A bitter dispute has erupted over the cause of the Air India Flight 171 crash, which claimed the lives of 230 people, including 53 British nationals, last year. The Boeing 787 Dreamliner, bound for London from Ahmedabad, India, crashed just 32 seconds after take-off on 12 June, killing all but one person on board and an additional 19 on the ground. The ongoing investigation by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) has drawn heavy criticism following preliminary suggestions that human error may have been a primary factor.
The aircraft, operated by Air India, had 169 Indian nationals and 53 Britons among its passengers, alongside 10 cabin crew. The flight deck was commanded by Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, an experienced pilot, and First Officer Clive Kunder. CCTV footage and social media videos showed the plane appearing to take off normally, but then failing to gain height before descending and disappearing from view, followed by a large explosion.
Under international aviation law, India's AAIB is responsible for the official investigation. The US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is also actively participating, given that the aircraft was manufactured by Boeing and its engines by GE Aerospace. The NTSB delegation includes technical experts from both companies, as well as the US aviation regulator, the Federal Aviation Administration. The stated objective of such investigations is solely accident prevention, not the apportionment of blame or liability.
However, a preliminary report issued by the AAIB a month after the incident has ignited significant controversy. This 15-page document, which did not draw final conclusions or make recommendations, controversially noted that the aircraft's flight data recorder indicated the two fuel cutoff switches transitioned from the 'run' to the 'cutoff' position seconds after take-off. This action would have deprived the engines of fuel, leading to a rapid loss of thrust.
This early focus on a potential human error has triggered a strong backlash from safety campaigners, pilots' groups, and lawyers representing the bereaved families. Critics argue that such preliminary findings risk pre-empting a comprehensive investigation and may be vulnerable to perceptions of political pressure or corporate influence. For Boeing, already facing scrutiny over previous safety issues, the integrity of its 787 Dreamliner, which had an unblemished safety record prior to this incident, is at stake. Air India, part of the Tata Group, also faces potential reputational damage.