‘No basis': Pilot groups reject claims of human error in Air India crash
Two groups of commercial pilots have rejected claims that human error caused an Air India plane crash that killed 260 people after a preliminary investigation found the aircraft's engine fuel switches had been turned off.
The Indian Commercial Pilots Association (ICPA) and the Airline Pilots' Association of India (ALPA India) issued statements on Sunday after the release of the initial findings, which showed that fuel control switches to the engines of Flight AI171 were moved from the 'run' to the 'cutoff' position moments before last month's deadly impact.
The report sparked speculation by several independent aviation experts that deliberate or inadvertent pilot action may have caused the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner to crash soon after takeoff from Ahmedabad in western India.
Flight AI171 was headed to London's Gatwick Airport when it crashed on June 12.
The report on the crash, issued on Saturday by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), did not offer any conclusions or apportion blame for the disaster but indicated that one pilot asked the other why he cut off the fuel and the second pilot responded that he had not.
After the switches flipped, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner immediately began to lose thrust and altitude, according to the report.
One pilot can be heard on the cockpit voice recorder asking the other why he had cut off the fuel. 'The other pilot responded that he did not do so,' the report said.
It did not identify which remarks were made by the flight's captain and which by the first officer or which pilot transmitted 'Mayday, Mayday, Mayday' just before the crash.
No more details about the cockpit dialogue between the pilots were revealed.
The ICPA said it was 'deeply disturbed by speculative narratives, … particularly the reckless and unfounded insinuation of pilot suicide'.
'There is absolutely no basis for such a claim at this stage,' it said in a statement. 'It is deeply insensitive to the individuals and families involved.
'To casually suggest pilot suicide without verified evidence is a gross violation of ethical reporting and a disservice to the dignity of the profession.' The ICPA was referring to a number of aviation experts suggesting engine fuel control switches can only be moved deliberately and manually.
United States-based aviation safety expert John Cox earlier said a pilot would not be able to accidentally move the fuel switches that feed the engines. 'You can't bump them and they move,' he told the Reuters news agency.
ALPA India, which has 800 members, also accused the investigative agency of 'secrecy' surrounding the investigation, saying 'suitably qualified personnel' were not involved in it.
'We feel that the investigation is being driven in a direction presuming the guilt of pilots and we strongly object to this line of thought,' ALPA India President Sam Thomas said in a statement issued on Saturday.
ALPA requested the AAIB be included as 'observers so as to provide the requisite transparency in the investigations'.
Meanwhile, Air India CEO Campbell Wilson said the probe into last month's crash is far from over and it is unwise to jump to any premature conclusions.
Wilson added: 'The preliminary report identified no cause nor made any recommendations, so I urge everyone to avoid drawing premature conclusions as the investigation is far from over.'
The crash killed all but one of the 242 people on board as well as 19 people on the ground.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Trump's big beautiful police state is here
On July 4, United States President Donald Trump signed into law his so-called 'One Big Beautiful Bill', which will reduce taxes for the rich, punish the poor, and otherwise propel American plutocracy to ever more noxious heights. Just days earlier, Trump's Vice President JD Vance took to X to underline the key component of the legislation: 'Everything else — the CBO [Congressional Budget Office] score, the proper baseline, the minutiae of the Medicaid policy — is immaterial compared to the ICE money and immigration enforcement provisions.' Indeed, the bill allocates the unprecedentedly ludicrous sum of $175bn to anti-immigration efforts, approximately $30bn of which will go directly to the notorious federal law enforcement agency ICE, known in long form as US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Another $45bn is earmarked for the construction of new immigration detention centres, which, as the American Immigration Council notes, 'represents a 265 percent annual budget increase to ICE's current detention budget'. Thanks to these budgetary machinations, ICE now occupies the position of the largest US federal law enforcement agency in history, with more money at its annual disposal than the military of any country in the world apart from the US and China. Given that ICE agents have as of late made a name for themselves running around in masks and kidnapping people, however, one would be forgiven for seeing this sudden windfall to the agency as something less than, um, 'beautiful'. Of course, the fanatical increase in ICE funding is no surprise coming from a president whose obsession with the idea of deporting millions of people has not prompted him to contemplate how, precisely, a US economy fundamentally dependent on undocumented labour will continue to function in the absence of said labourers. Anyway, the arrangement means big bucks for the detention-industrial complex, including detention companies like GEO Group and CoreCivic that are contracted by ICE. A July 4 Washington Post article on ICE's impending 'detention blitz' reported that each company coincidentally happened to donate half a million dollars to Trump's inauguration in January. The Post article also provided other clues as to how US 'democracy' really works: 'On calls with Wall