AAIB Reveals Black Box Of AI 171 Was Found Intact Initial Crash Report Out
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
32 minutes ago
- The Print
Air India crash spotlights 2018 advisory on Boeing switches installed with locking feature disengaged
On 12 June, Air India Flight 171, scheduled to fly from Ahmedabad to London, tragically crashed soon after take-off, resulting in the death of all 241 individuals on board, including 229 passengers and 12 crew members. The sole survivor was passenger Vishwashkumar Ramesh, who escaped through the emergency exit. Considering people on the ground, at least 275 lives were lost. This design of fuel control switches with the locking mechanism is also present in other Boeing models, including the 787 series. B787-8 aircraft VT-ANB, the Dreamliner that crashed, has the same component, 4TL837-3D, as confirmed in the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau's (AAIB's) preliminary report. Aircraft that run on two engines have two toggle switches for fuel control. New Delhi: Operators of Boeing Model 737 had reported to the Boeing Company that the fuel control switches installed in their aircraft have the locking mechanism disengaged—a feature that leaves room for inadvertent operation—according to a December 2018 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin. The AAIB report refers to a cockpit conversation between the two AI 171 pilots regarding the fuel switches. Seconds after the flight took off, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel switches transitioned from the 'run' position to the 'cut off' position, one after another, within a gap of one second, the report says. One of the pilots asked the other why he 'cut off'. The latter replied that he did not. Speaking to ThePrint, a pilot—familiar with the aircraft—explained that under no circumstances can fuel switches move on their own, and only in case of dual-engine failure, both switches are 'cut off' and 'run' in a cycle. Experts say the fuel switches remain guarded in a locking mechanism, leaving little to no room for inadvertently applying pressure. Moreover, the Enhanced Airborne Flight Recorders (EAFR) data of AI 171 shows the switches of both engines of AI 171 transitioned back from 'cut off' to 'run', indicating that the pilots attempted to save the aircraft seconds before the crash. One engine restarted, but the other did not. The two-page FAA bulletin—sent to registered owners and operators of several Boeing models, including the 787 series—asked them to inspect the fuel control switch locking feature for possible disengagement. It, however, did not come with an airworthiness directive as data was limited, and the feature was considered 'not' unsafe. The preliminary report on the 12 June crash mentions that Air India informed investigators that the suggested inspection did not take place for AI 171 since it was not mandatory. The background of the bulletin, however, mentioned that fuel control switches have a locking feature, which should remain engaged to prevent 'inadvertent operation that could result in unintended switch movement between the fuel supply and fuel cutoff positions'. So, when the lock is engaged, the pilot must lift the switch to change its position. However, if the locking feature remains disengaged, the switch can move between the two positions 'without lifting the switch'. The switch remains exposed to potential 'inadvertent operation' and could have an 'unintended consequence, such as an in-flight engine shutdown'. (Edited by Madhurita Goswami) Also Read: Inside the final moments of Air India 171—the hrs leading up to take-off & the 32 seconds before crash
The Print
32 minutes ago
- The Print
Inside the final moments of Air India 171—the hrs leading up to take-off & the 32 seconds before crash
The report reveals what happened in the run-up to the aircraft take-off and the crucial 32 seconds after its take-off. AI 171, scheduled to fly from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick, tragically crashed soon after take-off, resulting in the loss of 275 lives. This includes all 241 individuals aboard—229 passengers and 12 crew members—and people on the ground. The sole survivor was passenger Vishwashkumar Ramesh, who managed to escape through the emergency exit. New Delhi: The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) has released a preliminary report of the initial investigation into the 12 June crash of Air India Flight AI 171 in Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Before take-off 11:17:00 IST The aircraft concerned—a Boeing 787-8, VT-ANB—touched down at Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport and was parked at Bay 34. 