News | National
15 Jul 2025 18:20
NZCity News
NZCity CalculatorReturn to NZCity

  • Start Page
  • Personalise
  • Sport
  • Weather
  • Finance
  • Shopping
  • Jobs
  • Horoscopes
  • Lotto Results
  • Photo Gallery
  • Site Gallery
  • TVNow
  • Dating
  • SearchNZ
  • NZSearch
  • Crime.co.nz
  • RugbyLeague
  • Make Home
  • About NZCity
  • Contact NZCity
  • Your Privacy
  • Advertising
  • Login
  • Join for Free

  •   Home > News > National

    Was the Air India crash caused by pilot error or technical fault? None of the theories holds up – yet

    This tragedy reminds us that aviation safety depends on patient and thorough investigation – not media soundbites or unqualified expert commentary.

    Guido Carim Junior, Senior Lecturer in Aviation, Griffith University
    The Conversation


    Over the weekend, the Indian Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau released a preliminary report on last month’s crash of Air India flight 171, which killed 260 people, 19 of them on the ground.

    The aim of a preliminary report is to present factual information gathered so far and to inform further lines of inquiry. However, the 15-page document has also led to unfounded speculation and theories that are currently not supported by the evidence.

    Here’s what the report actually says, why we don’t yet know what caused the crash, and why it’s important not to speculate.

    What the preliminary report does say

    What we know for certain is that the aircraft lost power in both engines just after takeoff.

    According to the report, this is supported by video footage showing the deployment of the ram air turbine (RAT), and the examination of the air inlet door of the auxiliary power unit (APU).

    The RAT is deployed when both engines fail, all hydraulic systems are lost, or there is a total electrical power loss. The APU air inlet door opens when the system attempts to start automatically due to dual engine failure.

    The preliminary investigation suggests both engines shut down because the fuel flow stopped. Attention has now shifted to the fuel control switches, located on the throttle lever panel between the pilots.

    This is what the fuel switches look like, with the throttle lever above them. Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau

    Data from the enhanced airborne flight recorder suggests these switches may have been moved from “run” to “cutoff” three seconds after liftoff. Ten seconds later, the switches were moved back to “run”.

    The report also suggests the pilots were aware the engines had shut down and attempted to restart them. Despite their effort, the engines couldn’t restart in time.

    We don’t know what the pilots did

    Flight data recorders don’t capture pilot actions. They record system responses and sensor data, which can sometimes lead to the belief they’re an accurate representation of the pilot’s actions in the cockpit.

    While this is true most of the time, this is not always the case.

    In my own work investigating safety incidents, I’ve seen cases in which automated systems misinterpreted inputs. In one case, a system recorded a pilot pressing the same button six times in two seconds, something humanly impossible. On further investigation, it turned out to be a faulty system, not a real action.

    We cannot yet rule out the possibility that system damage or sensor error led to false data being recorded. We also don’t know whether the pilots unintentionally flicked the switches to “cutoff”. And we may never know.

    As we also don’t have a camera in the cockpit, any interpretation of pilots’ actions will be made indirectly, usually through the data sensed by the aircraft and the conversation, sound and noise captured by the environmental microphone available in the cockpit.

    We don’t have the full conversation between the pilots

    Perhaps the most confusing clue in the report was an excerpt of a conversation between the pilots. It says:

    In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff. The other pilot responded that he did not do so.

    This short exchange is entirely without context. First, we don’t know who says what. Second, we don’t know when the question was asked – after takeoff, or after the engine started to lose power? Third, we don’t know the exact words used, because the excerpt in the report is paraphrased.

    Finally, we don’t know whether the exchange referred to the engine status or the switch position. Again, we may never know.

    What’s crucial here is that the current available evidence doesn’t support any theory about intentional fuel cutoff by either of the pilots. To say otherwise is unfounded speculation.

    We don’t know if there was a mechanical failure

    The preliminary report indicates that, for now, there are no actions required by Boeing, General Electric or any company that operates the Boeing 787-8 and/or GEnx-1B engine.

    This has led some to speculate that a mechanical failure has been ruled out. Again, it is far too early to conclude that.

    What the preliminary report shows is that the investigation team has not found any evidence to suggest the aircraft suffered a catastrophic failure that requires immediate attention or suspension of operations around the world.

    This could be because there was no catastrophic failure. It could also be because the physical evidence has been so badly damaged that investigators will need more time and other sources of evidence to learn what happened.

    Why we must resist premature conclusions

    In the aftermath of an accident, there is much at stake for many people: the manufacturer of the aircraft, the airline, the airport, civil aviation authority and others. The families of the victims understandably demand answers.

    It’s also tempting to latch onto a convenient explanation. But the preliminary report is not the full story. It’s based on very limited data, analysed under immense pressure, and without access to every subsystem or mechanical trace.

    The final report is still to come. Until then, the responsible position for regulators, experts and the public is to withhold judgement.

    This tragedy reminds us that aviation safety depends on patient and thorough investigation – not media soundbites or unqualified expert commentary. We owe it to the victims and their families to get the facts right, not just fast.

    The Conversation

    Guido Carim Junior has received funding from Boeing R&D Australia to conduct research projects in the past five years.

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license.
    © 2025 TheConversation, NZCity

     Other National News
     15 Jul: Queenstown Rees Hotel has been fined 22 thousand dollars for selling illegally caught crayfish - as part of a pricey luxury experience
     15 Jul: King Charles' annual swan census begins on River Thames
     15 Jul: People selling homes are having to settle for less - as median house prices fall across the country
     15 Jul: Police are investigating after a cannabis cake was taken to a shared lunch at Hawke's Bay Hospital
     15 Jul: UNESCO grants World Heritage status to Khmer Rouge atrocity sites – paving the way for other sites of conflict
     15 Jul: How do you stop an AI model turning Nazi? What the Grok drama reveals about AI training
     15 Jul: A man in his 80s is in hospital - after being trapped when his campervan blew over in Northland's Tauranga Bay camp ground
     Top Stories

    RUGBY RUGBY
    Former All Blacks scrum guru Mike Cron's cautioned against making any dramatic changes to rugby's laws in order to speed the game up More...


    BUSINESS BUSINESS
    Tax experts on the 20 per cent HECS-HELP discount and your tax return More...



     Today's News

    Business:
    Tax experts on the 20 per cent HECS-HELP discount and your tax return 18:17

    Entertainment:
    Jason Kelce says his brother Travis is his "best friend on the planet" 18:10

    Rugby League:
    Kurt Capewell will replace Rocco Berry in the centres for the Warriors' NRL visit to the Newcastle Knights on Sunday 18:07

    Entertainment:
    Oasis are planning a £200,000 party to celebrate their UK reunion shows 17:40

    Rugby League:
    Sonny Bill Williams has weighed in six kilograms heavier than Paul Gallen 24 hours out from their boxing bout in Sydney 17:37

    Law and Order:
    A scathing assessment of authorities with responsibility for Malachi Subecz , whose mother was in jail 17:27

    Entertainment:
    Cheryl Tweedy found it "heartbreaking" when Liam Payne's final TV show was released on Netflix 17:10

    Law and Order:
    Nineteen arrests - two of them women - after a North Island crackdown on the Whanganui Hell's Angel Motorcycle Club 16:57

    Entertainment:
    Ariana Madix feels like the "Glam Reaper" on Love Island USA 16:40

    Law and Order:
    Queenstown Rees Hotel has been fined 22 thousand dollars for selling illegally caught crayfish - as part of a pricey luxury experience 16:17


     News Search






    Power Search


    © 2025 New Zealand City Ltd