😱 Why are authorities hiding the FULL truth about Air India Flight 171? The cockpit voice recorder could reveal a shocking cause behind the crash that killed 260—NOT human error! 🤔 What secrets are they keeping from us? Uncover the mystery now. 👉

On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight 171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, crashed 32 seconds after takeoff from Ahmedabad’s Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport, bound for London Gatwick. The disaster claimed 241 of the 242 people on board and 19 lives on the ground, marking the first fatal accident involving a Boeing 787. The preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) revealed that both engine fuel control switches moved to the “cutoff” position, starving the engines of fuel. A cockpit voice recorder (CVR) snippet captured one pilot asking, “Why did you cut off?” with the other responding, “I didn’t.” Yet, the full CVR transcript remains unreleased, fueling speculation that the true cause may not be human error. Why are authorities withholding this critical evidence, and what might it reveal? This article explores the controversy, potential non-human causes, and the implications for aviation safety.

The Crash: A Brief Recap

Flight 171, carrying 230 passengers and 12 crew members, lifted off at 13:38:39 IST (08:08:09 GMT) with Captain Sumeet Sabharwal monitoring and First Officer Clive Kunder flying. At 08:08:42, both fuel control switches moved to “cutoff,” causing a dual-engine failure. The aircraft reached 625 feet and 180 knots before plummeting into the B.J. Medical College hostel, 1.7 kilometers from the runway. The switches were returned to “run” within 10 seconds, triggering an automatic engine relight, but only one engine partially restarted. A “MAYDAY” call at 08:09:05 went unanswered, and the crash occurred six seconds later, killing 260 people. Vishwaskumar Ramesh, seated in 11A, survived when his section detached, escaping with minor injuries.

The AAIB, supported by the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch, recovered both enhanced airborne flight recorders (EAFRs) by June 16. Data extraction, completed by June 24, confirmed the fuel cutoff but left the cause ambiguous. The preliminary report, released on July 8, included only a single CVR quote, prompting questions about why the full transcript remains under wraps.

The CVR Controversy: Why the Silence?

Cockpit voice recorders capture pilot conversations, radio communications, and ambient sounds, providing critical context for crash investigations. In the case of Flight 171, the CVR’s brief excerpt—“Why did you cut off?” followed by “I didn’t”—has fueled intense speculation. The AAIB’s decision to withhold the full transcript has drawn criticism from families, experts, and the public. Sameer Rafik, whose cousin Faizan died, told the BBC he distrusts the report without the full CVR, citing the pilots’ experience: Sabharwal with 15,638 hours and Kunder with 3,403. Peter Goelz, former NTSB managing director, argued that a complete transcript with identified voices is essential to clarify whether the switches were moved deliberately or accidentally.

The withholding of CVR transcripts is not uncommon due to their sensitive nature. Conversations may include personal remarks or expletives irrelevant to the investigation, and releasing them risks reputational damage to pilots or airlines. In India, CVR audio is never publicly released, and transcripts are shared only under strict legal conditions, as noted by the Times of India. However, the selective disclosure of a single line has raised suspicions. Was the AAIB protecting Air India, Boeing, or the pilots’ families? Or does the transcript contain details that challenge the human error narrative?

Families like Imtiyaz Ali’s, who lost four relatives, expressed frustration with the preliminary report’s lack of clarity, describing it as a “product description.” The Federation of Indian Pilots criticized media for relying on paraphrased CVR excerpts, arguing that selective reporting undermines the crew’s professionalism. The NTSB’s Jennifer Homendy called Western media claims—some suggesting Sabharwal deliberately moved the switches—“premature and speculative,” emphasizing the need for a thorough investigation.

Beyond Human Error: Alternative Causes

The CVR’s ambiguity and the unreleased transcript have fueled theories that the crash’s cause lies beyond pilot actions. The fuel control switches, located behind the throttle levers, require deliberate effort to move due to their spring-loaded design and metal guards. A 2018 FAA advisory noted that some Boeing 737 switches had disengaged locking mechanisms, though this was not mandatory for correction. Air India replaced these switches on its 787 fleet by 2023, but no defects were reported. Could a mechanical or electrical fault have caused the switches to move?

The Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) system, which monitors engine performance, is another focal point. Some pilots suggested a FADEC glitch, triggered by false sensor signals, could have initiated an automatic shutdown. However, the CVR’s pilot dialogue suggests human interaction with the switches, as the question “Why did you cut off?” implies one pilot believed the other acted intentionally. Shawn Pruchnicki, an aviation expert, told the BBC that the investigation hinges on two possibilities: deliberate action or confusion, or an automation-related issue. The absence of flight management system alerts, which would have been recorded on the flight data recorder (FDR), weakens the automation theory.

Other potential causes include electrical anomalies or maintenance oversights. The Variable Frequency Starter Generators (VFSGs), which power the 787’s systems, could theoretically disrupt engine controls if faulty, though the ram air turbine’s deployment indicates emergency power was available. The failure to retract the landing gear, visible in CCTV footage, suggests a possible hydraulic or electrical issue, but the FDR showed no such failures. Fuel contamination, as in the 2020 Titan Airways A321 incident, was ruled out after samples tested satisfactory.

Simulator experiments conducted by Air India pilots post-crash showed the 787 could climb with one engine, even with flaps retracted and landing gear down, suggesting a dual-engine failure at 625 feet was catastrophic. This undermines theories of simple pilot error, as recovery should have been possible with prompt action. The “shaky seat” or “tiny device” theories from earlier reports remain unconfirmed, with no evidence linking them to the switches’ movement.

Implications for Aviation Safety

The refusal to release the full CVR transcript has broader implications. The lack of cockpit video recorders, a long-standing NTSB recommendation, complicates identifying who, if anyone, moved the switches. The Air Current noted that video could have shown hand movements, reducing reliance on ambiguous audio. The debate over cockpit video, opposed by some pilots’ unions citing privacy, has been reignited by Flight 171’s unresolved questions.

Air India’s maintenance practices are under scrutiny, with the DGCA ordering inspections of its 33 Boeing 787s. The 2018 FAA advisory, though advisory, raises questions about whether Air India’s oversight was adequate. Boeing and GE Aerospace face no immediate directives, but a confirmed mechanical fault could impact the 787’s safety record, previously unblemished since 2011. Tata Group’s ambitious turnaround of Air India, acquired in 2022, is at risk, with potential market share losses to rivals.

The human toll remains profound. DNA identification continues, with only 90 bodies released by July 15. Families demand transparency, with some, like Dr. Mario Donadi, calling the preliminary report a “slap in the face.” Tata’s ₹1 crore compensation per victim and support for ground victims reflect efforts to address the tragedy, but emotional scars persist. Vigils in Ahmedabad, London, and Mumbai highlight global solidarity, yet the lack of answers fuels distrust.

Moving Forward: Transparency and Reform

The unreleased CVR transcript is a lightning rod for speculation. Does it contain evidence of a mechanical fault, absolving the pilots? Or does it reveal a moment of confusion that authorities fear could tarnish Air India’s reputation? The AAIB’s final report, expected by mid-2026, will likely include time-stamped dialogue and FDR analysis to clarify the cause. Until then, withholding the transcript risks eroding public trust, as seen in the Malaysia Airlines MH370 case, where conflicting information fueled conspiracy theories.

Flight 171’s legacy may drive reforms. Mandating cockpit video, improving switch designs, and enhancing maintenance protocols could prevent future tragedies. For now, the focus is on supporting families and honoring the 260 lives lost. The truth, locked in the CVR, awaits release to provide closure and ensure accountability.