Last Updated:
The interim report on Air India AI 171 crash on June 12 indicated that the fuel switches were transitioned from ‘Run’ to ‘Cutoff’ position that halted fuel supply to the engines.
An interim report on Air India AI 171 crash has indicated that the ill-fated flight crashed in Ahmedabad due to fuel switches being transitioned to ‘Cutoff’ position. (Screenshot from a YouTube video uploaded by
CLEARED TO LAND)
A 15-page preliminary report on the Air India AI 171 crash to determine the chain of events that led to the catastrophic crash of Boeing Dreamliner 787-8 in Ahmedabad moments after its takeoff was released a month after the tragedy. The crash that claimed at least 270 lives, including 241 souls onboard, shook the aviation industry because modern aircraft do not just fall out of the sky. As per the report, the aircraft achieved a maximum airspeed of 180 knots IAS or Indicated Airspeed when the fuel cutoff switches of both engines transitioned from ‘Run’ to ‘Cutoff’ position. This, according to the interim report, happened within a gap of one second.
The transition of both the fuel cutoff switch to the ‘Cutoff’ position resulted in a dual-engine shutdown. The report further revealed a brief conversation that took place between the two pilots in the cockpit. “Why did you cut off?” asked one of the pilots. Replying in a negative, the other pilot said: “I did not do so”.
Realising that they had no thrust in either of the engines to gain altitude, the pilots immediately moved the fuel controls to ‘Run’. It was learned that Engine 1 did come back on, but Engine 2 did not stabilise.
A ‘MAYDAY’ call to the ATC was made by one of the pilots before the Dreamliner was captured crashing outside the airport boundary onto a medical college hostel, resulting in several more casualties.
The ill-fated flight was airborne for only 32 seconds.
Public Reaction To Report
Considered one of the safest modes of travel in modern times that ferries millions of passengers daily, the news of an 11-year-old Dreamliner staying airborne for less than a minute after takeoff sent shock waves across the world. The initial report managed to quash the conspiracy theories and other probable causes that gained air after the air crash – the fuel supply cutoff to the engines at such a low altitude led to the imminent disaster.
Aviation experts and pilots assert that the fuel switches are designed to prevent accidental movement. Each switch is flanked by metal guards and features a spring-loaded mechanism, requiring a deliberate pull upward before it can be moved to either the “Run” or “Cutoff” position.
On July 14, Campbell Wilson, CEO of Air India, cited the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) preliminary report and asserted that the findings on AI171 did not indicate any mechanical or maintenance issues and the engines were fit to fly. He also added that the possibility of fuel contamination was ruled out.
“I would also remind that, out of an abundance of caution and under the oversight of the DGCA, every Boeing 787 aircraft operating in our fleet was checked within days of the accident and all were found fit for service. We continue to perform all necessary checks, as we will any new ones that authorities may suggest, ” Wilson said.
Pilots Association Upset
Pilots’ Association of India responded sharply to the report and alleged that the investigation was driven in the direction of presuming that the pilots were at fault.
“We feel that the investigation is being driven in a direction presuming the guilt of pilots and we strongly object to this line of thought,” a statement released by the association said.
Also Read: ‘Probe Done Presuming…’: Pilots Association Objects To AI-171 Crash Report, Demands Transparency
“We would like to crucially highlight the fact that the Wall Street Journal published an article on the 10th of July referring to the inadvertent movement of the fuel control switches. How did this information reach them? There is reference to a bulletin on the serviceability of the fuel control switch gates indicating that there could be a potential malfunction,” the Association’s statement said.
Why No Cameras In Cockpit?
The final investigation report is expected to be released within a year of the airline crash. The findings will be crucial in determining the chain of events that unfolded on the fateful day of June 12 that led to the catastrophic accident. However, the release of the interim report has sparked ugly speculations and damning accusations against the deceased pilots.
Could installing cameras in the cockpit enhance the clarity of the situation and eliminate such speculation in future incidents? If these surveillance devices are routinely used in cars, public transports, and helicopters, wouldn’t it make sense to have them installed on all commercial flights, flying 35,000 feet in the air? They could record and securely store data along with the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and Flight Data Recorder (FDR). This could assist in clearing up the ambiguity in such investigations.
Petter Hörnfeldt, a commercial pilot and host of the popular YouTube channel Mentour Pilot, recently touched upon this topic and acknowledged that the introduction of a camera in the flight deck would be beneficial. However, he pointed out that the pilots and associations were against the idea of being monitored. He explained that the installation was an expensive and extensive task for airline carriers, and retrofitting could also lead to downtime of flights.
The pilot, in his video, claimed that the presence of surveillance devices could lead to privacy concerns and alter the way pilots behaved and interacted in the cockpit. They could become self-conscious, speak in a performative way, function robotically, and be under constant pressure of how they were being perceived on the video. Petter added that the video data, if not encrypted, could also be used by the airlines against pilots as a tool to take disciplinary actions. The pilot further cited previous instances wherein the association had spoken against the idea of being monitored.
Petter, in this video, offered a solution: limited-scope cameras that focused on the instruments and did not specifically monitor the pilots. He added that international agreements could be introduced to keep the pilots and unions happy and help them reach a middle ground where they did not have to anxiously look over their shoulders, which would in turn help them gain trust with their employers and carriers.
He also showed support for cameras installed near the landing gear and cargo area. The aircraft could come equipped with parking sensors to avoid wing collisions while taxiing, he optimistically added.
Anurag Verma, News Editor at News18.com, works independently for the Viral section. Bollywood, Cricket, Science, Tech, YouTube, Reddit, Meme Origins and everything Pop-culture are his forte. He covers humourous…Read More
Anurag Verma, News Editor at News18.com, works independently for the Viral section. Bollywood, Cricket, Science, Tech, YouTube, Reddit, Meme Origins and everything Pop-culture are his forte. He covers humourous… Read More
view comments
- First Published:
