logo
Ahead Of Air India Crash Report, A Recap Of The Dreamliner's Sketchy Past

Ahead Of Air India Crash Report, A Recap Of The Dreamliner's Sketchy Past

NDTVa day ago
Air India flight AI171, which crashed seconds after takeoff from Ahmedabad airport on June 12 killing all but one on board, was a Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Till that fateful day, not a single Dreamliner had been involved in a crash. The Dreamliner fleet has been airborne since 2011 and nearly every third widebody aircraft flying across the world today is a Boeing 787. The Ahmedabad crash is being seen as a rare occurrence, but what caused the crash?
Theories abound, but only two broad themes matter - was it equipment failure, or was it human error? Aviation experts have already ruled out environmental factors such as a storm, lightning, etc, since it was a clear day. Terrorism as a cause has also not been established till now, though it will be conclusively ruled out only after the investigation into the crash has been completed. According to reports, the preliminary probe report of the crash is expected to be released next week. So as of now, the only two plausible possibilities are: either the aircraft systems malfunctioned, or there was a cockpit error.
All Eyes On Boeing
Boeing & Co, the manufacturer of the Dreamliners, has found itself in the spotlight after this crash. It has anyway been under intense global scrutiny for alleged malpractices in quality checks while making aircraft, including the 787s, for some time now. Last year, Sam Salehpour, a veteran quality engineer with Boeing for the 777s and also other aircraft, including the 787s (Dreamliners), who later turned into a whistleblower, gave a written testimony to the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs.
In his testimony, Salehpour alleged that Boeing prioritises "speed of production over safety and quality and incentivizes management to overlook significant defects in Boeing's airplanes". He said, "Despite what Boeing officials state publicly, there is no safety culture at Boeing and employees like me who speak up about defects with its production activities and lack of quality control are ignored, marginalized, threatened, sidelined, and worse." Some of Salehpour's allegations are quite damning, particularly on the 787s. Boeing has denied all of these allegations.
Salehpour went on to say that while working on the 787s in late 2020, he observed that Boeing had begun taking shortcuts to reduce bottlenecks in production and speed up the delivery of 787s, allowing defective parts and defective installations in the Dreamliner fleet. Specifically, he alleged that improper fastening of fuselage sections posed risks to the aircraft's longevity and could lead to a mid-flight breakup of the aircraft after many thousand trips. While the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
has taken note of Salehpour's allegations and started an investigation into Boeing's practices, the regulator has not come out with its findings till now. Perhaps the crash at Ahmedabad will spur the FAA to hasten the probe.
Not just Salhepour's allegations, Boeing has been in FAA crosshairs earlier too for the Dreamliner fleet. In 2013, two 787s operated by Japan Airlines caught fire, which was later attributed to overheating of the aircraft's lithium-ion batteries. At that time, the FAA had quickly grounded the whole of the Dreamliner fleet and had also banned fresh deliveries of these aircraft from Boeing. The manufacturer then fixed the problem by offering an improved battery insulation, among other solutions, before the Dreamliners were allowed to fly again.
So, in the aftermath of the deadly Ahmedabad crash, the FAA needs to not just close the existing probe and release its report, but perhaps Boeing should also be subjected to enhanced scrutiny.
What About Engine Maker?
But in all the focus on Boeing and its alleged malpractices, are we missing the woods for the trees? If the AI 171 crash involved a twin-engine failure, as is being widely believed now, shouldn't the engine manufacturer - GE Aerospace in this case - also have the spotlight turned on to itself? The aircraft that crashed was at least 12 years old, and it is unlikely that Boeing had anything significant to do with it in this period of time - while GE and the Air India maintenance teams would have had to do regular checks. So, along with questioning Boeing, perhaps tough posers should also be made to the maintenance practices at Air India and the role of GE Aerospace. Of course, if the investigation report points to a design flaw with aircraft, any software glitch in electronics, or so on, then Boeing would be culpable - simply because an aircraft engine does not work in isolation, it works in coordination with the rest of hardware and software.
DGCA's Hesitation
Across the globe, more than 1,100 Dreamliner aircraft are currently in operation with different airlines. Air India has 33 in its fleet, but the largest number of Dreamliners is currently being operated by a couple of American carriers. Their predominance in American airlines' fleets is perhaps one of the reasons the FAA has refrained from grounding the Dreamliner fleet after the Air India crash.
A Reuters report quotes US officials and FAA officials as saying that they had not seen any data that would require a grounding of all Dreamliners - as yet. But nothing explains the Indian safety regulator DGCA's reluctance to ground the Dreamliner fleet till investigators get some idea about what caused the crash.
The AI 171 crash is being probed by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), with experts from several countries joining in. Whatever the findings of the AAIB investigation, one thing is clear: the families and loved ones of the crash victims need answers, and these can only come when culpability is clearly fixed - without undue delay.
(Sindhu Bhattacharya is a senior journalist. She has been associated with leading media platforms and has written extensively on aviation policy and airlines.)
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Air India Express takes action against staff responsible for delay in replacing Airbus engine parts
Air India Express takes action against staff responsible for delay in replacing Airbus engine parts

