Air India crash: Report claims state of ‘confusion' between pilots, says former DGCA flight operations inspector
Captain Dhalla emphasised the word 'transitioned', which was mentioned in the report. He further explained that this report suggests a challenge-and-response dynamic exists between the two pilots, with one questioning the other, and a state of confusion.
'The report uses a particular word - 'transitioned'. The fuel control switches transitioned, according to the report. This report suggests that a challenge-and-response dynamic exists between the two pilots, with one questioning the other, and a state of confusion between the pilots, potentially leading to a breakdown in Crew Resource Management (CRM),' Captain Dhalla said.
'If any changes were made due to a failure in this aircraft, they would have used these switches to regain power. If there was a problem with the locking mechanism of these switches, then the pilots were also helpless,' Captain Dhalla added further.
Meanwhile, the Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP) President, C.S. Randhawa, on Thursday (July 17, 2025), condemned a media report that claimed that the captain of the flight deliberately cut off fuel to the engines.
Captain Randhawa emphasised that the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau's (AAIB) preliminary report makes no mention of the pilots turning off the switches controlling fuel flow to the engines.
'Nowhere in the report has it been mentioned that the fuel control switch was turned off due to the pilot's mistake. I condemn the article. They have not read the report properly, and will take action against them through FIP,' said Captain Randhawa.
Furthermore, he urged people not to comment on the AAIB's preliminary report, as this might create undue fear among commuters about air travel.
The two pilots involved were Captain Sumeet Sabharwal and First Officer Clive Kunder, who had a total flying experience of 15,638 hours and 3,403 hours, respectively.
A preliminary report released last week by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau depicted confusion in the cockpit shortly before the June 12 crash and raised fresh questions over the position of the critical engine fuel cutoff switches, the report said.
The AI 171 crash of the Boeing Dreamliner 787-8 aircraft in Ahmedabad, Gujarat, killed 260 people, including 229 passengers, 12 crew members, and 19 people on the ground.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
4 days ago
- The Print
‘More careful than colourful'—ThePrint's reporting on the Air India crash put facts first
This Readers Editor column considers ThePrint's approach to its reporting on AI-171 and the subsequent preliminary findings of the investigation by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AIBB) released on 12 July 2025. When you're reporting on something as devastating, sensitive—and immediate—as the Air India-171 crash last month, it is crucial to remember the value of good journalism, amid the endless theories on the reasons for the accident. Good journalism requires good hygiene. That means you have to write clean copy and provide the audience with a clear picture of the events you report. You have to cut out all the frills, the speculation, the 'extras'—which might make your reporting more lively and interesting to read, but don't always give readers accurate, factual, verified information. ThePrint's coverage was descriptive but factual and based on reliable sources. When you go through the articles or watch the videos, you will notice that the reporters are being selective in their choice of words. After reading or watching most of the reporting, I'd say it was more careful than colourful. The day of crash The afternoon of 12 June was just another normal day at ThePrint. I remember that it was a Thursday because I was at ThePrint's office in New Delhi for my weekly meeting with colleagues. It was fairly quiet as afternoons go, with reporters out on assignments, and those in the office staring at the computer monitors or mobile phones. Suddenly, it came to life. I saw people rush to watch the television monitors, and as I joined them, I beheld a sea of serious faces around me. The AI-171 had crash-landed at Ahmedabad airport. Nisheeth Upadhyay, Editor News Operations, realised it was huge. 'Whenever a commercial flight crashes it is a huge deal. We knew this was a big story.' The immediate response was to put out a 'Breaking News' story with the little information available. Next was to check for an accurate reading of the flight's movements up to its fall to the ground. Since I don't work on the editorial side of operations at ThePrint, I began to feel a little redundant, and in people's way. So, I sat on the sidelines and watched. A quick edit meeting was convened and everyone present in the office came together to suggest immediate story ideas. 'We felt, instinctively, that we should report the news as it came through and could be confirmed, but also do stories that added value,' Upadhyay said. 'From the moment it happened, there was so much noise in the media and social media—everyone was playing expert. 'At ThePrint, we were clear: Be sensitive, give the information, don't analyse—just plain, simple facts and information that can be confirmed. No conjecture.'' The difficulty that arose was the lack of access to the facts of the accident—or to any immediate information from the site of the crash in Ahmedabad—ThePrint doesn't have its own correspondent in the Gujarat capital. In stepped, Rama Lakshmi, Editor, Opinion and Ground Reports, and her team to fill the void. 'We had to keep reader interest going,' said Lakshmi. She also had previous experience covering airplane crashes, which helped. 