plane to recover from.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
The implications of that double shutdown are quite bleak — but there’s still a lot we don’t know.
What caused the crash?
In the weeks following the tragedy, public speculation about the potential cause ranged from a bird strike to an electrical problem; some suggested fuel contamination, others a malfunction with the wing flaps. Many focused on what seemed to have been an extreme occurrence suggested by the visibility of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), which deploys when there are engine problems: a total engine failure.
Over on YouTube, many analyzed the crash, including some pilots. Among them was Trevor Smith, call sign “Hoover,” a former military pilot who now flies for a commercial airline. On the side, he runs the YouTube crash analysis channel Pilot Debrief. Following the Air India crash, he emphasized what seemed to be the dual loss of thrust to both engines, and speculated that perhaps one engine had lost thrust for an unknown reason and that then one of the pilots had accidentally turned off the fuel control switch to the other engine, causing both to lose thrust.
Smith was hypothesizing a scenario in which at least one engine had been lost due to a mechanical failure, and an overwhelmed pilot mistakenly deactivated the other engine. The preliminary report, however, was more grim. It rejected all of those possibilities and instead pointed firmly toward a simple but unthinkable event: Both engines were shut down, first one and then the other, by way of the fuel control cutoff switch.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
In most Boeing airplanes, the flow of fuel to the engines gets activated via two fuel control switches. In the Boeing 787, the jet fuel control switches sit in the main console of the aircraft just below the throttles (which are used to control thrust power). The fuel switches are not easy to engage by accident; they have a built-in spring-loaded locking mechanism that requires anyone using them to first pull up on the knobs, turn them slightly, and then maneuver them up or down into the position you want — a bit like a safety-proof lid on a pill bottle. Additionally, two raised metal guards on either side of the two switches protect against accidental bumping or jostling.
The console of a Boeing 787. | Paige Vickers; Vox/Getty Images
There were no historical issues with the switches on this particular 787, and that section of the console had been refurbished as recently as 2023. Additionally, following the crash, other Air India Boeings were inspected, and no fuel switch issues were found with any of them. In a second inspection, Air India reportedly found no issues with the locking mechanisms on the switches either.
This crucial context underscores both the reliability of the switches — they were functioning normally with no problems — and the guardrails that were in place to protect against any associated mishaps. With the metal guards and the locking mechanisms, it would be all but impossible for an accident to knock both switches into the cutoff position, especially at the same time.
And yet what we know from the preliminary report is that the fuel cutoff switches were somehow switched from “run” to “cutoff” — from “on” to “off,” effectively. They were moved immediately after the airplane lifted off the ground and reached its maximum takeoff speed of 180 knots, or about 207 miles per hour. In a follow-up analysis video, Smith mapped out the timeline provided in the report, emphasizing that the two switches were turned off in quick succession, just a second apart — a short gap that makes sense, he noted, if someone were to move their hand from one switch to another.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
Without a fuel supply, the engines immediately lost power. The RAT began supplying hydraulic power to the plane a few seconds after the fuel was cut off. A few seconds after this, one or both pilots realized what had happened. They placed the switches back into the correct position about nine seconds after they were moved. The engines began to restart, but by the time they had recovered, it was already too late.
Initial media reports claimed that whichever pilot made the mayday call to air traffic control had stated, “Thrust not achieved,” as the explanation for the call shortly before losing contact. However, the investigative report didn’t include this statement, and recordings from the cockpit have not been made public.
What we do know is that according to the preliminary report, “one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cut off [the fuel]. The other pilot responded that he did not do so.”
So was the cutoff done intentionally?
The preliminary report has drawn criticism for its vagueness, and for the lack of a direct transcript of the aforementioned moment from the cockpit recorder. The AAIB has also drawn fire for its decision not to issue any safety guidelines as a result of the early stages of its investigation. However, the report was clear that the investigation is ongoing, and multiple pilots associations have cautioned against speculating before all the facts are known.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
Still, through its inclusion of the cockpit exchange, the preliminary report indicates that one pilot realized the switches had been manually moved and questioned the other pilot about it before moving the switches back into the “run” position. Given the virtual impossibility of an accidental dual cutoff, and the extreme unlikelihood of a dual engine shutdown being caused by any other issue, the pilot’s implied assumption in the moment that his colleague had manually moved the switches himself seems reasonable.
