The afternoon of June 12, 2025 ripped apart the silence over Mahatma Gandhi’s historic Sabarmati Ashram, which stood barely 7 kilometers from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Airport, Ahmedabad, India, as Air Indias flight AI-171, VT-ANB B-787 Dreamliner crashed on takeoff, plunging into the neighboring BJ Medical College, killing 270 passenger, crew and persons on the ground including students in the nearby medical college hostel.
The early hours of July 12, 2025, were broken apart by the release of the preliminary report of the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau of India, which dropped silently online in the still of the night in India, without any fanfare, for minimum exposure, creating maximum impact.
The 15-page preliminary report raised more questions than it answered, focusing on the Fuel Control Switches, the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), a sentence of the Cockpit Voice Recorders (CVR), and the flaps position. The investigation, which began shortly after the crash, had been joined by NTSB officials from the USA, representatives of Boeing, GE, and the FAA, and the AAIB of the UK, who served as observers.
Strangely, a news report that had emerged out of the United States three days prior, in an Aviation magazine, had leaked the fact that the Air India investigators were skirting around the Fuel Control Switches, and its improper, incorrect, or intentional pilot actions.
A day later, the hallowed Wall Street Journal came around with the very same theory, adding a rider that the “situation had got so bad between the NTSB and the AAIB, that the NTSB observers were thinking of withdrawing their cooperation from the investigation and returning home.” Pertinently, both the reports came days before the Indian AAIB report was released, and only after the foreign observers from NTSB, AAIB-UK, Boeing, and GE had returned home.
This led to questions over the confidentiality and independence of the AAIB and its report, and has caused detractors of the government-led process to raise objections in various media.
The preliminary report has set off storm clouds across India, amongst citizens and pilots’ organizations, who are demanding answers, some even seeking a judicial probe headed by a sitting High Court Judge. From the selective leaks in the US media, it appears that some foreign agencies had leaked details to foreign media, and the influence of big corporations cannot be ruled out, given the current state of these corporations.
The Airline Pilots Association (ALPA-India) issued a press release objecting to several issues, including the selective leaks regarding foreign involvement in the investigation, the lack of transparency within the organization, and the fact that details of the AI-171 report appeared in various overseas newspapers days before the Indian families were informed. The association also criticized the presumption of pilot guilt, the failure to involve pilot organizations in the probe, and the absence of any 787-rated check pilot on the investigative panel — concerns that were also raised by several experts, including Captain Kishore Chinta.
The barrage of negative media today forced the Cabinet Minister of Civil Aviation and his Minister of state for Civil Aviation to make public statements this evening, about how the Civil Aviation Ministry in India recognized the skills and hard work of the Pilots and Cabin Crew in Indian Aviation and that this was merely the preliminary report which was fact finding and that the detailed report would emerge in some months (up to a year from now) and may have different thesis.
The lack of the CVR transcript in the preliminary report was a huge dampener, as it gives rise to speculation and conjecture as to what happened in the cockpit. The fact that the AAIB selectively released one sentence from the CVR data, regarding the “fuel cutoff, “has added to the confusion.
That being said, we turn our focus to the AAIB report and its key milestone observations –
- VT-ANB AI-171 had a normal takeoff profile for its flight from AMD-LGW with 242 passengers and crew, and reached Vr at 180 knots at 0808 UTC
- The aircraft air/ground sensors transitioned to air mode consistent with liftoff at 08:08:39 UTC.
- At 08:08:42 UTC, the engine run cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position, one after the other, with a gap of 01 second.
- The Engine N1 and N2 began to decrease from takeoff values as the fuel supply to the engines was cut off.
- In the Cockpit Voice Recording, one pilot is heard asking the other, why did he cutoff? The other pilot responded that he did NOT DO SO. (No timing given)
- Significant issues are that the Airport CCTV footage showed the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) was deployed during initial climb immediately on liftoff (no timestamp on video)
- EAFR data shows that RAT hydraulic pumps began supplying power at 08:08:47
- As per EAFR data, Engine 1 fuel cutoff switch transitioned from CUTOFF to RUN at 08:08:52 UTC.
- Engine 2 Fuel Cutoff switch transitioned from CUTOFF to RUN at 08:08:56 UTC,
- Thereafter, each engine, FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control), automatically manages a relight and thrust recovery sequence of ignition and fuel introduction.
- At 08:09:05 UTC, one of the Pilots transmitted “Mayday Mayday Mayday”
- The EAFR recording stopped at 08:09:11 UTC.
The AAIB Report is available here.
The pilots, Sumeet Sabharwal and Clyde Kunder, together had more than 19,000 hours of experience, with a combined experience of almost 9,724 hours on the 787 type of aircraft. Captain Sabharwal was a trainer and a check pilot on the 787.
The conversation between the two Pilots in the cockpit is supposed to have been one asking the other, “Why did you cutoff?” – the response – “I did NOT do so.” This clearly indicates that there was confusion in the cockpit over the Fuel Cutoff, and both pilots seemed unaware as to how the fuel was cut off.
Yet the tone, tenor, and direction of the preliminary report led the casual observer to note that it had to be “inadvertent or intentional actions of the pilot to turn the fuel control switches to Cutoff mode, starving the engines of fuel.
Experts have suggested that it is next to impossible for a pilot strapped in on takeoff climb to pull both guarded Fuel Control switches one after the other within ONE SECOND to cut off fuel to both engines. The enhanced airborne flight recorders (EAFR) have noted that the two engines cut off within one second of each other, which appears to be humanly impossible, given that it took both pilots 04 seconds to recycle and transition the engines from Cutoff to Run stage.
