Experts examine what could have gone wrong
The Boeing 787 aircraft that crashed soon after taking off — it spent all of 33 seconds in the air — from Ahmedabad's Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport has left the aviation industry stunned, with experts examining what could have gone wrong with the 11-year-old aircraft carrying 230 passengers and 12 crew.
Video evidence from a surveillance camera at the airport showing the aircraft's final moments provide some crucial clues about the accident sequence. It reveals the plane following a normal take-off trajectory before suddenly losing its ability to climb. Moments later, it slowly descends into the horizon and erupts into a ball of fire.
According to officials aware of the matter, a Mayday call was issued by the pilots shortly after take-off.
HT spoke to multiple experts on the possible scenarios that may have unfolded in the moments before the crash and while each of them cautioned that early clues were insufficient to draw conclusions, they agreed that the profile of the flight in its final moments — maintaining a nose-up attitude while descending — was consistent with sudden, severe power loss.
'A B787 aircraft has extremely powerful engines. It is hard to guess what went wrong. It looks like the pilot could not get adequate thrust and realised the issue immediately after take-off,' said Amit Singh, aviation safety expert and founder of Safety Matters Foundation.
What led the plane to lose power would likely be at the centre of the investigation, said another expert. 'While nothing can be said by merely looking at the video, it could be possible that the crash was because both engines stalled. Investigations will reveal what led to the situation,' said Sam Thomas, president of the Airline Pilots Association of India (ALPA). That's an extremely rare event on a 787, with a probability of a 1 in billion flying hours.
A third expert, Mohan Ranganathan, agreed that from the visuals, that it appeared there was 'a loss of thrust and compressor failure' — referring to the scenario when not enough air enters the engine, reducing thrust.
One of the other scenarios that HT brought up was a bird strike which can potentially disable one, or in the extremely rare case of the December 2024 crash of Korea's Jeju Air Flight 2216, both engines.
Thomas said the possibility was extremely slim. 'It is highly unlikely that a flock of birds hit both the engines leading to the crash,' he said.
Ranganathan, however, added that 'during monsoons, bird activity around the airport increases and the airport is known for flocks of birds flying in its vicinity.'
The runway surveillance footage did not have the typical signs of a bird hit, where flames or smoke is momentarily seen from an engine when birds are ingested.
Another scenario involves determining what some experts said was a peculiar configuration of the plane in its final moments. In another video shot by a bystander with a closer view of the crash, the plane's landing gear is still extended but its flaps – a sort of wing deployed to generate lift – are retracted. 'That should not have been the case at all,' said Singh.
A senior pilot, who asked not to be named, too drew attention to the landing gears having not been retracted as a crucial indicator. 'Landing gear is retracted after an average of 35-100 ft of climbing since the aircraft achieves what is known as a positive climb rate. As per Flightradar24, the aircraft achieved a height of 650 ft. The Ahmedabad airport is at an elevation of 180ft which essentially means aircraft achieved a height of around 400 ft. This indicates that something more systemic could have happened and was detected immediately after take-off,' said this person, suggesting the pilots may immediately have planned for a return.
Other scenarios, experts said, would require investigation of whether there were problems with the fuel or the take-off weight, both of which could hamper an airliner's ability to climb.
Aviation expert Vipul Saxena said that the aircraft would have had 100,000 litres of fuel for its non-stop flight to London.
Saxena noted that the aircraft took off in clean configuration but faced challenging conditions. 'The aircraft experienced strong cross winds at atmospheric temperatures of above 30 degrees, which in itself could have caused certain amount of loss of lift,' he said.
He highlighted the unusual landing gear configuration as a critical factor. 'Till the aircraft crashed, the undercarriage were still not retracted, which was very unusual and which too would have required more lift and, thus, more engine power,' he explained.
The expert suggested a possible control system failure contributed to the aircraft's inability to recover. 'The situation seems complicated since the aircraft started sinking in a take-off attitude, which points to failure of one of the controls (may be flaps or elevators) that increased descent in take-off attitude,' Saxena said.