Following the report’s release, the Wall Street Journal reported that the investigation was intensifying its focus on the captain, 56-year-old Sumeet Sabharwal. As the pilot monitoring, Sabharwal would likely have had his hands free during the takeoff, while the first officer, Clive Kunder, 32, would have been busy actually flying the plane.
According to the Journal, the exchange referenced in the preliminary report involved Kunder querying Sabharwal about why the captain had moved the switches. In the following moments, Kunder “expressed surprise and then panicked” while Sabharwal “seemed to remain calm.”
Of course, without video of the moment, and without knowing more about the closely held details of the investigation thus far, it’s difficult to know what the situation in the cockpit truly was. It’s possible that Kunder’s panic and Sabharwal’s calm reflected nothing more than their respective level of career experience.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
As Nathan Fielder’s The Rehearsal recently explored, the power imbalance in a cockpit between a senior and a younger or less experienced pilot can have a huge impact on the outcome of a plane mishap. Yet in this case, it seems likely that even in a balanced co-piloting dynamic, nothing could have helped an unwary pilot predict, prevent, or recover from the engine failure.
What do we know about the pilots and the airline?
Sabharwal was a true veteran pilot, with over 15,000 career flight hours, nearly half of them piloting the 787. As a younger pilot, Kunder had just 3,400 hours of flight time, but over 1,100 of them were on the 787.
It’s been widely reported that Sabharwal was planning to retire soon to care for his ailing father, who himself was a career aviation ministry official. In reporting after the crash, he has been universally described by friends and colleagues as extremely kind, gentle, reserved, and soft-spoken. Kunder came from a family of pilots, went to flight school in Florida, and reportedly chose piloting over a career in esports because he loved to fly.
Following the crash, the Telegraph quoted a source claiming that Sabharwal had struggled with depression and had taken mental health leave from the company. However, Air India’s parent company, the Tata Group, contradicted this, with a spokesperson clarifying to the Telegraph that Sabharwal’s last medical leave was a bereavement leave in 2022, and emphasizing that “the preliminary report did not find anything noteworthy” in his recent medical history.
If pilots don’t get therapy, they could endanger themselves and others while in the air. But if they do get therapy, the airline could ground them.
However, it could be very easy for mental health issues in pilots to go undetected and unreported. That’s because the strict scrutiny and restrictions placed upon commercial pilots in the wake of the 2015 Germanwings tragedy — in which a pilot locked his co-pilot out of the cockpit and deliberately crashed the plane, killing everyone on board — creates a dangerous catch-22 for pilots: If they don’t get thorough and regular mental health treatment, they could be endangering themselves and others when they’re in the air. But if they do get mental health treatment, the airline could ground them, perhaps permanently. For pilots who love flying, it’s a major risk assessment: Around 1,100 people have been killed because of plane crashes intentionally caused by pilots since 1982.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
The tragedy comes at a pivotal moment for both Air India and Boeing, which have each been attempting to rebound from criticism.
Air India is one of the oldest and formerly one of the most influential airlines in the world, known for the opulence and exceptional artistic style it cultivated throughout the 20th century. After the company was nationalized in the 1950s, however, its once-sterling reputation significantly backslid, until it was finally re-privatized in 2022 and handed off to the Tata Group. The company’s attempts to revitalize the airline have included investing billions in readying the company for an expanded fleet and a reentry into the global market — an expansion that could be jeopardized because of the high-profile nature of the June crash. India’s civil aviation minister recently announced that the company has additionally received nine safety notices in the last six months.
Meanwhile Boeing continues to face criticism in the face of ongoing safety and maintenance concerns, and recently agreed to pay over $1 billion to avoid criminal prosecution over two plane crashes linked to faulty flight control systems that resulted in the deaths of 346 people. While there’s no indication yet that anything about the Air India crash was due to a defect in the plane, the optics won’t help the beleaguered airline.
