Understanding the Air India Boeing 787 Crash: A Preliminary Investigation Report
In a tragic event last month, an Air India flight operating a Boeing 787 Dreamliner crashed shortly after takeoff in Ahmedabad, India, resulting in the loss of at least 260 lives. A preliminary report from India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau sheds light on critical aspects of the incident, revealing significant findings regarding the aircraft’s engines and pilot actions during the ill-fated flight.
The investigation outlines that both engines on the Boeing 787 shut down simultaneously within just one second of each other during takeoff. Notably, the flight’s engine fuel control switches unexpectedly transitioned from the “run” to “cutoff” settings, a move that effectively cut power to the engines. Cockpit voice recordings exhibit a concerning exchange between the pilots, with one inquiring why fuel had been cut off, to which the other pilot firmly stated he hadn’t made such an action. This alarming revelation raises questions about potential mechanical failures or pilot errors that may have precipitated the disaster.
Released 30 days following the crash in compliance with guidelines from the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the report not only corroborates prior media reports but also highlights a focal point of the investigation: the engine fuel control switches. On June 12, shortly after takeoff, the aircraft tragically crashed, claiming 241 lives out of the 242 on board, along with 19 individuals on the ground. The incident is particularly notable as it marks the first fatal crash of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, underscoring the serious nature of the investigation.
With ongoing investigations spearheaded by India’s civil aviation authority and aided by support from both U.S. and UK representatives—given that citizens from these countries were on board the London-bound flight—the pressure is on to determine the root causes that led to this catastrophe. While it is confirmed that one of the engines was regaining thrust at the time of impact, the report leaves many questions unanswered regarding the actions and decisions made by the aviation crew during those crucial moments.
Importantly, the report highlights that both pilots had received adequate rest before the flight, passed preflight breath analyzer tests, and were deemed fit for operation. The first officer was at the controls while the captain monitored the takeoff nuance, stressing that there were no signs of human fatigue or negligence. Furthermore, the aircraft’s weight was within safe operating limits, and the absence of “dangerous goods” on board relieves some potential causes of the crash.
As Boeing and engine manufacturer General Electric have offered their aid in the investigation process, there remains a notable restraint on them regarding public commentary while the inquiry is active. At this stage, investigators report that there are no immediate recommendations for changes to the Boeing Dreamliner or General Electric engine operators, which adds a layer of complexity to understanding this tragic incident fully.
Amid these investigative pursuits, the aviation industry and the flying public remain in a state of uncertainty, desperately seeking clarity on the multiple factors potentially contributing to this anomalous crash. Aviation experts have expressed that a myriad of scenarios could have led to this unforeseen failure, indicating that the circumstances were highly unusual and not easily categorized. As updates from investigators remain scarce, the hope for those affected and the wider community is that thorough investigations will soon yield definitive answers.
