What Air India 171 Hid! 😱 The crash report leaves out chilling details—38 seconds of chaos no one can explain! Was it a pilot’s slip or a secret system flaw? 🤔 Dive into the shocking truth shaking aviation! 👉

The crash of Air India Flight 171 on June 12, 2025, which killed 260 people just 38 seconds after takeoff from Ahmedabad, India, remains a haunting enigma, with the preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) raising more questions than answers. Released on July 12, 2025, the 15-page document details a critical moment: three seconds after liftoff, both engine fuel control switches flipped from “RUN” to “CUTOFF,” starving the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner’s engines and triggering a fatal descent into a residential area (The Guardian,). Cockpit audio captures one pilot’s shock—“Why did you cut off?”—met with a denial, “I didn’t,” yet the report omits crucial details like speaker identities, full transcripts, and FADEC system data, fueling speculation of a cover-up or systemic failure (Hindustan Times,; BBC,). Social media, including X posts from @ShivAroor, amplifies distrust, suggesting what the report didn’t say—about pilots, mechanics, or software—changes everything (X,). This analysis, informed by your prior discussions of FADEC theories, examines these omissions, competing explanations, and their implications for aviation safety.

The AAIB report outlines a rapid sequence of events. At 13:38:39 IST, Flight 171 lifted off Runway 23, reaching 180 knots and 625 feet by 13:38:42 (Wikipedia,). Within one second, both fuel switches moved to “CUTOFF,” causing immediate thrust loss (BBC,). The pilots, Captain Sumeet Sabharwal and First Officer Clive Kunder, restored the switches to “RUN” within 10–14 seconds, initiating FADEC’s relight, but only Engine 1 began recovering before impact at 13:39:11 (Wikipedia,). The Ram Air Turbine (RAT) deployed, signaling total power loss, and the landing gear remained unretracted (BBC,). The CVR’s brief excerpt—one pilot’s confusion, the other’s denial—lacks context, with no speaker identification or full transcript, as criticized by Peter Goelz, former NTSB director (BBC,). The report’s silence on FADEC data, engine performance pre-cutoff, and the 2018 FAA bulletin on disengaged fuel switch locks leaves gaping holes (BBC,).

The FADEC theory, echoed in your prior queries, is prominent. X users like @eshwar_n suggest a Weight-on-Wheels (WoW) sensor glitch caused FADEC to misread the plane’s airborne status, triggering a fuel cutoff (X,). A 2019 All Nippon Airways 787 incident and a 2025 United Airlines case involved similar FADEC errors (X,; Financial Express). Mary Schiavo posits a Thrust Control Malfunction Accommodation (TCMA) fault, but the AAIB’s lack of FADEC command data undermines this, as the switches’ physical movement suggests a mechanical or human trigger (Leeham News,). The 787’s fuel switches, requiring deliberate force to unlock, make accidental activation unlikely (The Guardian,). Tim Atkinson notes the report’s failure to detail engine behavior before the cutoff, critical for assessing software involvement (BBC,).

Human error is a fraught alternative. Sabharwal, with 15,638 hours, and Kunder, with 3,403, were experienced and rested, passing breathalyzer tests (Wikipedia,). The CVR’s “I didn’t do it” rebuttal and rapid switch movement—within one second—argue against deliberate action (BBC,). The Indian Commercial Pilots’ Association (ICPA) condemned media speculation, like The Wall Street Journal’s claim that Sabharwal flipped the switches, as “reckless” (Al Jazeera,; Times of India,). NTSB’s Jennifer Homendy called such reports “premature,” urging focus on AAIB’s ongoing probe (Times of India,). The 2018 FAA bulletin on disengaged switch locks, ignored by Air India, raises mechanical possibilities, but the FAA deemed it non-critical (BBC,).

The report’s omissions fuel distrust. By not releasing full CVR transcripts or video, as Goelz advocates, AAIB invites speculation (BBC,). X posts from @BDUTT criticize media like BBC for implying pilot fault without evidence (X,). Families, like Nareshsinh Thakore, who lost his daughter, demand clarity, frustrated by the report’s vagueness (BBC,). This mirrors cultural amplification seen in your discussions of Rachel Zegler or The Acolyte, where incomplete narratives spark conspiracies (Northeastern). Theories of a “cover-up,” as @mujifren suggests, reflect public skepticism of Boeing, already battered by 737 Max crashes, and Air India’s maintenance lapses (X; Reuters). Boeing’s 9% stock drop and fleet inspections by India and South Korea signal industry alarm (Newsweek,).

The ongoing investigation, involving NTSB, GE Aerospace, and Boeing, faces pressure to resolve these gaps within a year (FAA,). With 1,100 787s in service, a systemic flaw could reshape aviation, but the report’s silence on key data keeps the mystery alive, leaving families and the industry grasping for answers in those fateful 38 seconds (Sky News,).