Image: Reuters/Amit Dave/TPX Images of the Day
Modern aircraft are not supposed to fall out of the sky during takeoff. Least of all those with computers cleverer than their pilots. Yet a Boeing 787 operated by Air India did precisely that on June 12th, killing all but one of the 242 people on board and several more on the ground in Ahmedabad. The cause, according to a preliminary report from India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), was as jarring as it was simple: the fuel-control switches had been turned off seconds after takeoff.
The Dreamliner’s twin engines were starved, manually, of fuel. Each switch—guarded and requiring deliberate manipulation—was flipped from “run” to “cutoff” just after the aircraft lifted off at 180 knots. One second apart. Then after a tense exchange in the cockpit—“why did you cutoff?” followed by “I didn’t”—they were flipped back. The aircraft had neither the altitude nor time to recover.
This was not a failure of hardware but of human-machine interaction. The AAIB stopped short of declaring why the pilots acted as they did. Whether the switches were flipped through confusion or miscommunication or a more exotic cause remains uncertain.
Some fault Boeing for building an aircraft where two protected fuel switches can still be triggered in haste. American pilots familiar with the Dreamliner point out the switches are not easily moved. They require a lift-and-flick motion under a physical guard, suggesting more than idle fumbling.
The AAIB report noted the throttle control module on the accident aircraft had been replaced twice before, for reasons apparently unrelated to the fuel switch. It also confirmed fuel samples were clean and that black box data had been retrieved. Yet the essential mystery remains: why did a modern airliner’s powerplants lose thrust at the precise moment when they were needed most?
Unlike previous Boeing mishaps—most infamously the 737 MAX disasters, in which flawed automation overruled pilots—this accident appears to invert the narrative. Here human agency intruded on normal flight with tragic consequences. It evokes the 2009 crash of Air France 447, where overcorrection in response to faulty speed sensors led to aerodynamic stall. Or more aptly the 2015 TransAsia crash in Taiwan, where a working engine was mistakenly shut down after the other failed. In both the aircraft might have survived if left alone.
Air India for its part has offered muted cooperation but no explanation. That is not surprising. The national carrier, freshly privatised and undergoing an overhaul under the Tata Group, has little incentive to highlight failings in cockpit culture or maintenance diligence. Nor has Boeing been asked to modify the switch design, pending final conclusions. ■