The accident has raised broader questions about aviation safety standards. 'The 787 has been in revenue service with Air India under government management for 15 years, and it has been one of the safest Gen5+ passenger airliners ever made,' said Mark D Martin, MRAeS and CEO of Martin Consulting. 'It's shocking that, with qualified crew having extensive experience in flying hours and maintenance, we see a catastrophic incident such as this.'
The pilots operating the aircraft were Capt Sumeet Sabharwal and First Officer Clive Kundar. According to the Directorate General of Civil Aviation, Capt Sabharwal was a line training captain with 8,200 hours of flying experience, while the co-pilot had 1,100 hours.
Officials who knew Capt Sabharwal, who joined Air India in the late 1990s, described him as 'one of the best pilots of Air India' who 'always followed the rule book and was always sincere towards his work.'
Only a detailed analysis of data from the flight data recorder, when it is found, will answer the questions that remain about Flight 171.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Emotional farewell for Air India crew member Irfan Shaikh who died in Ahmedabad
Jun 21, 2025 11:51 AM IST Relatives and friends gave an emotional farewell to Irfan Shaikh, a crew member of the ill-fated Air India that crashed in Ahmedabad last week, as his remains were laid to rest at Pimpri Chinchwad in Maharashtra on Saturday. The Shaikh family received 22-year-old Irfan's remains after a DNA match on Friday, and they were brought to Pune(Reuters) The Shaikh family received 22-year-old Irfan's remains after a DNA match on Friday, and they were brought to Pune in the early hours of the day. The final rites were held at a graveyard in Nehru Nagar in the presence of family, neighbours, friends, and leaders from across political parties. Irfan was on board the London-bound Air India flight, AI 171, that crashed into a building in a medical college complex moments after take-off from the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport in Ahmedabad on June 21. A total of 241 persons on board the Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft were killed in the crash, along with 29 others on the ground. "Irfan joined the aviation industry as a cabin crew member two years ago after completing a course. He initially worked with Vistara, and after the Air India-Vistara merger, he began flying on international routes," a relative said. The youngster had big dreams and was determined to excel in the field, but the crash shattered all those dreams, he added.
Hindustan Times
6 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Forest dept inspects Bandra Fort's ‘unauthorised' renovation
MUMBAI: The historic Bandra Fort, also known as Castella de Aguada, has allegedly suffered significant and potentially irreversible damage due to unauthorized repair and renovation work carried out within the sensitive Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ-IA), according to a complaint filed by Watchdog Foundation, an NGO. Concerned citizens and heritage conservationists have been raising the alarm over violations that have allegedly compromised the structural and historical integrity of this 17th-century landmark. Following up on the complaint, the forest guard in Versova carried out a panchnama of the Grade I heritage structure and visited the site on Friday to inspect for CRZ violations. Concerned citizens alleged that the renovation work being carried out at the Bandra Fort is turning out to be detrimental to its structural and historical integrity. Advocate Godfrey Pimenta, who was present at the site, told HT that the fort's walls were plastered with cement and paint instead of basalt stone, marring the heritage look. 'This complaint was made four months back but a site visit was done by the forest department and Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee today (Friday) to inspect the CRZ violations.' Built by the Portuguese in 1640, this iconic watchtower, overlooking Mahim Bay, once served as a strategic outpost for Portuguese naval operations. It has since become a symbol of Mumbai's colonial history and cultural richness. A previous conservation initiative was spearheaded in 2003 by the Bandra Bandstand Residents' Trust under the leadership of former member of parliament Shabana Azmi. It successfully stabilized the structure and prevented further erosion-related damage. That project followed internationally accepted conservation principles and aimed to preserve the fort's authenticity. However, recent unauthorized renovations have undermined those efforts, said Pimenta. 'Walls have been plastered and sections of the structure repaired using methods deemed inappropriate for a Grade I heritage site. According to heritage regulations, no work – whether development, redevelopment, or even cosmetic repairs like plastering or painting – can be undertaken on such protected sites without explicit, written approval from relevant authorities, including the Mumbai Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA), the Heritage Conservation Committee, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), and the BMC,' added Pimenta. According to Pimenta, the unauthorised renovation work, including plastering and structural modifications, has altered the original character and materials of the fort, compromising its authenticity. He alleged standard conservation protocols were ignored, resulting in the loss of significant architectural features that form the fort's historic identity. 'Such violations not only constitute a breach of legal protections but also represent a grave cultural and civic failure. Experts warn that if such practices continue unchecked, Mumbai risks losing other irreplaceable heritage landmarks to similar negligence.' The forest guard in Borivali told HT that while prima facie there were no violations and a detailed report on the visit will be submitted next week.