Perhaps because the stakes are so high, multiple pilot organizations in India as well as a bevy of media commentators have resisted the preliminary report’s implication that one of the pilots caused the crash. The Airline Pilots Association of India as well as the Indian Commercial Pilots Association both released statements criticizing the preliminary report and objecting to any presumption of guilt. Others have suggested an undetected issue with the plane might be at fault, or that the AAIB, which issued the preliminary report, might have something to hide.
The full investigation into the crash is likely to take at least a year to complete, but given the vagaries of the information obtained from the cockpit, it’s uncertain whether we will ever know more than we currently do. Official aviation organizations have cautioned against a rush to judgment until the investigation is completed.
Air India crash report: Cockpit voices fuel controversy over doomed flight
Preliminary report into crash of Air India Flight 171 fuels speculation. Fuel-control switches on Boeing 787 abruptly moved to “cut-off” Seconds after take-off, cutting fuel to the engines and causing total power loss. The cockpit voice recording captures one pilot asking the other why “did he cut-off?” to which the person replies that he didn’t. At the time of the crash, one engine was regaining thrust while the other had relit but had not yet recovered power. The plane was airborne for less than a minute before crashing into a neighbourhood in the western Indian city of Ahmedabad. The full transcript of the cockpit recording, expected in the final report, should shed clearer light on what truly happened in the June crash.
2 days ago Share Save Soutik Biswas • @soutikBBC India correspondent Share Save
Getty Images Air India Flight 171 crashed into a crowded neighbourhood in Ahmedabad
When the preliminary report into the crash of Air India Flight 171 – which killed 260 people in June – was released, many hoped it would bring some measure of closure. Instead, the 15-page report further stoked speculation. For, despite the measured tone of the report, one detail continues to haunt investigators, aviation analysts and the public alike. Seconds after take-off, both fuel-control switches on the 12-year-old Boeing 787 abruptly moved to “cut-off”, cutting fuel to the engines and causing total power loss – a step normally done only after landing. The cockpit voice recording captures one pilot asking the other why “did he cut-off”, to which the person replies that he didn’t. The recording doesn’t clarify who said what. At the time of take-off, the co-pilot was flying the aircraft while the captain was monitoring. What we know so far about Air India crash investigation
Read the preliminary report
Are India’s skies safe? Air safety watchdog responds amid rising concerns The switches were returned to their normal inflight position, triggering automatic engine relight. At the time of the crash, one engine was regaining thrust while the other had relit but had not yet recovered power. The plane was airborne for less than a minute before crashing into a neighbourhood in the western Indian city of Ahmedabad. Several speculative theories have emerged since the preliminary report – a full report is expected in a year or so. The Wall Street Journal and Reuters news agency have reported that “new details in the probe of last month’s Air India crash are shifting the focus to the senior pilot in the cockpit”. Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera claimed that its sources had told them the first officer repeatedly asked the captain why he “shut off the engines”.
Air India plane descending moments before crash
Sumeet Sabharwal, 56, was the captain on the flight, while Clive Kunder, 32, was the co-pilot who was flying the plane. Together, the two pilots had more than 19,000 hours of flight experience – nearly half of it on the Boeing 787. Both had passed all pre-flight health checks before the crash. Understandably, the wave of speculative leaks has rattled investigators and angered Indian pilots. As theories swirl about Air India crash, key details remain unknown Last week, India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), the lead investigator, stated in a release that “certain sections of the international media are repeatedly attempting to draw conclusions through selective and unverified reporting”. It described these “actions [as] irresponsible, especially while the investigation remains ongoing”. Jennifer Homendy, chairwoman of the US’s National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which is assisting the investigation, said on X that the media reports were “premature and speculative” and that “investigations of this magnitude take time”. Back in India, the Indian Commercial Pilots’ Association condemned the rush to blame the crew as “reckless” and “deeply insensitive”, urging restraint until the final report is out. Sam Thomas, head of the Airline Pilots’ Association of India (ALPA India), told the BBC that “speculation has triumphed over transparency”, emphasising the need to review the aircraft’s maintenance history and documentation alongside the cockpit voice recorder data. At the heart of the controversy is the brief cockpit recording in the report – the full transcript, expected in the final report, should shed clearer light on what truly happened.
