PRELIMINARY REPORT ON AIR INDIA FLIGHT 171:

A CATASTROPHIC FAILURE WITH UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

A preliminary investigation into the deadliest aviation accident of the decade involving Air India Flight 171 reveals manual fuel cutoff of both engines seconds after liftoff, leading to total engine failure and crash. The Boeing 787-8, operating with experienced pilots and valid certifications, crashed just 32 seconds after takeoff, resulting in 260 fatalities and 68 injuries. The report highlights unresolved questions regarding pilot actions and references a 2018 non-mandatory service bulletin addressing fuel control switch issues. The investigation faces criticism from pilot associations and regulatory bodies for its limited transparency and implications of pilot error.

A preliminary investigation report has been released concerning the deadliest aviation accident in the past decade, which resulted in the deaths of 260 people and injuries to 68 others. While the report provides partial insight into the causes of the crash, it raises far more questions than it answers.

On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight 171 was scheduled to operate from Ahmedabad, India, to London, United Kingdom. The aircraft, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, had been delivered to Air India in 2013, making the airline one of the earliest operators of this model. At the time of the crash, the aircraft had accumulated 41,868 flight hours. It held a valid airworthiness certificate, had undergone regular maintenance, and was considered to be in good operational condition on paper.

The flight was commanded by a 56-year-old captain with over 15,000 total flight hours, including more than 8,500 hours on the Boeing 787. The first officer was 32 years old and had logged 3,403 total flight hours, with 1,128 hours on the same aircraft type.

At 07:43 UTC, the crew requested clearance for pushback and engine start-up. Twelve minutes later, they confirmed readiness for taxi with all pre-flight checks completed. Eight minutes after that, they received clearance to enter the runway. Takeoff clearance followed four minutes later. The aircraft carried 230 passengers and 12 crew members.



At 08:08:39 UTC, flight data recorded liftoff. Three seconds later, the aircraft reached a peak airspeed of 180 knots. However, at the fourth second after liftoff, the fuel control switch for one engine was moved from RUN to CUTOFF. One second later, the fuel control switch for the second engine was also set to CUTOFF. The aircraft lost all engine thrust at this critical moment.

Three seconds after fuel cutoff, the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) deployed, indicating complete engine power loss. Eight seconds after the second engine was shut down, the fuel control switches were reactivated—first one switch, followed four seconds later by the other. At the 26th second, the flight crew issued a MAYDAY call. The aircraft crashed into the ground six seconds later, remaining airborne for a total of just 32 seconds.

Video footage shared shortly after the crash speculated that both engines had failed, given the RAT deployment. The preliminary report confirmed that engine shutdown was not due to mechanical failure but rather manual fuel cutoff. The report emphasized that these switches are specifically designed to prevent accidental activation, both in placement and mechanism.



Two aspects of the report are especially noteworthy. First, a 2018 service bulletin addressed potential faults in the locking mechanism of fuel control switches, based on incidents involving Boeing 737s. Although the issue also applied to 787s, the FAA did not classify it as a safety hazard and issued only a non-mandatory recommendation.

Second, cockpit voice recordings revealed a puzzling exchange between the pilots. One asked, “Why did you cut off the fuel supply?”, to which the other responded, “I didn’t.” The report states that it was not possible to determine which pilot made which statement due to unresolved voice identification.

This preliminary report has been met with significant criticism, especially from the Indian Airline Pilots Association, which condemned its implication of pilot error. The Indian aviation authority has also been criticized for failing to deliver a more comprehensive and transparent investigation.