Street analysts this year, Geo Group executives have primed shareholders for a government contract bonanza that could boost annual revenue by more than 40 percent and profits by more than 60 percent.' But since the government cannot come right out and say this is all about money, it has to invent other narratives, such as that ICE is protecting the US from 'vicious criminal illegal aliens'. Never mind that the vast majority of those detained by the agency have no criminal record whatsoever. Among ICE's ever-growing list of victims is a six-year-old Honduran boy with leukaemia, who was arrested in late May at the Los Angeles immigration courthouse where he had come with his family for a scheduled asylum hearing. This month, massive ICE raids on two California farms resulted in more than 360 arrests and the death of 57-year-old Jaime Alanis, a Mexican farmworker who fell from a greenhouse roof during the upheaval. Nor are all of ICE's detainees undocumented; after all, it is hard to be discerning when you are scrambling to meet detention quotas, and when you are well aware of the fact that you are totally above the law. One of the detainees from the farm raids was 25-year-old security guard George Retes, a US Army veteran, no less, who was pepper-sprayed and then jailed for three days, missing his three-year-old daughter's birthday party. He was released with no explanation. Now imagine the landscape with an additional $175bn in 'ICE money and immigration enforcement provisions', to borrow Vance's words. As if manic and arbitrary detention operations and the elimination of due process were not cause enough for concern, ICE is also being utilised as a force for political repression and the criminalisation of dissent. This was seen in the recent spate of abductions of international scholars opposed to the ongoing US-backed Israeli genocide in the Gaza Strip, including 30-year-old Rumeysa Ozturk, a Turkish doctoral student focusing on childhood development at Tufts University in Massachusetts. En route to an iftar dinner in March, Ozturk was surrounded by masked agents, forced into an unmarked vehicle, and disappeared to an ICE detention centre in Louisiana administered by GEO Group – all because she had co-authored an article for the university newspaper the previous year expressing solidarity with Palestinians. In a new essay for Vanity Fair, Ozturk reflects on her 45-day detention in appalling conditions that were only made bearable thanks to the solidarity of her fellow female detainees, hailing from an array of nations. Ozturk writes: 'One time, an officer came and took away all the cookie boxes, claiming we would use them to make weapons. Another time, we were shocked to witness an officer physically push two women in the kitchen.' When Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota, recently had the nerve to refer to ICE as 'Trump's modern-day Gestapo', the US Department of Homeland Security threw a tantrum over his 'dangerous rhetoric', and issued a press release asserting that, 'while politicians like Gov. Walz fight to protect criminal illegal aliens, ICE officers will continue risking their lives to arrest murderers, kidnappers, and pedophiles'. This was itself 'dangerous rhetoric', no doubt, coming from the folks who are kidnapping doctoral students, six-year-old leukaemia patients, army veterans, and so on. Although undocumented workers might be the most immediate and visible victims of the super-funding of ICE stipulated by the One Big Beautiful Bill, the consequences for US society as a whole cannot be understated. At the end of the day, a rogue agency snatching people off the street while entire communities live in fear does not denote a 'land of the free', particularly when the president appears to view anyone who disagrees with him as potentially eligible for criminal punishment. Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, has observed that 'you don't build the mass deportation machine without building the police state first'. And if we consider the Cambridge dictionary entry for police state – 'a country in which the government uses the police to severely limit people's freedom' – it seems the US already fits the definition to a big beautiful T. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Al Jazeera
a day ago
- Al Jazeera
Vehicle driven into crowd in Los Angeles, injuring at least 30: LAFD
The Los Angeles Fire Department in California, United States has said a vehicle has been driven into a crowd of people in East Hollywood, injuring at least 30. Three people are in critical condition, the department reported Saturday. There are reports that the driver of the vehicle lost consciousness, drove into a taco cart and subsequently ran into a large number of people outside the club. Adam Van Gerpen, public information officer for the Los Angeles City Fire Department told US broadcaster ABC that a line of people – the majority female – were waiting to enter a nightclub when they were struck by a vehicle that also hit a taco truck and valet stand. Paramedics discovered that one of the patients had a gunshot wound, Van Gerpen said. 'This is under police investigation,' he said. 'This will be a large investigation with the LAPD.' The incident occurred at about 2:00am (09:00 GMT) on Santa Monica Boulevard. LAFD Alert- #EastHollywood Traffic with Multiple Patients 4661 W Santa Monica Bl MAP: FS35; DETAILS: — LAFD 🔥 (@LAFD) July 19, 2025
Al Jazeera
a day ago
- Al Jazeera
Vehicle driven into crowd in Los Angeles injuring more than 20: LAFD
The Los Angeles Fire Department in California, United States has said that a vehicle has been driven into a crowd of people in East Hollywood, injuring more than 20. Up to five people are in critical condition, and further eight to-10 are said to be in serious condition and another 10-15 in fair condition, the department reported Saturday. The incident occurred on Santa Monica Boulevard. More to come…