Co-Pilot of Doomed Airliner Asked Chilling Question to Captain Before Crash
Co-pilot of Air India Flight 171 asked his captain why he switched off the fuel switches, seconds before the plane went down, killing 260 people. A voice recording of the cockpit was recovered and captured one of the two pilots asking the other why he “did the cutoff,” while the other pilot replies that he didn’t. It has now been revealed that it was the junior pilot, first officer Clive Kunder, 32, who asked the chilling question to his superior, Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, 56. India’s civil aviation authority ordered an inspection of Boeing 737s and 787s in the country.
A preliminary report last week revealed that both fuel control switches were simultaneously turned off, which immediately cut off fuel supply to the engines while the plane was in the air, just seconds after taking off from India’s Ahmedabad Airport on June 12.
A voice recording of the cockpit was recovered and captured one of the two pilots asking the other why he “did the cutoff,” while the other pilot replies that he didn’t.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
It has now been revealed that it was the junior pilot, first officer Clive Kunder, 32, who asked the chilling question to his superior, Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, 56, Bloomberg reports, citing “people familiar with the matter.”
Speculation following the release of the preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau had suggested this might have been the case, as Kunder would have had his hands full flying the plane.
The funeral of junior office Clive Kunder, who is said to have asked his captain why he
The Wall Street Journal reported that the younger pilot “panicked” while Sabharwal remained calm, citing people familiar with U.S. officials’ assessment of the incident.
Moving the spring-loaded fuel toggle requires the pilots to pass over small metal guards, pull the mushroom-shaped lever upwards, before yanking it into an on or off position and setting it.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
The AAIB probe revealed that the “cut off” was corrected 10 seconds after being done. However, it was too late to avoid the disaster that followed.
Officials are now following two lines of enquiry as to how the toggle reached the “cut off” position: human error, or a system error with the Boeing jet.
It comes after India’s civil aviation authority ordered an inspection of Boeing 737s and 787s in the country to ascertain whether the fuel switches were faulty.
Michael Daniel, a retired Federal Aviation Administration inspector and accident investigator, told Bloomberg that microphones in the flight deck could ultimately reveal the truth.
The remains of Captain Sumeet Sabharwal arrive home on June 17 in Mumbai, India. / Hindustan Times / Hindustan Times via Getty Images
“There are multiple microphones around the cockpit, including their headsets,” said Daniel.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
Investigators might be able to discern the sound of the switches, which sit between the pilots, and determine the direction from which it came.
Only one of the 242 people aboard the plane—Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, a 40-year-old British national—survived the crash by escaping through an opening in the fuselage.
India investigators say too early to draw conclusions on Air India crash cause
India’s aircraft accident investigation body says it is too early to reach any “definite conclusions” The Air India Boeing plane crash last month that killed 260 people. The Wall Street Journal reported that a cockpit recording of dialogue between the two pilots of the flight indicated that the captain cut the flow of fuel to the plane’s engines. The AAIB’s preliminary report on the crash on Saturday said one pilot was heard on the cockpit voice recorder asking the other why he cut off the fuel.
“We urge both the public and the media to refrain from spreading premature narratives that risk undermining the integrity of the investigative process,” Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) chief GVG Yugandhar said, adding that the investigation is still not complete.
Earlier on Thursday, the Wall Street Journal, citing people familiar with U.S. officials’ early assessment of evidence, reported that a cockpit recording of dialogue between the two pilots of the flight indicated that the captain cut the flow of fuel to the plane’s engines.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
Reuters could not independently verify the Wall Street Journal’s report.
The AAIB’s preliminary report on the crash on Saturday said one pilot was heard on the cockpit voice recorder asking the other why he cut off the fuel and “the other pilot responded that he did not do so.” It did not identify who made those remarks.
