Six months after an Air India Boeing 787‑8 Dreamliner crashed shortly after takeoff in Ahmedabad, killing 260 people, investigators have yet to determine what caused one of India’s deadliest aviation disasters in decades — fuelling a widening dispute between pilots, victims’ families, the airline and aircraft manufacturer Boeing.
India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) released its preliminary findings on July 12, one month after the June 12 crash, as required under international aviation rules. But while the report offered technical details, it stopped short of identifying the cause, leaving critical questions unanswered.
A Catastrophic Takeoff
Air India Flight 171 departed Ahmedabad airport at 1:38 pm, bound for London Gatwick with 230 passengers and 12 crew members on board. Within seconds, the aircraft failed to gain altitude and slammed into buildings on a nearby medical university campus, erupting into flames.
The crash killed 241 of the 242 people on board and 19 people on the ground. Only one passenger survived, suffering severe injuries. The victims included 200 Indians, 52 British nationals, seven Portuguese citizens and one Canadian.
Fuel Switches Found in ‘Off’ Position
The AAIB’s preliminary report revealed a startling detail: both engine fuel supply switches had been moved to the “off” position almost simultaneously moments after takeoff.
According to the cockpit voice recorder, one pilot asked the other why he had cut the fuel supply. The second pilot replied that he had not. The aircraft immediately began losing altitude.
An auxiliary power unit automatically deployed — a backup system designed to provide power in the event of engine failure. Within 10 seconds, both switches were turned back to “on,” and one pilot managed to issue a brief “Mayday” call before the aircraft crashed.
The 15‑page report did not state whether the fuel cutoff could have been caused by pilot action, mechanical malfunction, electrical fault, or another system failure.
Backlash From Pilots and Families
The preliminary findings drew swift criticism. Pilot associations accused investigators of implying human error without evidence, noting that the AAIB did not recommend checks on the aircraft’s systems or engines — a move they say prematurely ruled out technical failure.
Families of victims, lawyers and pilot groups have accused the authorities, Air India and Boeing of attempting to shift blame onto the deceased crew.
Pushkaraj Sabharwal, 91, father of co‑pilot Sumeet Sabharwal, has petitioned India’s Supreme Court, calling the investigation “profoundly flawed.” He argued the report “predominantly focuses on the deceased pilots… while failing to examine other plausible technical and procedural causes.”
British lawyer Sarah Stewart, representing around 50 families, said the data “raises a troubling spectre” of an uncommanded fuel cutoff, suggesting a possible Boeing system failure.
Air India and Boeing Push Back
Air India CEO Campbell Wilson said in September that the preliminary report showed “nothing wrong with the aircraft, nothing wrong with the engines, nothing wrong with the airline’s operation.”
Boeing declined to comment when contacted by AFP.
But independent aviation experts dispute the airline’s stance.
Former commercial pilot Amit Singh said electrical faults had been reported on the aircraft before the crash. He argued the report’s narrative “tends to make the reader believe the pilots are responsible,” despite unsourced data and unanswered technical questions.
Aviation analyst Mark Martin went further, calling the situation “a cleverly designed cover‑up,” comparing it to Boeing’s initial response to the 737 MAX crashes in 2018 and 2019. “Boeing cannot afford to take the blame,” he said.
Final Report Still Pending
With the investigation ongoing and no clear cause identified, tensions continue to rise. Families of victims are demanding transparency, pilot unions are calling for a broader technical review, and aviation experts warn that premature conclusions could undermine safety reforms.
The AAIB has not given a timeline for the release of its final report.