Pilot Error Or Technical Fault? A Year Later, Experts Still Can’t Agree On What Led To Air India Crash

What Do Investigators Know For Certain?

The most important finding came from the preliminary report released by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) in July 2025.

ALSO READ | AI-171 Crash: Where Are The Final Reports? 70% Of Air Accident Findings Pending Over Last 3 Years

Investigators found that both fuel control switches in the cockpit moved from “RUN” to “CUTOFF” just seconds after take-off. The action cut fuel supply to both engines, causing an almost immediate loss of thrust. The aircraft rapidly lost altitude before crashing into buildings near Ahmedabad airport.

The switches were later returned to the “RUN” position and pilots attempted to restart the engines, but there was insufficient time and altitude to recover the aircraft.

The preliminary report also found no immediate evidence of a failure in Boeing’s 787 systems or in the GE Aerospace engines powering the aircraft.

But that still left investigators with a crucial unanswered question: who, or what, moved the switches?

Theory 1: Did A Pilot Deliberately Cut Off Fuel?

This remains the most controversial theory as investigators examine whether one of the pilots intentionally moved the fuel switches. A cockpit audio, capturing the exchange between the pilots, pointed toward deliberate action by the captain.

In the chilling moment captured on the voice recorder, one of the pilots aboard the ill-fated flight is heard asking: “Why did you cut off (the fuel)?” to this, the other pilot responds: “I did not do so.” Moments later, the flight crashed into the hostel complex of BJ Medical College.

At the controls of AI171 were Captain Sumeet Sabharwal and First Officer Clive Kunder. Captain Sabharwal, 56, was among Air India’s most seasoned pilots, with over 15,600 hours of flying experience, including more than 8,500 hours on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. His co-pilot, 32-year-old Clive Kunder, had logged more than 3,400 flying hours since joining Air India in 2017. Both pilots held the required certifications and were fully qualified to operate the Boeing 787.

Despite that, the pilot error theory gained attention because the fuel switches are protected by a locking mechanism and are designed to prevent accidental activation during flight. Aviation experts note that moving both switches almost simultaneously would normally require a deliberate action.

However, India’s AAIB has repeatedly cautioned against drawing conclusions before the investigation is complete. In February 2026, the agency publicly rejected speculative reports and stressed that the probe remained ongoing. No official report has concluded that the crash was the result of intentional pilot action.

Theory 2: Could It Have Been Pilot Error?

Another possibility is that the switches were moved unintentionally.

While some investigators believe the physical design of the switches makes accidental movement unlikely, others argue that unusual cockpit circumstances, confusion during a critical phase of flight or a sequence of human errors cannot yet be ruled out, Reuters reported.

Pilot associations have strongly pushed back against suggestions that the crew caused the crash. The Federation of Indian Pilots and other pilot bodies have criticised attempts to blame the crew before all technical evidence has been examined, arguing that such conclusions are premature.

The pilots’ groups say investigators must first eliminate every possible technical explanation before attributing responsibility to the flight crew.

The groups reiterated the demand on Thursday, when the Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP) has claimed that the aircraft suffered from a “plethora of problems”, including electrical failures, and urged investigators to include independent subject matter experts before arriving at a final conclusion.

FIP president Captain CS Randhawa said there were several gaps in the preliminary investigation report. According to him, the aircraft had arrived from Delhi with a stabiliser problem, following which the motors were replaced before it was declared fit for service. He also alleged that the aircraft had electrical issues affecting the air conditioning system and other components, and questioned the timings mentioned in the preliminary report.

Randhawa further argued that the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) evidence cited in the preliminary report covered only two seconds, adding that “Western media picked it up as a deliberate attempt”.

Theory 3: Was There A Technical Or Software Failure?

Some aviation experts and independent researchers argue that a technical malfunction remains a possibility.

Questions have been raised about whether a software fault, electronic malfunction or hidden systems defect could have triggered the fuel-switch movement or produced misleading indications inside the cockpit. Some experts have pointed to the aircraft’s maintenance history and previous technical issues as areas requiring deeper scrutiny.

However, investigators have so far not identified any evidence proving that a Boeing 787 design flaw or GE engine defect caused the accident. Neither India’s DGCA nor US aviation regulators have grounded the aircraft type following the crash.

The ongoing examination of engine components and aircraft systems is one reason the final report has been delayed beyond the first anniversary of the crash.

Why Has The Investigation Taken So Long?

Aircraft accident investigations are designed to determine causes rather than assign blame.

In the AI171 case, investigators from India have been working alongside experts from the United States and the United Kingdom because the crash involved a Boeing aircraft, GE engines and British victims. According to recent reports, engine examinations, technical testing and international consultations are still underway. As a result, authorities may issue an interim report before releasing final conclusions.

What Are Families Still Waiting For?

For many relatives of the victims, compensation is no substitute for answers.

Families and the lone survivor, Vishwashkumar Rameshhave repeatedly called for transparency and a definitive explanation of what happened in the cockpit during the final seconds of the flight. Many argue that until the final report is published, speculation about pilot actions or technical failures only deepens uncertainty.

Their demand is straightforward: establish exactly why both engines lost fuel moments after take-off and ensure that such a disaster never happens again.

A Year On

Investigators largely agree on one fact: Air India Flight 171 crashed after both engines were starved of fuel when the cockpit fuel-control switches moved to the “CUTOFF” position seconds after take-off.

What remains unresolved is the central mystery of the case—whether those switches were moved deliberately, accidentally, or because of an as-yet-undetected technical malfunction.

Until the final report is released, the cause of India’s worst aviation disaster in decades remains a subject of intense debate rather than settled fact.

Handpicked stories, in your inbox

A newsletter with the best of our journalism

submit

About the Author

When he beat Misra

Apoorva Misra is News Editor at News18.com with over nine years of experience. She is a graduate from Delhi University’s Lady Shri Ram College and holds a PG Diploma from Asian College of Journalism, …Read More

News india Pilot Error Or Technical Fault? A Year Later, Experts Still Can’t Agree On What Led To Air India Crash

Disclaimer: Comments reflect users’ views, not News18’s. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

Read More