Air India Ahmedabad Plane Crash: Preliminary Report Raises Questions About Cause

Jul 18, 2025

Air India Ahmedabad Plane Crash: Preliminary Report Raises Questions About Cause
Credit: Times of India 

New Delhi, July 18: The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) of India has released its preliminary report on the Air India Boeing 787 crash in Ahmedabad, revealing startling findings that have triggered fresh debates over accountability. The report’s release coincided with a surge in Boeing’s stock prices, which hit their highest level in over a year — indicating that initial assessments suggest no major fault in Boeing’s systems.

However, the report appears to point towards pilot actions as a potential factor, sparking widespread speculation. Critics argue whether the investigation is attempting to protect corporate interests by attributing the failure to pilots — who, tragically, are no longer alive to defend themselves.

This preliminary report provides a detailed timeline and technical explanation of the events that led to the tragic crash. Here’s what we know so far:

Flight Details and Maintenance Report

  • June 12, 11:17 AM IST: The aircraft, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner operating an Air India flight, landed at Ahmedabad after completing its scheduled Delhi–Ahmedabad service.
  • While parked at Bay 34, the flight crew lodged a technical defect in the Tech Log Book under the Pilot Defect Report (PDR).
    • The defect noted was: “Stab POS Xdcr” — short for Stabilizer Position Transducer, a sensor that measures the position of the aircraft's horizontal stabilizer.
  • Air India’s maintenance engineers addressed the issue, and at 12:10 PM IST, the aircraft was cleared for its next flight.

The flight crew for the next leg comprised Mumbai-based pilots, who had arrived in Ahmedabad the previous night and had adequate rest. Both pilots passed their pre-flight breathalyzer tests at 11:55 AM, confirming no alcohol influence.

Fuel and Weight:

  • Fuel on board: 54,200 kg
  • Take-off weight: 213,000 kg, within the maximum permissible limit of 210,000+ kg.

Exact Timeline of the Crash (as per FDR and CVR data)

(Note: Original report times were in UTC, converted to IST for clarity.)

  • 13:38:39 IST: Aircraft begins take-off roll.
  • 13:38:42 IST: Achieves maximum speed of 180 knots.
  • Seconds later: Both engines shut down in quick succession. The fuel cutoff switches for both engines moved from RUN (ON) to CUTOFF (OFF) positions.
    • Engine 1: Cutoff first
    • Engine 2: Cutoff one second later
  • This led to an immediate loss of thrust, causing the aircraft to lose altitude even before clearing the airport boundary wall.

The Ram Air Turbine (RAT) deployed automatically at 13:38:47 IST, supplying limited hydraulic power — insufficient at such low altitude.

Cockpit Conversation (Partial):

  • One pilot: “Why did you cut off?”
  • Other pilot: “I did not do so.”

This exchange is the only dialogue disclosed in the report — fueling controversy. No further conversation has been released.

Failed Recovery Attempts

  • 13:38:52 IST: Pilots switched Engine 1 back to RUN position.

  • 13:38:56 IST: Engine 2 switched back to RUN position.

  • Engine 1 recovered; Engine 2 did not restart despite multiple attempts.

  • 13:39:05 IST: Pilots declared emergency with three “MAYDAY” calls to ATC.

  • ATC attempted to respond, but there was no further communication.

  • 13:39:11 IST: Flight Data Recorder stopped functioning — presumed exact impact time.

Key Questions and Theories

  1. Pilot Suicide or Sabotage?

    • Some speculate deliberate action by one pilot, citing the phrase: “Why did you cut off?”
    • However, both pilots had excellent professional records:
      • Captain: 15,000+ flight hours, nearing retirement.
      • First Officer: 3,400+ hours, clean record.
    • Both passed breath tests; no history of mental health issues.

  2. Accidental Activation?

    • Highly unlikely, given the fuel cutoff switches have a stop-lock mechanism, requiring deliberate lift-and-pull motion.
    • Two switches moved within 1 second, making accidental movement virtually impossible.

  3. Mechanical/Electrical Malfunction?

    • FAA Special Airworthiness Bulletin (Dec 2018) warned Boeing 737 and 787 operators about potential locking mechanism disengagement, making switches easier to move.
    • FAA recommended inspections, but Air India claims it was advisory, not mandatory — hence not implemented.
    • Could this oversight have contributed to the crash? Still under investigation.

Industry Reactions and Transparency Concerns

  • The Airline Pilots Association of India (ALPA) accused AAIB of bias, stating the report unfairly focuses on pilot error without releasing full Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) data.
  • Former Indian Air Force Director-General (Flight Safety), Air Marshal Sanjeev Kapoor, challenged the theory that two switches could be manually turned off within one second, calling it “practically impossible.”

Next Steps

This is a preliminary report, mandated under international norms within 30 days of an accident. The final conclusive report is expected within a year, which may disclose:

  • Complete CVR transcripts
  • Root cause analysis
  • Accountability measures

Past incidents raise doubts about full transparency. For instance, after the March 2022 China Eastern Boeing 737 crash, the Chinese authorities classified final findings citing “national security,” leaving the cause undisclosed to the public.

Bottom Line: The current evidence leaves more questions than answers:

  • Was it human error, design flaw, or maintenance negligence?
  • Why is full cockpit audio being withheld?
  • Could proactive compliance with FAA advisories have prevented this disaster?

Public trust now hinges on the final report revealing the unvarnished truth — no matter how uncomfortable it may be.

Next Post Previous Post