Pilots Unions Say Its Unfair To Blame Air India Crew For Plane Crash
The Indian Commercial Pilots' Association (ICPA) on Sunday condemned 'insinuations of pilot suicide' as baseless and insensitive, saying the crew acted in line with their training for an emergency.
'Speculation is irresponsible and cruel. There is absolutely no basis for such a claim at this stage… invoking such a serious allegation based on incomplete information is not only irresponsible, it is deeply insensitive,' ICPA said in a statement.
The Airline Pilots' Association of India (ALPA) has already criticised the preliminary investigation report, calling the tone of the probe biased towards pilot error and lacking in transparency. They have demanded that line pilots be included in the investigation process, at least as observers, to ensure transparency and accountability.
The pilots' associations have also questioned the selective media leaks hinting at pilot error ahead of the publication of the preliminary report.
A preliminary report released by the AAIB on Saturday stated that both engines of the Air India Dreamliner lost thrust after the two fuel cut-off switches moved from the 'RUN' to the 'CUTOFF' position, within seconds of take-off.
The cockpit voice recorder has revealed that one of the pilots told the other that he did not turn off the fuel control switches. The fuel switches were then returned back to the RUN position just before the plane crashed.
According to former AAIB director Aurobindo Handa, the report presents a factual timeline but does not identify what triggered the failure. 'Even though the report is out, it just contains the facts… what has gone on in those 30-odd seconds. It is nothing conclusive.'
He pointed out that preliminary and final findings often differ in air crash investigations and that a deeper technical analysis is still required. 'We have seen the initial findings and the final findings — they are at variance in the majority of the investigations,' he explained.
Union Civil Aviation Minister Ram Mohan Naidu also said on Saturday that the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau's report on the Air India crash was based on preliminary findings, and urged against reaching any conclusions until the final report is released.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
15 hours ago
- Indian Express
Air India crash preliminary report: A transparent probe is the least that is owed to the dead and their families
The preliminary report of the Air Accidents Investigation Board (AAIB) on the June 12 crash of Air India Flight 171, which killed 241 people on board and 19 on the ground in Ahmedabad, is only a first step in the search for answers. While the AAIB met the 30-day guideline in accordance with the International Civil Aviation Organisation's rules, the 15-page report was released at the very last minute by the Ministry of Civil Aviation, in the early hours of Saturday. It says that the Boeing 787-8 aircraft's two-engine fuel control switches transitioned from Run to Cutoff position within a second of each other just after take-off. In the only bit of information released from the cockpit voice recorder (CVR), one of the pilots is recorded asking the other why he cut off the fuel, to which the latter says that he did not. The switches were returned to the Run position, the report says, triggering automatic engine relight, but it was too late. While the full and final report will be out in a year's time, what the AAIB report says — and what it doesn't say — has raised concerns. For instance, why does it include only a single paraphrased exchange between the pilots regarding fuel cut-off, and not the full CVR audio and transcript? Notably, it does not say that either pilot moved the fuel control switches during take-off; it merely notes that the switches 'transitioned from Run to Cutoff position'. Curiously, there has been no press briefing on the report during which questions could be addressed. Not surprisingly, the Airline Pilots' Association of India has criticised the ambiguity, calling it a premature insinuation of pilot error. The report mentions a 2018 Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) issued by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which flagged that some Boeing 737s' fuel control switches had been installed with the locking feature disengaged — the 787 version has similar switches. As the SAIB was just an advisory, Air India did not carry out any inspections. In a welcome move, the DGCA has now asked airlines to inspect fuel switch locking systems in Boeing 787 and 737 aircraft. The report's concluding section says that it does not recommend any action on Boeing or General Electric. Meanwhile, in what appears to amount to a clean chit for both companies, the FAA has declared that the preliminary report 'found no urgent safety concerns' relating to either the engines or the aircraft systems of the 787-8. In this context, the case of the Boeing 737 MAX injects a necessary note of caution. Following the crashes of Lion Air Flight 610 in October 2018 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 in March 2019 — both linked to similar technical faults — the FAA had initially affirmed the aircraft's airworthiness, only to ground the entire 737 MAX fleet between March 2019 and December 2020. It would be unwise to draw definitive conclusions from the preliminary report, which acknowledges in the foreword that the findings are provisional and subject to revision. Until the final report is out, all the agencies involved must take every possible measure to ensure a fair, transparent, and fact-based inquiry. That is the very least that is owed to the dead and their families — and the safety of passengers every day.
