Tragic Questions: Preliminary Report on Air India Ahmedabad Plane Crash Raises Disturbing Unanswered Concerns

The recent release of the preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) into the Air India Ahmedabad plane crash has ignited a contentious debate, leaving more questions than answers. While some speculate about pilot error, a significant segment of the aviation community and the public is urging for greater transparency, questioning whether the report shields companies by shifting blame to the deceased pilots. This Air India Crash Report offers a glimpse into the tragic incident, but a full and unvarnished truth is still awaited.

Unraveling the Air India Crash Report: Key Preliminary Findings

The preliminary Air India Crash Report details critical events leading up to the disaster, offering a timeline that, paradoxically, deepens the mystery:

• Pre-flight Preparations:
  • On June 12, the aircraft landed in Ahmedabad from Delhi, with the previous crew reporting an issue with the stabilizer position transducer. Maintenance engineers reportedly addressed this.
  • The Mumbai-based pilots for the incident flight had adequate rest and successfully passed pre-flight breathalyzer tests, indicating no immediate impairment.
  • The co-pilot was designated as the pilot flying, and the captain as pilot monitoring.
• The Critical Take-off and Incident:
  • The aircraft initiated its take-off at 1:38:39 PM IST.
  • Within seconds, at 1:38:42 PM, it reached its maximum speed of 1180 knots.
  • Crucially, the fuel cut-off switches for both engines moved from the “run” (on) to the “cut-off” (off) position, with a mere one-second interval between them. This abrupt action led to an immediate loss of fuel supply and subsequent engine shutdown.
• Disturbing Cockpit Conversation:
  • Following the engine cut-off, a chilling exchange occurred: one pilot questioned, “Why did you cut off?” The other pilot’s response, “I did not do so,” adds a layer of enigma to the tragedy. The report, controversially, provides no further details on the conversation or speaker identification.
• Desperate Attempts at Recovery:
  • The Ram Air Turbine (RAT) deployed, providing vital hydraulic power.
  • Approximately 10 seconds after the fuel cut-off (1:38:52 PM), pilots attempted to restore power, turning the first engine switch back “on.” Four seconds later (1:38:56 PM), the second engine switch was also moved to “on.”
  • While the first engine recovered, the second engine, despite restored fuel supply, failed to restart.
• Mayday and the Inevitable:
  • At 1:39:05 PM, the pilots issued three “Mayday” calls to Air Traffic Control.
  • ATC attempted to respond, but received no further communication.
  • The Flight Data Recorder ceased functioning at 1:39:11 PM, presumed by investigators to be the exact time of the crash.

Speculation and Scrutiny of the Air India Crash Report

The preliminary Air India Crash Report has fueled various theories, each raising significant counter-arguments:

• Intentional Act (Pilot Suicide)?
  • Some interpret the “Why did you cut off?” question as potential evidence of an intentional act.
  • However, counter-arguments emphasize the other pilot’s denial, the pilots’ unblemished records, absence of known mental health issues, and their valiant attempts to restart engines and make Mayday calls, all of which strongly contradict this theory.
• Accidental Action? Highly Improbable.
  • Accidentally moving both fuel cut-off switches is deemed nearly impossible due to their stop-lock mechanisms, which necessitate pulling them up before repositioning. The near-simultaneous activation of both switches further diminishes the plausibility of an accidental event.
• System Malfunction or Maintenance Lapses – A Critical Angle in the Air India Crash Report:
  • A significant line of inquiry revolves around potential electrical or software malfunctions leading to false switch indications.
  • A 2018 FAA bulletin had previously highlighted issues with Boeing 737 fuel control switches, where the locking feature could be disengaged, potentially allowing unintended mode changes. The Boeing 787 (the aircraft model involved) was identified as having similar switches.
  • Crucially, Air India reportedly did not conduct the recommended inspection of these switches, citing it as non-mandatory.
  • The throttle control module, which houses the fuel cut-off switch, had been replaced twice on the crashed aircraft (2019 and 2023), though the report claims these replacements were unrelated to the switches themselves.

Widespread Criticism of the Initial Air India Crash Report

The preliminary Air India Crash Report has faced considerable criticism:

• Lack of Transparency: The report’s inclusion of only one line of the cockpit conversation has raised concerns about transparency and a perceived bias towards blaming the pilots.
• Feasibility Concerns: The Airline Pilots Association of India (ALPA India) and Air Marshal Sanjeev Kapoor (Retd.) have voiced serious doubts about the report’s direction and the practical feasibility of manually turning off both switches within a one-second timeframe.

The Road Ahead for the Air India Crash Report

As a preliminary document, this Air India Crash Report is a stepping stone. A comprehensive, conclusive report is anticipated within a year. The aviation community and the grieving public hold out hope that the final report will deliver the complete cockpit voice recording and unveil the full truth, regardless of the discomfort it might cause. Parallels are being drawn to the 2022 China Eastern Airlines Boeing 737 crash, where the full investigation details were withheld, citing national security concerns – a precedent that many hope will not be repeated in this tragic Air India case.