11:55:00 The crew of flight AI 171 arrived at the airport, and breath analyser tests found all of them fit to fly. 12:10:00 The aircraft was released for flight after Air India's on-duty Aircraft Maintenance Engineer carried out troubleshooting, according to the Flight Information Manual. The crew of the previous flight, AI423, using the aircraft, had made a 'pilot defect report' entry related to a stabiliser sensor—status message 'STAB POS XDCR'—in the tech log. 12:35:00 The boarding gate CCTV recording showed the AI171 crew arriving for duty. The flight crew included a pilot-in-command holding an airline transport pilot licence, a co-pilot holding a commercial pilot licence, and 10 cabin crew. 13:10:00 The scheduled start time for AI171-related operations. The co-pilot was supposed to fly, and the senior pilot was to monitor the flight. They arrived in Ahmedabad from Mumbai on 11 June and had adequate rest. 13:13:00 AI171—a Boeing 787-8, VT-ANB—requested pushback and startup. There were 230 passengers on board. Fuel on board was 54,200 kg, and the take-off weight was 2,13,401 kg—within the limit allowed. There were no 'dangerous goods' on board the aircraft. 13:13:13 Air Traffic Control (ATC) approved pushback. 13:16:59 ATC approved engine startup clearance. 13:18:38 ATC queried if the aircraft required the full length of the runway, and the aircraft confirmed the requirement of the full length of Runway 23. The aircraft was observed departing from Bay 34. 13:25:15 The aircraft requested taxi clearance, and the ATC granted it. 13:26:08 Aircraft taxied from the bay towards Runway 23 via Taxiway R4. 13:32:03 The aircraft control was transferred from 'Ground' to 'Tower'. 13:33:45 Aircraft was instructed to line up on Runway 23. 13:37:33 Aircraft was cleared for take-off from Runway 23. The wind was coming from 240 degrees (west-southwest) at a speed of six knots. 13:37:37 AI171 started rolling. 13:38:33 The aircraft crossed the take-off decision speed (V1)—the point beyond which take-off must continue even if an issue arises—and subsequently achieved 153 knots indicated airspeed (IAS), indicating a commitment to take-off and sufficient speed for liftoff or rotation, according to the enhanced airborne flight recorder (EAFR). 13:38:35 The aircraft reached the Vr speed of 155 knots—the rotation speed at which the pilot begins to gently lift the nose wheel off the runway, initiating the aircraft's take-off and transition to flight. 13:38:39 The aircraft air/ground sensors transitioned to air mode, consistent with liftoff. Everything was normal up to this point. After take-off 13:38:42 IST The aircraft reached its maximum recorded airspeed of 180 knots indicated airspeed, representing the highest speed measured by the aircraft's instruments. Immediately after, the fuel switches for Engine 1 and Engine 2 were turned off one after the other, just one second apart. As the engines stopped getting fuel, their speeds began dropping from the take-off levels. According to the cockpit audio, one pilot asked the other why he turned the fuel off, and the other pilot replied that he didn't do it. The airport's CCTV footage showed the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) deployed right after the plane took off during its initial climb. At the time, there were no signs of birds near the flight path. The aircraft began to lose height before it even passed the airport's perimeter fence. 13:38:47 Both engines slowed down below the lowest speed required to run properly, so the small emergency turbine called the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) started working to supply hydraulic power and keep important systems functioning, according to the EAFR. 13:38:52 The fuel switch for Engine 1 was turned back on from the off position (cutoff) to the on position (run), meaning fuel started flowing to the engine again, according to the EAFR. 13:38:54 The Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) inlet door started to open automatically, i.e., the system was getting ready to start the APU on its own. 13:38:56 The fuel switch for Engine 2 was turned back on from off (cutoff) to on (run). When this happens during flight, the engine's automatic control system—FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control)—takes over to restart the engine and bring its power back by managing the fuel and ignition. The temperature at the back of both engines—EGT (Exhaust Gas Temperature)—went up, indicating that the engines were trying to restart. Engine 1 stopped slowing down and started getting back to normal speed. Engine 2 managed to restart but kept slowing down, so the system kept adding fuel again and again to try to speed it up and recover properly. 13:39:11 The EAFR recording stopped. Crash 13:39:05 IST One of the pilots transmitted 'Mayday Mayday Mayday'. The air traffic control officer (ATCO) enquired about the call sign. The ATCO did not get any response but observed the aircraft crashing outside the airport boundary and activated the emergency response. 13:44:44 Crash fire tender left the airport premises for rescue and firefighting, with the fire and rescue services of the local administration joining them. (Edited by Madhurita Goswami) Also Read: Why do airplanes still crash?
