Air India finds ‘no issues' with fuel switches on other Boeings after crash

The Guardian

18 hours ago

Air India has said it found 'no issues' with the fuel switches on its other Boeing planes after the fatal crash that killed 260 people last month, as a US report suggested investigators have turned their attention to the actions of the plane's captain.
A preliminary report into the incident, released last week, found that the switches that controlled fuel going into the engines had been turned off 'one after another' just after the plane took off from Ahmedabad airport.
It meant the engines were starved of fuel, causing them to shut down. Moments afterwards, the London-bound plane lost altitude and crashed, killing 241 people on board and 19 people on the ground.
The preliminary report, by India's aviation authority, made no recommendations for action against Boeing, which manufactures the 787 Dreamliner. However, after the report's release, Air India ordered that the locking mechanisms of all fuel control switches – designed to prevent them from being accidentally turned off in-flight – on its Boeing planes be examined as a precautionary measure.
On Thursday, an official from Air India confirmed that 'inspections have been completed and no issues were found'.
According to a report by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), an early assessment made by US officials has indicated that investigators are now focusing on the actions of the plane's captain, Sumeet Sabharwal, a veteran pilot, who it said is believed to have been the one who moved the fuel switches to cut-off.
The black-box recording is reported to indicate that it was the plane's first officer, Clive Kunder, who was flying the aircraft during take-off and had questioned why the pilot had moved the fuel switches to cut off. Sabharwal had replied that he had not.
The WSJ cited what it said were people familiar with US officials' early assessment of evidence uncovered in the crash investigation as saying that Kunder, the first officer, had panicked, while the captain had remained calm.
The sources cited by the WSJ did not state if the action was believed to be deliberate or accidental. It was reported that US officials believed that criminal investigators should also be involved to look into the incident.
The WSJ did not name the sources it interviewed and Indian authorities have not attributed any fault in their preliminary investigation.
India's preliminary report had summarised the exchange between the pilot and the first officer but had not attributed the quotes. A direct transcript of the recorded discussion has not yet been published by officials.
The fuel switches were moved back on seconds after, and one of the engines re-started, but it was not enough to reverse the plane's deceleration. A 'mayday, mayday, mayday' message was transmitted to air traffic control before the plane hit the ground, just 32 seconds after it had left the runway.
The Federation of Indian Pilots strongly criticised the WSJ report as 'baseless', accusing it of attempting to pin the blame on the pilot.
Sign up to Headlines UK
Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning
after newsletter promotion
After the release of the report last week, India's civil aviation minister Kinjarapu Ram Mohan Naidu said that people should not 'jump to conclusions' after the report, citing the welfare and wellbeing of India's pilots.
Two groups represented pilots also condemned the suggestion of a pilot error or action to be the cause of the crash as a 'reckless and unfounded insinuation'.
A report in the Indian Express said that investigators were also examining previous technical glitches with the plane, to explore the possibility of an 'un-commanded transition' of the fuel control switches.
Relatives of the 241 passengers who died on board the London Gatwick bound flight have expressed frustration at the preliminary report, which was accused of being 'vague and inexact'.
In an email to staff after the report, Air India chief executive Campbell Wilson acknowledged the report had 'opened additional questions' but urged staff to 'avoid drawing premature conclusions as the investigation is far from over'.