Fuel to Air India jet engines cut off before crash, says report
The report, issued by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau, did not offer any conclusions or apportion blame for the June 12 disaster, but indicated that one pilot asked the other why he cut off fuel, and the second pilot responded that he had not.
The Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner was headed from Ahmedabad in western India to London when it crashed, killing all but one of the 242 people on board as well as 19 people on the ground.
In its 15-page report, the investigation bureau said that once the aircraft achieved its top recorded speed, "the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec".
"In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff. The other pilot responded that he did not do so," it said.
The aircraft quickly began to lose altitude.
The switches then returned to the "RUN" position and the engines appeared to be gathering power, but "one of the pilots transmitted 'MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY'", the report said.
Air traffic controllers asked the pilots what was wrong, but then saw the plane crashing and called emergency personnel to the scene.
Investigation ongoing
Earlier this week, specialist website The Air Current, citing multiple sources familiar with the probe, reported it had "narrowed its focus to the movement of the engine fuel switches", while noting that full analysis will "take months -- if not longer".
It added that "the focus of the investigators could change during that time".
The Indian agency's report said that the US Federal Aviation Administration had issued an information bulletin in 2018 about "the potential disengagement of the fuel control switch locking feature".
Though the concern was not considered an "unsafe condition" that would warrant a more serious directive, Air India told investigators it did not carry out suggested inspections as they were "advisory and not mandatory".
Air India was compliant with all airworthiness directives and alert service bulletins on the aircraft, the report said.
The investigations bureau said there were "no recommended actions to B787-8 and/or GE GEnx-1B engine operators and manufacturers", suggesting no technical issues with the engines (GE) or the aircraft (Boeing).
The bureau said the investigation was ongoing, and that additional evidence and information has been "sought from the stakeholders".
Boeing said in a statement it will "continue to support the investigation and our customer", adding "our thoughts remain" with those affected by the disaster.
The UN 's International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) stipulates that states heading an investigation must submit a preliminary report within 30 days of an accident.
US and British air accident investigators have taken part in the probe.
The plane was carrying 230 passengers -- 169 Indians, 53 British, seven Portuguese and a Canadian -- along with 12 crew members.
Dozens of people on the ground were injured.
One passenger miraculously survived, a British citizen who was seen walking out of the wreckage of the crash, and who has since been discharged from hospital.
Health officials in the Indian state of Gujarat initially said at least 279 people were killed, but forensic scientists reduced the figure after multiple scattered and badly burnt remains were identified.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
6 days ago
- Euronews
India orders airlines to inspect Boeing models after Air India crash
India's aviation regulator has ordered airlines operating Boeing aircraft to inspect all fuel control switches, days after an investigation into last month's Air India crash found that they had been flipped off, starving both engines of fuel. India's Directorate General of Civil Aviation stated that the directive would apply to Boeing 787 Dreamliners and certain Boeing 737 variants, and that airlines must complete the inspections and submit their findings to the regulator by next Monday. A preliminary report into the Air India crash that killed 260 people in the northwestern city of Ahmedabad found that the switches shifted positions within one second, cutting off fuel supply to both engines. The report, released last week, did not offer any conclusions regarding the cause of the plane crash. It also did not say how the switches could have flipped from run position to the cutoff during the flight. The movement of the fuel control switches allows and cuts fuel flow to the plane's engines. The Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner crashed on 12 June shortly after take-off. All but one of the 242 people on board were killed, as well as 19 people on the ground. The report, issued by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau, noted a 2018 advisory from the US Federal Aviation Administration, recommending that airlines operating Boeing models inspect the locking feature of fuel cut-off switches. According to the report, cockpit voice recordings captured a moment of confusion between the pilots, with one asking the other why he cut off the fuel. "The other pilot responded that he did not do so," the report said. Some aviation experts in India speculated that the crash was caused by human error based on the preliminary report. At least two commercial pilots' associations have rejected such claims. The Indian Commercial Pilots' Association in a statement on Sunday said it was "deeply disturbed by speculative narratives ... particularly the reckless and unfounded insinuation of pilot suicide." On Monday, Air India CEO Campbell Wilson said the preliminary report into the crash of the London-bound plane found no mechanical or maintenance issues with the aircraft or its engines. In an internal memo to airline staff seen by AP, Wilson stated that the report indicated all mandatory maintenance tasks for the aircraft had been completed. "There was no issue with the quality of fuel and no abnormality with the take-off roll. The pilots had passed their mandatory pre-flight breathalyser and there were no observations pertaining to their medical status," he said in the note. Following the crash, Indian authorities ordered a thorough examination of all of Air India's Boeing 787 Dreamliners to prevent future incidents. Air India has 33 aircraft of that model in its fleet.