The two pilots in the flight deck were Captain Sumeet Sabharwal and First Officer Clive Kunder, who had total flying experience of 15,638 hours and 3,403 hours, respectively.
Kunder, who was flying the plane, asked Sabharwal why he moved the fuel switches to the “cutoff” position seconds after lifting off the runway, according to the Journal report.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
The newspaper did not say if there was any evidence that Sabharwal did move the switches, beyond the verbal exchange it cited. But it quoted U.S. pilots who have read the Indian authorities’ report as saying that Kunder, the pilot actively flying, likely would have had his hands full pulling back on the Dreamliner’s controls at that stage of the flight.
(Reporting by Abhijith Ganapavaram, Editing by Mark Potter, William Maclean)
What happened to the fuel-control switches on doomed Air India flight 171?
New details about last month’s Air India plane crash in Ahmedabad, which killed 260 people, have emerged. Black box audio recording of last conversation between the two pilots indicates that the captain might have turned off the switches controlling the flow of fuel to the plane’s engines. Last week, a preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) found that both engines had shut down within the space of one second, leading to immediate loss of altitude. However, that report, which stated the fuel-control switches had moved to the “cutoff” position, did not assign blame for the incident. All the passengers on the plane died except one – Vishwaskumar Ramesh, a 40-year-old British national of Indian origin. Some 19 people on the ground were killed as well, and 67 were injured. Two groups of commercial pilots have rejected suggestions that human error may have caused the disaster. But the report noted that a 2018 US Federal Aviation Administration advisory warned of a potential flaw in theFuel-control switch system of some Boeing planes, including the Dreamliner.
According to a report published on Wednesday by The Wall Street Journal quoting sources close to United States officials’ early assessment of evidence, the black box audio recording of the last conversation between the two pilots indicates that the captain might have turned off the switches controlling the flow of fuel to the plane’s engines.
Last week, a preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) found that both engines had shut down within the space of one second, leading to immediate loss of altitude, before the plane crashed into a densely populated suburb of Ahmedabad. However, that report, which stated the fuel-control switches had moved to the “cutoff” position, did not assign blame for the incident.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
Two groups of commercial pilots have rejected suggestions that human error may have caused the disaster.
What happened to the Air India flight?
At 1:38pm (08:08 GMT) on June 12, Air India Flight 171 took off from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport in Ahmedabad for London Gatwick Airport, carrying 230 passengers, 10 cabin crew and two pilots.
About 40 seconds after taking off, both engines of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner lost power during the initial climb. The plane then crashed into the BJ Medical College Hostel in a populated suburb 1.85km (1.15 miles) from the runway.
The aircraft broke apart on impact, causing a fire that destroyed parts of five buildings. All the passengers on the plane died except one – Vishwaskumar Ramesh, a 40-year-old British national of Indian origin. Some 19 people on the ground were killed as well, and 67 were injured.
(Al Jazeera)
What did the AAIB report say?
The AAIB is investigating the crash, the deadliest aviation incident in a decade, along with Boeing and experts from the US and United Kingdom. A preliminary report from the investigators released on Saturday found the aircraft had been deemed airworthy, had up-to-date maintenance and carried no hazardous cargo.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
But the report noted that a 2018 US Federal Aviation Administration advisory warned of a potential flaw in the fuel-control switch system of some Boeing planes, including the Dreamliner. The report said Air India did not inspect the system and it was not mandatory for it to do so. During the crash, recovery systems activated, but only partial engine relight occurred, the report stated.
Both engines shut down just after takeoff as fuel switches moved from the “run” to “cutoff” positions. The report cited a black box audio recording in which one pilot asked, “Why did you cut off?” and the other denied doing so. The speakers were not identified.
Despite taking emergency measures, only one engine partially restarted, and moments before impact, a “Mayday” call was issued before communications were lost.
Air traffic control received no response after the distress call but saw the aircraft crash outside the boundary of the airport. CCTV footage from the airport showed one of the flight recovery systems – known as the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) – deploying shortly after liftoff, followed by a rapid descent.