'I put on my reporter's cap and looked for different angles to the story until our reporters reached the accident spot,'' she added. The reporters in the Delhi Ground Reports team filed reports on past history and the context of the incident. From other commercial flight crashes in India and Air India's current fleet of aircraft, accounts of survivors in Ahmedabad, stories of people who suffered in similar plan crashes, to another sole survivor of an air crash, the revamp of Ahmedabad runway, and the last social media post of some victims—these were some of the early stories put out by ThePrint. Interviewing victims & tackling misinformation The most pressing concern was to get on-ground reporting from Ahmedabad. ThePrint's nearest reporting team was in Mumbai. 'We were unsure of flights taking off from Mumbai and being able to land in Ahmedabad,' recalled Manasi Phadke, Deputy Editor based in Mumbai, who reached the city the next morning. Luckily, the Delhi-Ahmedabad evening flight was on schedule, so National Photo editor Praveen Jain and Senior Correspondent Krishan Murari flew out. 'I have covered earlier air crashes—Charkhi Dadri, for example. So I knew what it was like on the ground,' said Jain. In 1996, a midair collision between two commercial aircraft over Charkhi Dadri outside Delhi killed 349 people. Krishan Murari had never reported on an air crash or any accident of this proportion. He'd reported on Operation Sindoor and the Pahalgam terrorist attack in May. AI-171 presented a different challenge. 'After Operation Sindoor, coming to this, I realised you need a completely different kind of vocabulary. You have to be far more sensitive. I'd call it compassionate journalism,' he said. Praveen Jain and Krishan Murari reached Ahmedabad within 12 hours of the crash and visited the site, the hospital, and the mortuary. 'It was very hot outside, and even inside, the temperature was higher than it should have been. There was an overwhelming smell of the charred bodies,' Murari added. Together, they filed a number of stories over the next few days. Here are some of them: Meet the forensic dentist racing against time so kin of Air India crash victims can say final goodbye Air India crash: Inside Ahmedabad hospital morgue, bodies await DNA ID as doctors race against heat, time Confusion, debris & bodies at Air India crash site. Rescue worker first thought it was cylinder blast Air India crash: All 4 hostel buildings of BJ Medical College emptied amid site investigation This Air India crash eyewitness cheated death by a whisker—'a blast, then a fireball, just 200 m away' Manasi Phadke found the lack of official information to be one of the major stumbling blocks in her first few days of reporting. 'The media was the least important for them, so we had to source information wherever we could,'' she said, 'We had to be very careful, not speculate.' So, she had to piece together information. Here are some of the stories she filed: 11 DNA matches 48 hrs after Air India crash: Process of releasing victims' bodies to families begins The crash, the rescue & aftermath—Inside the first 36 hours at ground zero of Air India crash Behind the scenes of Gujarat's Air India crash response—4 IAS officers, 36 DNA experts & 230 teams Medical college's exam hall turns into DNA sampling centre. For victims' kin, it's the longest test yet After a week's search, family working in hostel mess cremates mother & 2-yr-old killed in Air India crash Phadke, Jain and Murari turned to doctors, workers, and the families of the victims. 'Families presented a challenge, a lot of them were angry. You can't just walk up to them and say, 'Kya hua?'. 'We had to be sensitive—I didn't use the camera immediately—I waited till they were at ease,' recalled Praveen Jain. As far as possible, he tried to click pictures from a distance. Even, then, one family member of a victim scolded him for taking pictures and Jain immediately apologised. Phadke said she had to make people feel comfortable before they spoke. Some like to speak – 'I am still in touch with at least one relative,' she said, adding, 'You have to talk around the subject, be conversational.' Also read: Inside ThePrint's mailbox—readers bring us praise, critique, and everything in between Unpacking investigation report Back in Delhi, Bismee Taskin, Principal Correspondent, was keeping an eye out for government communications. 'My job was to get in touch with the DGCA, the civil aviation ministry. To confirm information, verify it with at least two reliable sources,' she explained. She was also in touch with former pilots of Air India. When the preliminary report was released on 12 July, she reported it. 'Preliminary report is like an FIR,' said Taskin, 'No conclusions should be based on it. You have to wait till the final report for probable cause.' Taskin's stories, therefore, were straightforward, simply putting out what the report stated. Have a look: Air India crash spotlights 2018 advisory on Boeing switches installed with locking feature disengaged Air India crash preliminary report: A look at what fuel switches are designed to do & built-in safeguards Throughout the last month and a half, victims' families, aviation experts and the average reader want to know what brought the aircraft down? Why did it crash? There are so many technical details to it—and a lay person, with no understanding of them was prey to various theories doing the rounds. Nisheeth Upadhyay is, in his own words, an 'aviation nut''. Thus, it was possible for him to understand the complex (mal)functioning of an aircraft and to explain it in simple language. 'I was very careful not to act as an authority on the subject, just to describe what we knew had happened and to explain,'' he said, 'No aviation experting.'' On the preliminary report, which led to so much speculation and finger-pointing to pilot error in some foreign news media such as the Wall Street Journal, Upadhyay said only the final report mattered: 'There is not enough evidence to attribute blame. And so, ThePrint's line was that—there's not enough information to reach a conclusion.' I would recommend you watch his videos: they are clear, concise, and to the point, factual—without unnecessary opinion or speculation. I know I learned a great deal from them. The common thread in ThePrint's reporting—from the ground and Delhi—was to keep it simple, stick to verified facts and attribute views clearly. I have one suggestion newsrooms like ThePrint could consider: After tough assignments in the field, reporters may need some assistance in dealing with the traumas they witness. It can be overwhelming, especially for young reporters. Counselling is one option, and a few days' leave may help them cope better. Shailaja Bajpai is ThePrint's Readers' Editor. Please write in with your views and complaints to (Edited by Ratan Priya)