New Indian Express

timean hour ago

  • New Indian Express

Air India Express takes action against staff responsible for delay in replacing Airbus engine parts

NEW DELHI: Air India Express, a subsidiary of the Tata-owned Air India, has taken action against individuals responsible for delay in replacing the parts of one of its Airbus A320 as directed by the European Union's aviation safety agency. The agency had issued its directive two years ago, in May 2023, asking the airline to address an unsafe condition on its engines. India's aviation watchdog, The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) had pulled up the airline in March 2025 for not addressing the issue. In a statement, the airline said, 'Air India Express is committed to the highest standards of safety and regulatory compliance. An Airworthiness Directive (AD) issued by EASA in May-2023 was applicable for two engines in the airline's inventory. However, primarily on account of the migration of records on the monitoring software platform, the technical team missed the trigger for one engine. The change was carried out as soon as this was identified. The change in the only other engine impacted by the AD has also already been complied with, within the stipulated threshold.' The statement added, 'We acknowledged the error to DGCA and undertook remedial action and preventive measures with immediate effect. Necessary administrative actions were also taken against the persons held responsible.' No other details were shared by the airline including specifics on the individuals against whom action was taken. A query on alleged forging of documents to show the ariline had complied with the directive went unanswered. DGCA refused to speak on the issue.

Air India pays compensation to kin of two-thirds of Ahmedabad crash victims
Air India pays compensation to kin of two-thirds of Ahmedabad crash victims

Business Standard

timean hour ago

  • Business Standard

Air India pays compensation to kin of two-thirds of Ahmedabad crash victims

Air India on Friday said it has paid the compensation to families of nearly two-thirds of the victims who died in the June 12 plane crash in Ahmedabad. An Air India Dreamliner from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick crashed moments after takeoff on June 12, killing 260 people onboard and on the ground. "Our teams have been helping families receive interim compensation. Every affected family is being directly assisted by an Air India representative, with nearly two-thirds having already received payment or are in the final stages," Air India Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director Campbell Wilson told the airline employees in an internal post. Tata Sons is in the process of establishing the apparatus to provide longer-term assistance to the families and survivors, the Tata Group-owned airline said. In an internal post to airline employees, Air India Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director Campbell Wilson also said the carrier will continue to "invest in upgrading aircraft, products, service, systems, capabilities and, most of all, people". The crash, one of the worst air disasters in India in decades, involved a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner operating as Air India flight AI171. Of the 242 people onboard, 241 were killed, while the total death toll stood at 260, including casualties on the ground. Soon after the crash, Air India parent Tata Sons announced that it will provide Rs 1 crore each to the families of each person who died in the crash. And on June 14, Air India announced that it will provide an interim compensation of Rs 25 lakh, or approximately GBP 21,500, to the families of each of the deceased and survivors of the Ahmedabad plane crash to help address immediate financial needs. Air India's on-ground presence in Ahmedabad to see this process to completion, he said, will continue for as long as required." The Air India Chief also said "the process of reuniting next of kin with their loved ones, and repatriating them to their final destinations, is now complete". "As we transition from the immediate aftermath to mapping the journey ahead, many efforts are underway. Among them, Tata Sons is in the process of establishing the apparatus to provide longer-term assistance to the families and survivors, and will share more when the time is right," Wilson noted. Air India continues to observe its "Safety Pause", the deliberate temporary scale-back of its international and domestic networks, he said, acknowledging that, besides the customer impact, this temporary curtailment of flights put extra pressure on Air India frontliners in call centres and at airports, and has "disrupted crew rosters". "The 'pause' was an important and necessary move to accommodate voluntary additional aircraft checks, navigate the volatile international airspace environment and to stabilise our flight schedule to restore faith and trust," Wilson said. Besides providing extra resilience, the extra aircraft ground time is allowing the airline to accelerate its aircraft reliability enhancement programs, he said. Air India on June 18 had announced a 15 per cent reduction in international flights operated with widebody planes till mid-July as amid operational disruptions due to enhanced safety inspections and geopolitical situation, among others. "Irrespective of any cause, the accident of AI171 and the loss of so many lives will forever stand as one of our darkest days. It must also signal the start of a new era," Air India chief said in the internal post, adding, "we will continue to invest in upgrading aircraft, products, service, systems, capabilities and, most of all, people".

