Share
Saturday, July 12, 2025
A Momentary Out-of-Theme Entry: Regarding the Air India Flight 171 Disaster, Provisional Report - Thoughts on plausible causes, after release of the initial report
Perhaps one hasn't taken into account the timing of the fuel switchoff: Wasn't it done at precisely the most critical and vulnerable phase of all during takeoff, namely almost immediately after liftoff? If someone were intent on critically incapacitating an aircraft by cutting off the fuel supply at a certain phase of the (10 hour?) flight, would they pick any other phase than that to do it in?
The chances of any of the two fuel switches toggling to off due to some inexplicable technical glitch or inadvertent manual or mechanical handling (like accidentally bumping into or touching them) was already as close to zero as could be imagined given the flawless track record of the switch design/model in question, and its being in use across multiple Boeing's commercial airline models for a period of about two decades without issue). Let alone the chances of BOTH of them switching off consecutively at that phase!
Hence, the theoretical possibility of something like that taking place being virtually zero, we must look elsewhere for possible explanations.
The only other scenario to that of random error as its cause, would be the intentional option. Indeed, we have considered that the specific choice of that narrow time window for its effectuation - the phase following liftoff - would have been the most logical one from a trained aviator's perspective. The fact that its occurrence corresponded exactly with such reasoning strengthens the hypothesis of deliberate intervention.
#ai171 #AIflight171
Share
Share
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Here's what Gemini Ai commented, in this regard:
ReplyDeleteThe search results provide significant context regarding the Air India Flight 171 accident, aligning with the blog post's "deliberate intervention" hypothesis. The preliminary report indeed indicates both fuel switches moved to the "cut-off" position shortly after takeoff, and the cockpit voice recording shows one pilot asking "Why did you cut off?" with the other responding "I didn't." This has led to speculation about pilot error, mechanical malfunction, or deliberate action, including pilot suicide. Aviation experts cited in the search results emphasize that these switches are designed to prevent accidental activation and require deliberate action.
Now, let's look for similar accidents from other quarters, specifically focusing on cases where:
Multiple critical systems failed simultaneously.
The failure occurred during a critical phase of flight (takeoff/climb, or similar highly demanding phase).
Deliberate intervention (e.g., pilot suicide, sabotage) was a suspected or confirmed cause.
The search results already provided a few examples in the context of pilot-induced crashes or deliberate acts, mentioned by Captain Mohan Ranganathan in the NDTV article:
Germanwings Flight 9525 (2015): The co-pilot deliberately flew the plane into the French Alps, killing all 150 aboard. This was a clear case of pilot suicide, but involved intentional flight path deviation rather than fuel cutoff at takeoff.
EgyptAir Flight 990 (1999): The official NTSB report concluded the crash was due to the relief first officer's intentional flight control inputs. The Egyptian Civil Aviation Authority, however, concluded it was a mechanical failure. This involved deliberate flight control inputs during cruise, not fuel cutoff at takeoff.
SilkAir Flight 185 (1997): The NTSB concluded the crash was due to deliberate pilot action (suicide by deliberately putting the aircraft into a dive). This occurred during cruise flight, not takeoff, and involved flight controls, not fuel.
China Eastern Airlines Flight 5735 (2022): While investigations are ongoing, initial findings and data analysis led to speculation of deliberate input causing the steep dive. Again, this was during cruise and involved flight controls.
Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 (2014): Many experts believe the pilot may have deliberately diverted the aircraft before it disappeared. This involved flight path alteration, not engine shutdown at takeoff.
Delta Air Lines Inc. (1980s): One article mentioned a Delta Air Lines Inc. pilot mistakenly cut off fuel to the engines of a Boeing 767. However, he was able to restart them because the aircraft was higher in the sky, avoiding a disaster. This was human error, but involved fuel cutoff, though not simultaneous on both engines and not explicitly suspected as deliberate in the context of the Air India crash.