Economic Times
a day ago
- Economic Times
AI 171 crash probe raises more questions than answers
The sole purpose of states devoting resources to investigate an air accident is to determine the cause and take corrective action to prevent a recurrence. What such an investigation absolutely shouldn't do is apportion or indicate blame on investigators in the AI 171 crash have managed to do with the preliminary report that was released on Saturday is exactly opposite of that. It has left the airlines and regulators wondering what should be done to prevent another air tragedy, while hinting at casting aspersions on capability or mental health of pilots. International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) recommends that in cases of heightened public attention, the state investigating the case should publish the report within 30 days. It should lay down all facts obtained during the early stages of the investigation and provide safety recommendations if it deems fit at that stage. Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) has done remarkably well to meet this deadline. But a bare reading of the report reflects it trying to hide more than providing information. Initial reports of investigations into similar crashes present a transcript of the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) along with timestamps. For instance, while releasing the early report into the investigation of the accidents involving Boeing 737 Max aircraft, Indonesian and Ethiopian authorities laid out the entire transcript of the CVR. It depicted the pilots' struggle to regain control of the plane despite performing all procedures mandated by the manufacturer. Airlines and regulators across the world look to such cues to take preventive action so as to cut down any factors that can risk flight of such details in AAIB's report - while cherry-picking a single sentence in which one pilot is heard asking the other regarding why he had cut off the fuel switch, to which the reply was that he hadn't - is questionable. It has led to pointless speculation on pilot error, or worse, pilot suicide, since these switches in crafts like the 787 have safeguards like metal lock and a guard built around them to avoid any accidental 'switching off'.By keeping the report open-ended, AAIB has provided fertile ground for claims and counter-claims that can affect pilots at large. Further, it gives no further details on what happened in the 10 secs between the switches being cut off and being put on again. Surely, sharing such details wouldn't have harmed the probe process. Instead, it would have helped to understand why investigators believe they see no risk with either the Boeing 787 aircraft or GE report also cites a 2018 advisory of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which flagged the possibility of disengagement of the fuel switch-locking mechanism, although in a different type of aircraft. Because the bulletin was advisory and the issue was not deemed an unsafe condition, it stated that Air India did not conduct inspections on its fleet. It raises the suspicion about whether the crash was due to bad engineering practice. But in the very next sentence, the report states that Air India replaced the throttle control module twice, in 2019 and a modern-generation jet like Boeing 787, the thrust control module and fuel control switches are physically integrated into the same unit, and replacing the module also involves replacing fuel switches. If at all investigators felt that it was a significant fact in the accident, the least they could have done is advise airlines to check the locking mechanism of the crux of ensuring success of a process is to maintain public trust. The report has managed to break that trust with some claiming it's hiding pilot error, intentional or not. From the very start, the investigation process has been shrouded with controversy with AAIB or civil aviation ministry deciding not to give any update. It is essential to effectively communicate in today's 'real-time information' era. In the absence of that, it's misinformation that fills the void. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. The 10-second mystery: Did the Air India crash report hide more than what it revealed? Can Indian IT's 'pyramid' survive the GenAI shake-up? Zee promoters have a new challenge to navigate. And it's not about funding or Sebi probe. The deluge that's cooling oil prices despite the Iran conflict Stock Radar: Natco Pharma stock showing signs of momentum after falling over 30% from highs – what should investors do? In mid-caps, 'just hold' often creates wealth: 10 mid-cap stocks from different sectors with upside potential up to 44% F&O Talk | Foreign outflows, IT drag pull nifty lower; next support at 24,500: Rahul Ghose How to use dividend yield in volatile times: 6 stocks where this strategy has a high chance of giving much better returns
Hindustan Times
a day ago
- Hindustan Times
Priyanka Chaturvedi seeks probe into 'leak' of Air India plane crash report to international media