France 24
6 days ago
- France 24
Speculation and blame follow first official report on deadly Air India crash
The June 12 crash of an Air India Boeing 787 Dreamliner was the most deadly aviation disaster in a decade. A sole passenger miraculously survived the doomed flight that killed 260 people, including 19 on the ground, after the London-bound plane rammed into the dining hall of a medical college. Videos of the accident went viral: the plane had barely left the runway of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport in the western Indian city of Ahmedabad before it began descending, ultimately exploding in a cloud of smoke and fire. The entire ordeal took about 30 seconds. Many grieving families of the deceased had to provide DNA samples to verify the identities of their loved ones. They've also had to endure the anguish of not yet knowing how or why the disaster took place. Exactly one month after the incident, the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau of India (AAIB) released its preliminary report on the crash. But the findings have led to a storm of speculation, and so far have provided more questions than answers. To err is human? The AAIB report revealed that the jet's fuel supply was cut off seconds after takeoff, and the plane started losing thrust before it had even crossed the airport's perimeter. The fuel-control switches were turned off, which experts say is odd, since an aircraft's locking mechanism should prevent them from being accidentally moved. The report included only a short snippet of conversation between the pilots in the cockpit. In the black box voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why he cut off the fuel. 'The other pilot responded that he did not do so,' the report said. On the day of the accident, 32-year-old first officer Clive Kunder was responsible for flying the Dreamliner while 56-year-old pilot-in-command Captain Sumeet Sabharwal was responsible for supporting the flight through communications with air traffic control and system monitoring. Both were experienced: Sabharwal had accumulated 15,638 total flying hours, including 8,596 hours on the Boeing 787, and Kunder had 3,403 flying hours, including more than a thousand hours on the Dreamliner. Both had passed all the required physical, mental and drug tests required. This brief snippet of conversation has been interpreted as evidence of human error, or even deliberate sabotage. Former pilot Marco Chan, now a senior lecturer in aviation operations at Buckinghamshire New University, says it is too soon to tell. 'The preliminary document's job is to capture the timeline, physical evidence and initial recorder data; it deliberately avoids drawing conclusions or assigning blame,' he says, adding: "A single line of cockpit dialogue is not proof of human error, and the report doesn't say why the switches moved, and whether that action was human, mechanical or electronic.' Still, that hasn't stopped speculation that one or both pilots either accidentally or deliberately caused the crash – speculation that has prompted anger from two major commercial pilots' associations in India, both of which have rejected those claims. The Indian Commercial Pilots' Association said in a statement on Sunday that it was "deeply disturbed by speculative narratives ... particularly the reckless and unfounded insinuation of pilot suicide', calling the theories 'a gross violation of ethical reporting and a disservice to the dignity of the profession". The Airline Pilots' Association of India (ALPA India), an organisation 800 members strong, also accused the AAIB of "secrecy" surrounding the investigation. "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. Chan says he didn't take the AAIB report to be biased in one way or another, but as a former pilot he understands the frustration. 'I sympathise. In aviation we rely on evidence-driven safety culture. Premature blame – whether directed at pilots, regulators or manufacturers – undermines that culture and creates unnecessary public anxiety.' Bernard Lavelle, principal consultant at BL Aviation Consulting, echoes that sentiment. 'It's important to understand what this report was meant to do. It was never meant to say how and why the crash occurred. For now, it can only tell us what occurred. It did its job and I don't think it highlights human error over any other thing." 'I understand the need to know, but this report was never meant to provide closure,' he says. Mechanical or electrical fault? Chan says that for now, the data can be read three ways: inadvertent crew action, an unintended electronic event, or a wiring/relay fault that simulated switch movement. 'Right now, we simply do not have enough evidence to rank those scenarios,' he says. Equipment malfunction – be it an issue of maintenance, a fault in the aircraft or something else entirely – also cannot be ruled out. 