Analysis: Interim Air India crash report flags serious concerns

An interim report on the air accident investigation into the fatal crash of an Air India Boeing 787 on take-off from Ahmedabad in India en route to Gatwick on June 12 has revealed that fuel switches to both engines were turned off, causing the aircraft to stall and crash, killing 229 passengers and 12 crew plus 19 people on the ground.

 

It is an alarming development, given neither pilot nor co-pilot appeared aware the switches had been turned off, according to a flight deck recording. The fuel supply to one engine resumed as the aircraft crashed – the other did not.

 

Human error – in the cockpit or on the ground before take-off – was initially considered the most likely cause of the crash, given the 787’s safety record. With a bird strike on one or both engines ruled out, human error or an act of sabotage remain the main crash theories.

 

More: Air India partially restores paused services one month after fatal crash

 

At least one UK media report at the weekend posed the question of “sabotage or suicide”, after the preliminary report concluded: “Switches controlling fuel flow to the jet’s two engines had been moved from ‘run’ to ‘cutoff ’ position, hampering the thrust of the plane.”

 

Neither theory has been ruled out, with India having been at war with Pakistan for four days in late May, and a pilot of Lufthansa subsidiary Germanwings dying by suicide by crashing an Airbus A320 in 2015.

 

Another disturbing possibility is a problem with the 787’s software or electrical systems, which would have serious implications for a portion of the global 787 fleet.

 

The 787 represented a step change in aircraft technology at its launch in 2011, with electric systems driven by lithium-ion batteries rather than pneumatic or hydraulic control of power systems such as those for starting the engines.

 

India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) noted: “The aircraft achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 knots and immediately after, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from run to cutoff position one after another with a gap of one second.” 

 

This suggests the switches flipped in flight and, if not moved by a pilot, moved automatically – the cockpit voice recorder revealed one asking the other: “Why did you cut off [the fuel]” to which the other replied he had not. If not moved by a pilot, attention will switch back to the aircraft’s maintenance, to Boeing and to the 787’s systems.

 

The recent rapid growth of India’s aviation sector – Iata notes “phenomenal” annual growth of more than 10% – could also be a factor when experienced maintenance and groundhandling is crucial to safety.

 

India’s AAIB pointed to a 2018 US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) bulletin on the design of the fuel-control switches, including on the Air India 787, which recommended inspection of the locking mechanism on the fuel cutoff switches, and noted this was “a step not taken by Air India”.

 

A subsequent update stated the FAA “did not consider this issue would warrant an airworthiness directive”.