While preliminary crash reports are not meant to assign responsibility, they are expected to detail the methodology of investigation and highlight questions that demand urgent technical attention. Ironically, the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau’s (AAIB) preliminary report on the tragic Air India AI171 Dreamliner crash fails on both counts. Instead of instilling confidence in the integrity and direction of the inquiry, it muddies the waters further by raising more questions than answers. The report presents the bare minimum, like a dry sequence of pre-flight activities, engine data, and a brief mention of what occurred during those fatal 30 seconds after take-off. But critical gaps remain unaddressed, and the framing leans heavily toward pilot error, without any supporting analysis or explanation. This is neither transparent nor fair. Consider the central mystery, which is the near-simultaneous shutdown of both engines seconds after liftoff. The report mentions the fuel cut-off switches moving to the “OFF” position, followed by a brief exchange between the pilots—one pilot asking the other why did he switch them off and the latter replying he didn’t do so. That’s it. No full transcript. No attribution. No attempt to reconstruct who said what and under what conditions. Despite this, the placement of this quote, unsupported by technical analysis or context, subtly nudges readers toward suspecting human error, without saying it outright.
This is the biggest failing of the report. If it’s willing to draw attention to the pilot exchange, why does it fail to expand on the 2018 Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) issued by the Federal Aviation Administration, which warned of disengaged locking features on the same kind of fuel control switches used on Boeing 737s, and similar in design to those on the Dreamliner? The report acknowledges that Air India did not inspect these components, citing the advisory nature of the bulletin. But it stops short of questioning whether these switches could have failed. Worse still, the report gives no detailed assessment of the switch assembly recovered from the wreckage, whether the locking mechanism functioned correctly or not.
This silence becomes particularly jarring when contrasted with reports like the Ethiopian Airlines preliminary investigation from 2019. That document, also released within a month, included full cockpit voice recorder transcripts, cockpit control positions, technical diagrams, and a list of immediate safety recommendations. The suggestion that the pilots may have mistakenly or intentionally shut down the engines is quite troubling. The captain of AI171 was a Boeing 787 trainer. He had logged over 8,000 hours on type. This was someone trusted to evaluate others. Casting suspicion on him without evidence is not just unjust, but irresponsible. The report also ignores troubling anomalies. CCTV footage shows the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), a backup system that gets deployed when both engines fail, already extended while the aircraft is still barely above the rooftops. That implies the engines failed even earlier than the timeline suggests.
At a time when clarity is essential, the report leaves too much unsaid. No call has been made either for inspections across the Dreamliner fleet, or for testing of similar switches. No immediate recommendations have been offered to prevent recurrence. Union civil aviation minister Kinjarapu Ram Mohan Naidu has rightly urged the public not to jump to conclusions, reminding all that this is only a preliminary submission. But fairness must not only be done, it must be seen to be done. As it stands, the AAIB’s preliminary report does not merely fall short of that standard—it crash-lands.