Had the warning signs been treated with the urgency they deserved, this tragedy may never have happened
The air travel is considered to be a safe mode of transport. The chances of air crash are rather low that makes it a dependable choice. The odds of a commercial aeroplane crashing are approximately 0.000001 per cent. You have a 1 in 816,545,929 chance of being killed in a plane crash. However, when an air crash happens, it shakes this confidence. Generally, either it is the human error or technical flaw that is to blame. The other reasons, of course, are bad weather, unforeseeable landing or take-off conditions, and even a bird hit. The recent air crash of flight AI 171 has once again shocked everyone, and now with some reports emerging, it gives some insight into the possible cause of crash, though it is premature to jump to any conclusion. The preliminary findings in the crash of Air India flight AI 171 have revealed a chilling possibility — both engines of the Dreamliner shut down mid-air due to fuel cut-off switches that moved from ‘RUN’ to ‘CUTOFF’ position within seconds of each other, and without direct human input. The plane lost thrust almost immediately, leading to a fatal crash in Ahmedabad just 32 seconds after take-off. The incident claimed the lives of all but one of the 241 people onboard and at least 20 medical students on the ground.
This conversation between the pilots strongly suggests that the switches may have failed mechanically — without crew intervention. The simultaneous movement of both fuel cut-off switches is “extremely rare.” As a matter of fact, in 2018 advisory from Boeing, issued through the US Federal Aviation Authority (FAA), warned that these gated switches could become worn over time and could move without force. However, the advisory only recommended an ‘on-condition’ replacement — meaning the switches would only be changed if visibly worn — not a mandatory overhaul.
The advisory should have triggered action. The civil aviation should adopt this as practice now. The tragedy raises difficult questions about mechanical reliability, regulatory oversight, and the role of human judgement. Was this a mechanical failure stemming from ignored wear-and-tear, or a lapse in institutional response to known vulnerabilities? While it’s too early to blame, the early evidence leans towards a preventable systems failure.
It is true that air crashes are rare, but when they happen, chances of survival are almost zero. This means that the maintenance and the upkeep of the aircraft must be impeccable. Besides, the pilots must be given proper ‘rest time’ to be in their best state of mind. Their attention and alacrity is of utmost important for air safety.
This crash is a grim reminder that in aviation, even one overlooked advisory can be so fatal. Mandatory action on worn-out parts, better collaboration between regulators and operators, and a culture of zero compromise on safety are no longer optional. They’re essential.
As investigations continue, there would be many questions that need to be answered. Could the pilots have saved the day, or could Boeing have been more categoric and specific in its advisory, or could it have made it mandatory to change switches after a specific time interval? Many questions need to be answered by the operating airlines and the manufacturer of the aircraft to ascertain the cause of the crash but before that it would not be proper to reach a conclusion and fix the blame on anybody.