The Print
32 minutes ago
- The Print
Air India crash prelim report sparks criticism, debate: ‘Bias toward pilot error, shrouded in secrecy'
According to the report, fuel to both engines was cut off, even though the pilots could be heard saying they did not do it. They also seemed to have tried to restart fuel supply to the engines, but could not manage to keep the aircraft up. On 12 June, the London-bound 787-8 Dreamliner crashed within 1 minute of departure, right after take off. At least 275 people died in the crash, 241 of the 242 on board. While many pointed out that the report raised many questions and provided few answers, some already began a blame game. New Delhi: Soon after the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) of India came out with its 15-page report on the AI-171 crash, reactions started pouring in, despite Minister of State for Civil Aviation warning that this was just a preliminary report and people should not jump to conclusions. Minister of State for Civil Aviation Murlidhar Mohol's warned after the report was made public: 'The AAIB has brought out a preliminary report. This is not the final report. Until the final report comes out, we should not arrive at any conclusion. AAIB is an autonomous authority, and the ministry does not interfere in their work.' But despite this, the detailed findings in the report have already sparked public debate and raised serious concerns. 'The Preliminary Report on the accident of B787 of Airlines raises more questions than answers,' said Aviation expert and former Head of Operations at Indian Airlines, Shakti Lumba, reacting to the findings in a post on X. 'What I find interesting is this observation: Any such action is the purview of @DGCAIndia, and giving a clean chit to @BoeingAirplanes, @airindia, and @GeneralElectric sours the whole investigation—especially given the fact that the Service Bulletin (SB) on the fuel switches was ignored. A safe airline would have carried it out no matter what,' Lumba added. The report also mentions that the aircraft accelerated normally during takeoff. But seconds later both engines of the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner shut down one second apart. This caused the aircraft to lose altitude rapidly and crash near the boundary of Ahmedabad's Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport. 'Does the takeoff roll and critical gates (V1, Vr) versus time indicate a normal acceleration till liftoff? There's nothing in the CVR or prelim report that says it doesn't. Why would any trained crew operate a fuel switch at that critical juncture?' asks K.P. Sanjeev Kumar, widely known as Kaypius, is a former Indian Navy test pilot. 'Lack of transparency' In response to the AAIB's preliminary report, the ALPA-India (The Association of Licensed Pilots of India) has issued an official statement expressing serious concerns over the investigation process and the manner in which the report was presented to the public. 'Investigations continue to be shrouded in secrecy, undermining credibility and public trust. Qualified, experienced personnel—especially line pilots—are still not being included in the investigation team,' said ALPA-India. ALPA-I also raised concerns over a recent Wall Street Journal article that mentioned the inadvertent movement of fuel control switches, questioning how such sensitive details were leaked to international media while the investigation was still ongoing. ALPA-India also rejected any presumption of pilot guilt. 'The investigation suggests a bias toward pilot error, we reject this presumption and insist on a fair, fact-based inquiry,' the statement further said. Preliminary rep sparks debate Reactions—not only from the general public and families of victims, but also from aviation officials and industry experts—are mixed. Former Union Civil Aviation Minister and BJP leader Syed Shahnawaz Hussain said, 'This report is an eye-opener about how the aircraft engine was not getting fuel.' Families of those who lost their lives in the tragic Air India Flight AI-171 crash have also expressed concerns following the release of the AAIB's report. Speaking to ANI, Yashpal Singh Vansdiya, who lost both his parents in the crash, raised questions about the findings. 'I have certain questions to ask the government and the investigation agencies. Based on the report, which mentions one pilot asking the other if he has turned off the switch, it means there were some technical issues. Were all preventive checks of the aircraft done? I hope I get answers to all these questions,' he said. As the report was released a month after the incident, there are questions also on the timing of its release. 'Like everything the Modi government does, the report was released late in the night—at 2 am—under the cover and silence of darkness,' said Rajya Sabha MP and All India Trinamool Congress (TMC) national spokesperson Saket Gokhale. (Edited by Viny Mishra) Also read: Fuel switches transitioned to 'cut-off' 1 second apart for both engines—Air India crash preliminary report