'The statements in the report simply mean no obvious defect has been found in other fleets,' says Chan. But both Air India and Boeing have a lot at stake if future reports reveal any kind of electronic or mechanical error. Air India underwent a merger last year in an effort to revive its rapidly deteriorating reputation and Boeing has been mired in controversy for years, mainly for a series of major and minor accidents involving its 737 Max aircraft. Boeing issued a report on Sunday along with US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulators saying that the fuel-control switch locks on Boeing planes were safe and checks were not required. But India and South Korea on Monday ordered its airlines to examine the same switches on several Boeing models, indicating intensified scrutiny of the fuel-control switch locks at the centre of the crash investigation. 'Boeing stands by their advisories, but I don't know whether that's put the issue to bed,' says Lavelle. An advisory from the FAA in 2018 recommended, but did not mandate, operators of several Boeing models including the 787 to inspect the locking feature of fuel-control switches to ensure they could not be moved accidentally. The Air India preliminary report said the airline had not carried out the FAA's suggested inspections as the advisory was not a requirement, but it did say that maintenance records showed the throttle control module – which includes the fuel-control switches – was replaced in both 2019 and 2023 on the plane that crashed. Chan says the fuel-control switch locks are something he'll be looking out for in upcoming reports. "Was the 'locked' version actually installed on this aircraft, and was it functioning? Or the hardware could be mechanically sound, yet still receive a spurious 'cutoff' signal," he says. "We won't know until bench tests and teardown inspections are finished.' Chan warns against focusing blame on the pilots prematurely. 'It can happen in accident history, label something 'pilot error' and deeper systemic flaws go unaddressed.' But he's hopeful that the truth will be revealed. 'The AAIB has already invited observers from various third parties – an encouraging sign that multiple independent eyes are on the data. If the evidence ultimately points to a system fault, it will be difficult for any stakeholder to hide behind a human-error label.' 'Better right than quick' The incident is a wake-up call for the aviation industry. 'It is a stark reminder that low-frequency, high-consequence events still occur, even with modern automation,' says Chan. 'The loss of lives on board and on the ground is the worst commercial-jet accident in a decade.' It will take at least a year for the final conclusions to be released, Lavelle predicts. 'The answers could take at least another 12 months to be revealed, which is in line with the investigative process.' He says it takes months to download and analyse data correctly, and that the investigation will be looking at maintenance records going back five years as well as both pilots' histories in detail. Relevant experts will likely be consulted and each finding, he says, will weed out theories until the truth is revealed. 'It's like a jigsaw puzzle, and it is far better to be right than quick.'
LeMonde
12-07-2025
- LeMonde
Air India plane crash: Report says engine fuel supply was cut off, confusion in cockpit
The preliminary investigation report into the Air India Boeing 787 crash did not draw any conclusions or assign any responsibility. However, it provided initial explanations about the cause of the tragedy and raised questions about the actions of the pilots. The document, made public on Saturday, July 12, exactly one month after the crash of the plane that was scheduled to fly from Ahmedabad in the state of Gujarat in western India to Heathrow Airport in London, stated that the engines' fuel supply was cut just before impact. When it crashed just moments after takeoff in a densely populated area of Ahmedabad, killing 19 people on the ground, the plane was carrying 230 passengers, including 169 Indians, 53 Britons, seven Portuguese and one Canadian, as well as 12 crew members. Only one passenger miraculously survived the crash, which ranks among India's worst air disasters. The flight lasted only 30 seconds between takeoff and the crash. The Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner reached its maximum recorded speed when the fuel supply switches for both engines moved from the "run" (open) to the "cutoff" (closed) position – first for one engine, then the other, just one second apart. The 15-page report did not specify how the switches could have moved to the cutoff position during flight. Both engines then began to lose power.