New Delhi, Shiv Sena leader Priyanka Chaturvedi on Monday wrote to Civil Aviation Minister Kinjarapu Rammohan Naidu, demanding a probe to figure out how details of a preliminary report into the crash of Air India flight AI171 was released to the international media before its release in India. Priyanka Chaturvedi seeks probe into 'leak' of Air India plane crash report to international media In a letter to Naidu, she said a formal inquiry should be conducted into the "leak". Seeking transparency regarding the authorship of the report, Chaturvedi said the names of all members of the investigation panel should be made public, and the interim report should bear the signatures of each panel member. The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau on Saturday released its preliminary report on the crash of Air India's Boeing 787-8 plane that killed 260 people, including 241 people onboard. The aircraft, which was operating the flight AI171 from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick, crashed into a building soon after takeoff. Chaturvedi wrote, "I write to you to express serious concerns regarding the manner in which the recent interim investigation report by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau was handled and disseminated, particularly in light of media reports surfacing in international publications before the report was officially made public in India." She said she is writing given the serious implications for public safety, pilot morale, and India's global aviation standing. "Because one can't be a mute spectator to what is happening with regards to the narrative around the AI171 crash and its interim report," she said, sharing her letter on X. "It is deeply troubling that sensitive details of the AAIB report were available to foreign news agencies and published in outlets such as The Wall Street Journal before any official release in India. This raises urgent questions about how the contents of the report were accessed by foreign entities prior to their dissemination to the Indian public and concerned stakeholders. "Such a breach not only undermines the credibility of our aviation safety institutions but also reflects a serious lapse in information security and protocol," the Rajya Sabha MP said. She also claimed that the nonstop insinuations are being made against the deceased pilots through implication and selective leaks of the interim report through the international media are "absolutely reprehensible". "Such motivated speculation via broadcast, print and digital platforms shows a more sinister attempt to malign our pilots who aren't alive to put their case even pilot associations have raised their objections," Chaturvedi said. She also demanded that the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting issue clear media guidelines on how interim reports from regulatory and investigative bodies such as AAIB should be reported upon, considering their potential impact on aviation personnel, airline operations, and public perception globally. "Inclusion of experienced aviators in every stage of such investigations, either as investigators or as qualified observers, to ensure technical accuracy and stakeholder confidence," she demanded. Chaturvedi also alleged that the report was quietly released during late hours, with no public briefing, no signed interim findings, and no clarity on the process that led to its release. "The lack of transparency in such a critical matter gives rise to legitimate concerns about whose interests are being served and whether due process has been followed," she noted. The Shiv Sena leader said it is also important to highlight that pilot associations have publicly voiced their apprehensions about the composition of the investigation team. They have pointed out that no experienced aviator appears to have been involved in the investigation process, and have even offered to contribute voluntarily as observers to ensure credibility, technical insight, and fair representation, she said. Seconds before Air India flight 171 crashed while ascending from Ahmedabad, the fuel control switches of both its engines were cut off, according to the preliminary investigation report, suggesting a catastrophic pilot error in the cockpit of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. The Airlines Pilots Association of India disagreed with the report, saying the investigation is "shrouded in secrecy," appears to be biased against the pilot and has come to a conclusion hastily. A 15-page preliminary investigation report into the disaster revealed that fuel-control switches of the two engines moved from the "run" to the "cutoff" position, within the space of one second, leading to immediate loss of altitude. In the cockpit voice recording, one pilot is heard asking the other why he cut off the fuel. The other denied having done so. The report by the AIIB, released early on Saturday, neither concluded any reason for the switches moving nor apportioned explicit blame for the crash. It also did not identify the pilots in the voice recording. But it also said no fault was found in the aircraft, leaving only the possibility of pilot error as the cause. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
