🔥 SHOCKING DISCOVERY in Air India 171 Crash! 🔥
What they found inside the wreckage is rocking the aviation world. A fatal flaw in Boeing’s 787? A pilot’s mistake? Or something far darker? The truth will change how you see flying.
👉 Click to reveal what Boeing’s hiding!

On June 12, 2025, the aviation world was rocked by the catastrophic crash of Air India Flight AI-171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner that plummeted just seconds after takeoff from Ahmedabad, India, en route to London Gatwick. The disaster claimed 260 lives, including 241 passengers and crew onboard and 19 people on the ground, marking it as the deadliest aviation incident in India in over four decades and the first fatal crash involving a Boeing 787. What investigators found in the wreckage—particularly the black box data and cockpit voice recordings—has sparked intense scrutiny, not only of the airline but also of Boeing, one of the world’s leading aircraft manufacturers. This article delves into the findings, the mysteries surrounding the crash, and the broader implications for Boeing’s reputation and the aviation industry.

The Crash: A Timeline of Tragedy

Flight AI-171 took off from Ahmedabad’s Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport at 13:38 IST. The Boeing 787, piloted by experienced Captain Sumeet Sabharwal and co-pilot Clive Kunder, reached its maximum airspeed of 180 knots within seconds. However, just four seconds later, both engines lost power, triggering a rapid sequence of events that ended in disaster. The aircraft, unable to maintain lift, crashed into the BJ Medical College hostel complex, destroying buildings and sparking an inferno. Only one passenger, British national Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, survived, escaping through a broken emergency door in what he described as a “miracle.”

The crash’s immediate aftermath saw the recovery of the flight’s two Enhanced Airborne Flight Recorders (EAFRs), commonly known as black boxes, on June 13 and 16. Despite thermal damage, the black boxes provided critical data, including flight parameters and cockpit voice recordings, which have become central to the investigation led by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), with support from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Boeing, and General Electric (GE).

Key Findings from the Investigation

The AAIB’s preliminary report, released on July 12, 2025, revealed a series of startling discoveries that have raised more questions than answers. Here are the critical findings:

Simultaneous Fuel Cutoff: The most shocking revelation was that both engines’ fuel cutoff switches transitioned from “RUN” to “CUTOFF” within one second of each other during takeoff, effectively starving the engines of fuel. This is highly unusual, as these switches are typically only manipulated after landing or in extreme emergencies. The cockpit voice recorder captured a chilling exchange: one pilot asked, “Why did you cut off (fuel)?” to which the other responded, “I did not do it.” The ambiguity over who—or what—caused the switches to move has fueled speculation about human error versus mechanical failure.
Emergency Systems Activation: CCTV footage confirmed that the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), a backup power system, deployed seconds after takeoff, indicating a total loss of engine power. The RAT provides minimal electrical and hydraulic power, but it was insufficient to save the aircraft at such a low altitude. This discovery pointed to a dual engine failure, a rare and catastrophic event for a modern aircraft like the 787, designed to operate safely on one engine if needed.
No Evidence of Bird Strikes or Fuel Contamination: Early theories about bird strikes or contaminated fuel were ruled out. CCTV showed no significant bird activity, and fuel samples from the refueling bowsers tested satisfactory. While onboard fuel samples are still under analysis, the simultaneous engine failure suggests a cause beyond typical contamination patterns.
Cockpit Confusion and Delay: The ten-second delay between the fuel cutoff and the crew’s attempt to reset the switches was critical. At the low altitude and speed, the engines could not be reignited in time. The report suggests a possible “startle effect,” where cockpit alarms and psychological shock may have slowed the pilots’ response. The transfer of control from the co-pilot to the captain, necessitated by the RAT’s limited power to the captain’s controls, further complicated the situation.
A Known Vulnerability?: A 2018 FAA Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB NM-18.33) highlighted a potential issue with the Boeing 787’s fuel control switch locking mechanism. If improperly installed or worn, the mechanism could allow unintentional movement of the switches due to vibration, inadvertent contact, or other disturbances. Air India did not act on this non-mandatory advisory, raising questions about whether this vulnerability played a role.
Aircraft Condition: The 787 was deemed airworthy, with a valid Airworthiness Review Certificate until May 2026. Maintenance records showed no unresolved issues with critical systems, and the engines, GE GEnx-1B models, were recently installed. However, the presence of several non-critical Minimum Equipment List (MEL) items, such as a faulty flight deck printer, has prompted scrutiny of Air India’s maintenance practices.

