Air India Boeing 787 Crash: Conflicting Narratives as Investigation Deepens
The shocking crash of an Air India Boeing 787 Dreamliner on June 12 has sent shockwaves through India's aviation sector and the global airline industry. The crash, which took place shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad as the plane headed for London, claimed 260 lives. But as families grieve, a bitter battle over blame, safety, and responsibility has taken center stage.
Amid this scrutiny, the CEO of Air India issued a strongly-worded memo declaring there was no mechanical fault in the aircraft prior to the disaster. His message, aimed at calming both customers and employees, stands at odds with mounting questions among investigators and pilots. While the promise of a ‘clean’ airplane may sound reassuring, not everyone is convinced—especially with so many technical uncertainties still looming.
Fuel Switches, Sensor Defects, and the Hunt for Answers
Digging into the preliminary findings, a picture of confusion and technical complexity emerges. The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) found that both engine fuel switches on the doomed Dreamliner somehow moved to 'CUT-OFF' just seconds after takeoff. That cut off the engines’ fuel supply, leading to a catastrophic loss of thrust at a critical moment. Yet, when investigators examined the wreckage, both switches were in the 'RUN' position, and the cockpit voice recorder confirmed pilots never touched them. These contradictions have triggered talk of a mechanical fault or software bug overriding crew actions.
The drama doesn’t end there. In response, India's Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) rushed out a nationwide order. Every airline operating Boeing 737, 747, and 787 models must now check their fuel control switches by July 21. Sound reaction? Perhaps. But it also raises eyebrows—especially since a 2018 FAA advisory had highlighted a risk of faulty latches in these switches, warning that such glitches could lead to accidental fuel shutoff. Critics are now asking why airlines hadn’t already done these checks, given years of known concerns.
Pilots, too, have added their voice to the storm, with the Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP) accusing the AAIB report of glossing over complex technical scenarios. According to the FIP, the possibility that a failure in systems like the Engine Electronic Control (EEC) or Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) might have triggered the shutdowns hasn't been properly explored. They argue investigators are far too quick to suggest pilot error, when the evidence for it just isn’t there yet.
Adding yet another layer, it turns out engineers had logged a 'Stabilizer Position Transducer Defect' in the same plane not long before the crash. Boeing’s repair instructions were followed, but that hasn’t stopped officials from wondering if this sensor problem—and the chain of automated signals it controls—played a hidden role in the tragedy. So far, no direct link has emerged, but in complex modern jets, small bugs in one system can wreak havoc elsewhere.
As the probe pushes forward, the debate keeps heating up. Is the real cause buried in a rare mechanical flaw? Or did a software glitch tip things over the edge? How much blame, if any, should fall on the pilots? There are more questions than answers, but what’s clear is this: the Air India Dreamliner crash isn’t just another aviation accident—it’s a major test for safety regulators, airline bosses, and passengers everywhere who trust these planes with their lives.