The insinuation on social media has been that of a “German wings” kind of situation that has enraged the aviation community and the Indian traveling public, bringing back sad memories of the Lion Air 737-Max crash, where a 24-year-old Indian pilot Chirag Kalra was one of those wrongly blamed for the crash, which later surfaced as the 737-max MCAS issue.
Unless, as some suggest, the AAIB and NTSB know something they have not disclosed yet to the public and are trying to break it gently.
The reluctance of the AAIB to be transparent in the process and the failure to include the entire CVR transcript have only added to the anger and suspicion of the people. The Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR) has still not been fully decoded and studied, and its interpretation will take some time longer.
What makes the preliminary report even curiouser is the fact that it pauses to refer to a 2018 FAA Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) No. NM-18-33 on December 17, 2018, which was based on reports from 737 Operators that fuel control switches were installed with locks disengaged. This similar part had been installed on 717, 737, 747, 757, 767, 787, MD-11, and MD-90 aircraft.
That FAA SAIB, which warned of vulnerability in fuel control switches, did not make it mandatory for all airlines, but advised all operators to follow the process of “inspect the locking feature of the fuel control switch to ensure its engagement. Airlines were advised to check whether the fuel control switch can be moved between the two positions without lifting up the switch. FAA requested airline owners and operators to report any failure of the locking feature of the fuel control switch to Boeing, including the date of the failure occurrence.
At the same time, another FAA Directive, which was not relied upon by the AAIB but may be relevant, was FAA BOEING ALERT BULLETIN (May 02, 2022), which was entitled “Engine Fire Control Panel – Engine fire shutoff switch”. The FAA review of this document was prompted by a report that indicated that Foreign Object Debris (FOD) may have been introduced during the maintenance or rework of certain EFSS units.
The FOD risks included – “Uncommanded Activation of the engine fuel shut off.”
The 2022 circular, when read in conjunction with the 2018 notice, firmly established a link between dirty engine fire panels and fuel cutoff switches. While Boeing and unnamed parts suppliers had already notified operators that received affected parts, so much has gone awry with them in recent times that it’s difficult to be certain of anything.
The preliminary report noted that Air India had not conducted the safety checks on this equipment in line with the 2018 circular, as it was not Mandatory but was optional and advisory in nature. The report also noted that Air India had replaced the entire throttle control module in 2019 and 2023 without complaint of Fuel Cutoff switches.
Air India, for its part, has issued a statement noting receipt of the preliminary report of the AAIB and offered to continue cooperation with all the authorities whilst continuing to support the families of the passengers and crew of the ill-fated AI-171.
To quote Captain Amit Singh, a veteran pilot and the founder of Safety Matters Foundation, “there was no indication of foul play, no sign that either pilot intended to shut down the engines, but something – Manual, Electrical, or Mechanical – caused both fuel switches to CUT OFF Fuel”.
Experts have opined that there is also no certainty whether the Fuel Control Switches were actually moved to cut-off or whether it was just the electronic functions associated with the switches, that were recorded as having cut-off fuel supply to the engines, as the report records the words “transition” and not “moved”. That could even be due to a software/electronic glitch, such as a TCMA malfunction in the EEC, which sends a signal to other software logic gates, that the aircraft has changed its status from air to ground, as TCMA is the only logic gate software, behind pilot controllers that can automatically shut down the engines, as confidentially shared by a 787 Check pilot. The above theory is taken from Boeing 787 lab notes, which is available only to Boeing and GE engineers, though this angle requires deeper investigation.
However, what has appeared most offensive to people in the Indian Aviation industry is the Aviation Accident Investigation Bureaus report which in its final sentences, states that “at this time there were no safety recommendations for either Boeing or General Electric,” thereby absolving both the US based corporate giants of any culpability in this episode.
The preliminary report raises many questions and issues worth noting:
-
-
- Why did the report not have the full CVR conversation transcript?
- Importance of the pilot conversation over the fuel control switches.
- If both pilots did not cutoff the fuel, then was there some electronic glitch?
- When and how did the RAT deploy? Images indicate that it may have deployed at 60 feet height, suggesting that engine failure may have occurred even before 08:08:42.
- The fuel control off switches were found in “run” position at crash site.
- The throttles were found in maximum position at the crash site.
- Flap handle was set at 5 degree position, for take off attitude.
- Landing gear was down, the ELT did not activate.
- RAT had deployed on takeoff, indicating a total power failure.
- Has the possibility of a TCMA – EEC malfunction been investigated as yet?
- Why did the AAIB remark that there were “no safety recommendations for Boeing or GE,” thus giving them a get-out-of-jail-free card?
-
The onus thus is left on the two brave men who died in the cockpit that fateful day, whose entire lives will be scrutinized to find a way to solve the mystery by placing the blame on them. Dead men tell no tales, and the secret of AI-171 may go down with its 260 victims from the plane and in that Medical college. The blessed soil of Gujarat, of the great Mahatma Gandhi, will bury one more bloody truth with it, along with the hundreds of struggles that the great man himself fought against in his lifetime.
Sanjay Lazar
Sanjay Lazar is an Analyst, Lawyer, Author & commentator, who writes on International relations, Aviation and law. He is @sjlazars on @x.
- Sanjay Lazar#molongui-disabled-link
- Sanjay Lazar#molongui-disabled-link
- Sanjay Lazar#molongui-disabled-link
- Sanjay Lazar#molongui-disabled-link