Families of 47 victims of Air India 171 crash victims receive interim payout; lawyers warn against forgoing rights for full compensation
Families of 47 victims of Air India 171 crash victims receive interim payout; lawyers warn against forgoing rights for full compensation

The Hindu

timean hour ago

  • The Hindu

Families of 47 victims of Air India 171 crash victims receive interim payout; lawyers warn against forgoing rights for full compensation

Air India has paid interim compensation of ₹25 lakh each to the families of 47 victims of Air India 171 crash so far, and documents of 55 other claimants are being verified as legal experts with experience in prior aviation disaster cases advise relatives to avoid waiving off their rights to further reparations when accepting interim payments, which have in the past resulted in reduced overall payouts. 'Passengers must be cautious and not sign any undertaking forgoing their rights as we have seen in all previous crashes, be it the bombing of Air India Kanishka AI 182 in 1985, or the more recent Mangalore air crash of 2010 and Kozhikode accident of 2020 involving Air India Express where families received a compensation of a few lakhs instead of a minimum liability of ₹75 lakh ten years ago or nearly ₹1.3 crore five years ago as per international convention,' Sanjay Lazar, aviation consultant and former head of All India Cabin Crew Association, who has helped crew and passengers, in past crashes told The Hindu. Minimum liability The interim compensation of ₹25 lakh is part of the minimum legal liability for airlines in case of death or bodily injury for international flights defined under the United Nations aviation safety watchdog International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO)'s Montreal Convention 1999 that will be paid through Air India's insurers. On top of this, Tata Group has announced an ex-gratia, or a voluntary payout, of ₹1 crore for the family of each of the deceased through a ₹500 crore trust it will be setting up. Families of 241 out of 242 passengers and crew onboard the ill-fated Boeing 787 aircraft as well as those of 19 people killed on the ground at BJ Medical College where the aircraft crashed will be entitled to a compensation, in addition to those injured. In October 2023, the Supreme Court issued notices on special leave petitions (SLPs) filed by injured passengers seeking higher compensation following the Kozhikode crash who claimed that they had only been provided a nominal compensation for their losses which they believed was only an interim settlement. Senior advocate and former Attorney General K.K. Venugopal, representing the petitioners, stated before the court that the injured had entered into agreements with Air India by which they accepted ₹12 lakh or ₹35 lakh whereas under the Montreal Convention they should have received ₹1.34 crore as a fixed amount. Air India Express had maintained that the complainants could not demand further compensation as they had already entered into an agreement. Of the 190 onboard the Boeing 737 aircraft, there were 21 deaths and several injured passengers. Compensations can far exceed the limits laid down under Montreal Convention as it merely defines airline liabilities, which was raised to 151,880 Special Drawing Rights [an IMF asset whose value is based on a basket of the world's five leading currencies] or ₹1.87 crore approximately for death or bodily injury, and is an unlimited amount when there is airline negligence. The Convention or the Indian law that ratifies it, Carriage By Air Act, 1972, do not regulate how much a passenger can recover, explains Yeshwant Shenoy, President of Kerala High Court Advocates' Association, who helped a family bag the highest compensation of ₹11.5 crore (or ₹7.64 crore and 9% interest for every year there is a delay in payout) following the Mangalore air crash in Triveni Kodkany vs Air India Limited as per a Supreme Court order on March 3, 2020. Mr. Shenoy was also instrumental in Mumbai High Court directing Air India to pay a compensation of ₹8 crore to the family of Captain Zlatko Glusica, one of the two pilots who died in the Mangalore crash, and an appeal on the matter is pending before the top court. As many as 158 of the total 166 people aboard the plane died after a Boeing 737 aircraft overshot the runway and fell into a valley. Judicial precedent For awarding compensation to air crash victims, Indian courts have relied on Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which provides the framework for compensation to road accident victims, Mr. Shenoy explains. The Supreme Court order in Kodkany vs Air India also refers to judgments in the National Insurance Company Limited vs Pranay Sethi and Sarla Verma vs Delhi Transport Corporation for calculating income and personal expenses for arriving at a compensation. Under Indian law, the key criteria for determining compensation for victim families of crashes is the earning capacity of the deceased. The next two parameters are age of the deceased and the number of dependents. Mr. Shenoy has fought cases before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and Labour Commissioner.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store