Hans India
5 days ago
- Hans India
United Airlines Boeing 787 Makes Emergency Landing After Engine Failure
A United Airlines Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner experienced a critical in-flight emergency last week when its left engine failed during the initial climb phase, forcing the crew to declare an emergency and execute an unscheduled return to Washington Dulles Airport. The incident occurred on July 25 during what was intended to be a routine transatlantic flight to Munich. United Airlines Flight UA108 had departed Washington Dulles Airport as scheduled when the engine malfunction manifested shortly after reaching an altitude of 5,000 feet. The timing of the failure, occurring during the critical climb phase of flight, required immediate action from the flight crew to ensure passenger and aircraft safety. Upon recognizing the severity of the engine problem, the pilots promptly declared a "MAYDAY" emergency, the highest level of aviation distress call, signaling to air traffic controllers that the aircraft was facing a life-threatening situation requiring immediate assistance and priority handling. The flight crew worked in close coordination with air traffic controllers to manage the emergency situation safely. Their primary concerns included reducing the aircraft's weight to safe landing parameters and ensuring adequate separation from other air traffic while maneuvering the disabled aircraft back to the departure airport. According to flight tracking data from FlightAware, the Boeing 787-8 remained airborne for approximately 2 hours and 38 minutes following the engine failure. This extended flight time was necessary to complete essential safety procedures before attempting a landing with the compromised aircraft. The pilots requested permission from air traffic controllers to dump fuel while maintaining a steady altitude of 6,000 feet. This fuel dumping procedure was crucial for reducing the aircraft's weight to within safe landing limits, as commercial aircraft typically carry much more fuel than the maximum allowable landing weight. During the fuel dumping process, the aircraft entered a holding pattern northwest of Washington, circling repeatedly in a designated area while safely discharging excess fuel into the atmosphere. Air traffic controllers provided guidance to ensure the distressed aircraft maintained safe separation from other flights operating in the busy Washington airspace. Controllers carefully managed the emergency situation by directing other aircraft away from the fuel dumping area and providing continuous guidance to the United Airlines crew throughout the extended emergency procedures. This coordination was essential for maintaining aviation safety standards during the critical phase of the incident. Once the fuel dumping procedure was completed and the aircraft had reached an acceptable weight for landing, the pilots sought clearance to approach Washington Dulles Airport using an Instrument Landing System approach to Runway 19 Centre. This precision approach system provided electronic guidance for a safe landing despite the engine failure. The emergency landing was executed successfully without injuries to passengers or crew members aboard the aircraft. However, the disabled left engine rendered the Boeing 787-8 unable to taxi under its own power following touchdown, requiring ground support equipment to move the aircraft. Airport ground crews were required to tow the immobilized Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner off the active runway to clear the way for other aircraft operations. The aircraft's inability to move independently highlighted the extent of the engine damage sustained during the in-flight emergency. As of Monday following the incident, the affected Boeing 787-8 remained grounded at Washington Dulles Airport while awaiting detailed technical assessment and repair work. The extended grounding suggests that the engine failure may have caused significant damage requiring comprehensive maintenance before the aircraft can return to service. United Airlines and relevant aviation safety authorities are expected to conduct thorough investigations into the technical malfunction to determine the root cause of the engine failure. Such investigations are standard procedure following serious in-flight emergencies and help identify potential safety improvements. The incident adds to ongoing scrutiny of Boeing aircraft safety, particularly given recent high-profile issues with various Boeing models. However, the successful emergency response and safe landing demonstrate the effectiveness of established aviation safety protocols and crew training procedures. Aviation safety experts will likely examine maintenance records, engine performance data, and operational procedures to understand how the failure occurred and whether any systemic issues contributed to the malfunction. The investigation findings may influence future maintenance requirements and safety protocols for similar aircraft.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
26-07-2025
- Business Standard
Air India pays interim compensation to kin of 166 Ahmedabad crash victims
The plane crash, one of the worst air disasters in India in decades, involved a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner operating as Air India flight AI171 Press Trust of India Mumbai