TransAsia Airways Flight 235 (2015): A pilot shut down the wrong engine after a single-engine failure, causing a crash that killed 43. This was a clear human error under stress, not intentional sabotage, but involves engine shutdown during a critical phase.
Alaska Airlines (recent, mentioned on Reddit): A jump-seater pilot was high on "shrooms" and tried to pull the engine fire switches but was prevented. This was an attempt at deliberate action, but not a completed crash.
Based on the prompt, the closest parallels to the AI171 "deliberate intervention" hypothesis (specifically regarding intentional critical system failure at a highly vulnerable phase of flight) are the cases of pilot suicide. While none of the prominent pilot suicide cases (Germanwings, EgyptAir, SilkAir) involved the exact scenario of fuel cutoff at takeoff, they share the element of deliberate human action leading to a catastrophic outcome in a highly atypical manner.
(cont'd)
(cont'd)
ReplyDeleteThe key elements to compare:
AI171 (as per the blog's hypothesis): Deliberate, near-simultaneous fuel cutoff of both engines immediately after liftoff by a "trained aviator," at the most critical phase.
Similar Incidents: Cases where intentional acts by pilots or others led to a crash, particularly when such acts were highly unusual for that phase of flight or system.
While the AI171 case, as described in the blog, emphasizes the unique combination of fuel cutoff and timing (immediately after liftoff), other deliberate intervention cases involved different mechanisms and flight phases.
Here's a summary of similar incidents from other quarters, where deliberate action, especially by a pilot, was a suspected or confirmed cause of a major airline accident, or involved an attempt at such action, focusing on instances where the action was highly unusual for the flight phase:
Germanwings Flight 9525 (2015): The co-pilot, Andreas Lubitz, intentionally descended the aircraft into the French Alps, killing all 150 people on board. This was a confirmed case of pilot suicide, where the pilot deliberately manipulated flight controls to cause the crash during the cruise phase. While not a fuel cutoff, it involved intentional system manipulation leading to catastrophic loss.
EgyptAir Flight 990 (1999): The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) concluded that the probable cause of this crash in the Atlantic Ocean was the relief first officer's intentional flight control inputs. The Egyptian authorities disputed this, citing mechanical failure. This incident involved deliberate flight control inputs during the cruise phase, causing the aircraft to dive.
SilkAir Flight 185 (1997): The NTSB concluded that the crash was the result of deliberate flight control inputs, most likely by the captain, placing the aircraft into a dive. This occurred during the cruise phase.
China Eastern Airlines Flight 5735 (2022): While the investigation is ongoing, preliminary analyses of flight data have led to speculation that deliberate inputs from the cockpit caused the aircraft's steep, near-vertical dive during the cruise phase.
TransAsia Airways Flight 235 (2015): While determined to be human error under stress rather than a deliberate act of sabotage/suicide, this crash involved a pilot mistakenly shutting down the working engine after one engine failed during takeoff/climb, leading to a loss of thrust and crash. This highlights how critical engine management errors during a vulnerable phase can be catastrophic, even if not malicious.
Alaska Airlines (October 2023 attempt): An off-duty pilot riding in the jump seat attempted to shut down the engines by pulling fire suppression handles during a flight. He was subdued by the crew. This was a clear attempt at deliberate system manipulation with intent to cause a crash, though it was prevented and did not involve a fuel cutoff specifically at takeoff.
While the exact scenario of a simultaneous, deliberate fuel cutoff of both engines immediately after liftoff, as hypothesized for AI171, appears to be a unique and particularly alarming combination, the broader category of deliberate human intervention by a pilot or other crew member causing or attempting to cause a catastrophic aircraft accident, especially through unexpected manipulation of critical systems during a vulnerable phase of flight, has precedents in the aviation history of other quarters. These cases often involve unusual actions that defy normal operational procedures and raise questions about intent, similar to the "deliberate intervention" argument in the AI171 case.