Who were the pilots?
Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, 56, served as the pilot-in-command on the flight. A soft-spoken veteran who had logged more than 15,600 flight hours, 8,500 of them on the Boeing 787, Sabharwal was known for his reserved nature, meticulous habits and mentorship of junior pilots.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
He trained at India’s premier aviation school, the Indira Gandhi Rashtriya Uran Akademi, and friends who spoke to The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) recalled him as deeply committed to his career as a pilot as well as caring for his ageing father, a former civil aviation official.
First Officer Clive Kunder, 32, was the pilot flying the aircraft at the time of the crash while Sabharwal was the pilot monitoring.
Kunder had accumulated more than 3,400 flying hours, including 1,128 hours on the Dreamliner. Flying was his childhood dream, inspired by his mother’s 30-year career as an Air India flight attendant.
At age 19, he trained in the US and earned a commercial pilot’s licence before returning to India to join Air India in 2017.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
Described by family and friends in the WSJ as joyful, curious and tech-savvy, Kunder was said to be passionate about aviation and excited to be flying the 787.
People stand next to a condolence banner as they wait for the body of Captain Sumeet Sabharwal [File: Hemanshi Kamani/Reuters]
What has emerged this week?
According to US officials who examined evidence from the crash and were quoted by the WSJ, the cockpit voice recording suggests it was Sabharwal who may have moved the fuel control switches to “cutoff” after takeoff, an action that cut power to both engines.
The switches were turned back on within seconds, but it was too late to regain full thrust.
As the flying pilot, Kunder would have been occupied with the climb-out, making it unlikely he could have manipulated the switches, according to unnamed US pilots quoted by the WSJ. Sabharwal, as the monitoring pilot, would have had a freer hand, they said.
What are the fuel-control switches?
Located on a key cockpit panel just behind the throttle levers between the two pilot seats, these switches manage the flow of fuel to each of the aircraft’s two engines.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
Pilots use these fuel cutoff switches to start or shut down the engines while on the ground. In flight, the pilots can manually shut down or restart an engine in the event of a failure.
How do fuel-control switches work?
The switches are designed for manual operation. They are spring-loaded to stay firmly in place and cannot be moved accidentally or with light pressure during flight operations.
The switches have two settings: “cutoff” and “run”. The “cutoff” mode stops fuel from reaching the engines while “run” allows normal fuel flow. To change positions, a pilot must first pull the switch upwards before shifting it between “run” and “cutoff”.
Could the crash have been caused by human error?
Experts are cautious about this. US aviation analyst Mary Schiavo told the Financial Express in India that people should not draw premature conclusions, arguing that there is as yet no definitive evidence of pilot error.
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
She highlighted a similar incident during which one of the engines suddenly shut down midflight on an All Nippon Airways Boeing 787 during its final approach to Osaka, Japan, in 2019.
Investigators later found that the aircraft’s software had mistakenly interpreted the plane as being on the ground, triggering the thrust control malfunction accommodation system, which automatically moved the fuel switch from “run” to “cutoff” without any action from the pilots.
Schiavo warned that a similar malfunction cannot yet be ruled out in the Air India crash and stressed the importance of releasing the full cockpit voice recorder (CVR) transcript to avoid misleading interpretations.
“There is nothing here to suggest pilot suicide or murder,” she said. “The voices, words and sounds on CVRs must be carefully analysed.”
Advertisement Advertisement
Advertisement Advertisement
India’s Federation of Indian Pilots criticised the framing of the preliminary findings in the media this week.
In a public statement, the federation noted that the report relies heavily on paraphrased CVR excerpts and lacks comprehensive data.
“Assigning blame before a transparent, data-driven investigation is both premature and irresponsible,” the statement read before adding that it undermines the professionalism of the crew and causes undue distress to their families.
Campbell Wilson, chief executive of Air India, this week urged staff not to make premature conclusions about the causes of the crash, telling them this week that the investigation was “far from over”.