Emerging Theories and Speculation

While the AAIB has urged caution against premature conclusions, speculation has swirled, particularly on platforms like X. One theory, proposed by experts Jeffrey Thomas and Richard Godfrey, suggests water ingress into the electronic equipment (EE) bay during takeoff rotation could have caused an electrical disruption, leading to the simultaneous engine shutdown. This theory points to potential issues with restroom pipes leaking into critical systems below, though it remains unconfirmed.

Other possibilities include human error, such as an accidental bump of the fuel cutoff switches, or a design flaw in the 787’s complex systems. The cockpit voice recorder’s ambiguity about which pilot spoke adds to the mystery, with some U.S. media outlets controversially hinting at a deliberate act, a claim dismissed by the NTSB and AAIB as speculative.

Boeing’s Tarnished Reputation

The Air India 171 crash has dealt a significant blow to Boeing, already grappling with a string of safety concerns and public relations challenges. The 787 Dreamliner, introduced in 2011, had an impeccable safety record until this incident, with nearly a billion passengers transported safely. However, this crash, combined with previous issues like the 737 MAX groundings, has intensified scrutiny of Boeing’s engineering and quality control processes.

Boeing’s response has been measured, deferring to the AAIB’s investigation under ICAO Annex 13 protocols. The company expressed condolences but avoided commenting on specifics, likely to mitigate legal and reputational risks. The revelation of the unheeded 2018 FAA advisory has fueled criticism, with questions about why Boeing did not push for mandatory inspections of the fuel switch locking mechanism.

Air India, too, faces pressure. The airline ordered safety inspections of its 34 Boeing 787s, with no major issues found in 24 aircraft, but the crash has raised concerns about its maintenance and training standards. CEO Campbell Wilson emphasized fleet-wide safety checks, but the focus remains on the cockpit’s critical ten seconds.

Implications for the Aviation Industry

The Air India 171 crash has far-reaching implications. First, it underscores the importance of robust cockpit resource management (CRM) and training for rare emergencies like dual engine failure. The “startle effect” highlighted in the report suggests pilots may need enhanced training to handle sensory overload.

Second, the crash raises questions about the complexity of modern aircraft systems. The Boeing 787’s reliance on advanced electronics, while efficient, may introduce vulnerabilities, as suggested by the water ingress theory. This could prompt regulators to mandate stricter inspections or design changes, particularly for critical components like fuel control switches.

Third, the incident has reignited debates about aviation safety oversight. The FAA’s decision not to mandate action on the 2018 advisory reflects a broader challenge: balancing cost and safety in an industry under financial pressure. The crash may push regulators to revisit non-mandatory advisories for critical systems.

Finally, the tragedy has humanized the stakes of aviation safety. The sole survivor’s account and the grief of families awaiting DNA confirmation of remains highlight the human toll. Families have demanded transparency, with some criticizing delays and alleged mislabeling of remains.

The Path Forward

The AAIB’s final report, expected within 12 months, will likely provide clearer answers. Investigators are analyzing wreckage, conducting simulations, and interviewing stakeholders. The black box data, despite damage, has already provided 49 hours of flight data across six flights, offering a wealth of information.

For Boeing, the crash is a setback in its bid to restore trust. The company must cooperate fully with the investigation and address any identified design flaws. For Air India, the focus is on rebuilding confidence through rigorous safety measures. Globally, the aviation industry faces a moment of reckoning, with the potential for new regulations and training protocols to prevent similar tragedies.

Conclusion

The crash of Air India Flight 171 is a stark reminder of the fragility of aviation safety, even in modern aircraft like the Boeing 787. The findings—simultaneous fuel cutoff, cockpit confusion, and a possible unaddressed vulnerability—have cast a shadow over Boeing and Air India. As the investigation continues, the world watches, hoping for answers that honor the 260 lives lost and ensure safer skies. The truth, when fully revealed, could reshape how we design, operate, and regulate aircraft, making this tragedy a pivotal moment in aviation history.