Time of India
7 hours ago
- Time of India
‘Shaking, hissing, growling door mid-air': Air India Boeing 787 flight to Hong Kong spooks flyers; crew plugs gap with napkins to 'fix' issue
Passengers on an Air India flight from Delhi to Hong Kong experienced a disturbing incident when a door began shaking and emitting strange noises mid-flight. Despite the unsettling sounds, the flight continued safely after crew members used napkins to seal the gap. MUMBAI: Passengers on board an Air India flight from Delhi to Hong Kong had a harrowing time after a door of the Boeing 787 aircraft started shaking and making hissing, growling noises about an hour into the flight operated on June 1. AI's flight attendants plugged paper napkins into the thin gap at the top of the door and pushed it to seal and quieten it, while the flight continued to its destination and landed safely. This was not the first case of a B787 having a door grumbling mid-flight. At least three other instances were recorded by airlines, the first in 2019 by Japan Airlines and then two cases in 2022 involving German carrier TUI Airlines and American Airlines. In all three cases, pilots diverted the flight back to the airport of origin because of the noisy doors. The Boeing 787 aircraft and safety concerns around it have been in focus since the June 12 Ahmedabad crash which killed 275 people. The incident on the flight to Hong Kong took place before that. Passengers might find such incidents unnerving, but a hissing door poses no major risk to flight safety, and aircraft doors don't open mid-flight, pilots pointed out. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like AdTab, un delicioso comprimido antiparasitario Adtab Encuéntralo Undo The incident occurred on flight AI-314 which left Delhi at 11.45 pm, over an hour after its scheduled departure time. 'About an hour after take-off, the door started shaking and making noises. It seemed the door seal came off due to air pressure,' said a recent post on social media, quoting a passenger. All safety parameters were found to be in compliance: Air India Air India in a statement said an aircraft undergoes multiple engineering checks before it is cleared for flight operations, with top priority given to safety issues, and the June 1 Delhi-Hong Kong flight too went through the process. 'A hissing sound started emanating from the decorative door panel mid-flight, and after assessing that there was no risk to safety, crew took action to alleviate the noise. After landing in Hong Kong airport, the aircraft underwent checks by the engineering team. 'All safety parameters were found to be in compliance and the aircraft was cleared for service. There was no such noise during the return flight AI315 from Hong Kong to Delhi. We would like to reiterate that the safety of our customers and crew remains top priority,' the Air India statement added. So what could have caused the problem? 'As the aircraft climbs, the atmospheric pressure difference within and outside the aircraft increases. The pressure inside the B787 passenger cabin is what you would experience at around 6,000 ft altitude. But the aircraft could be cruising at 40,000 ft. If the door seal is compromised, pressurised air (meant to circulate in the passenger cabin) could leak through it, making these noises,' said a source, requesting anonymity. Unlike the Boeing 777 or 737 aircraft, Boeing 787 has an advanced plug-type door which is electronically monitored. The door swings outward and then moves forward to open. To close, it is plugged into the fuselage for pressurisation. The B777 door on the other hand is operated manually, while the narrow body B737 has a manual, mechanical plug-type door. TOI looked into door plug problems reported by airlines worldwide. The most recent documented case occurred in Oct 2022, when an American Airlines Boeing 787-800 flight to Paris returned to Philadelphia after fumes were detected around two doors. Flight attendants checked lavatories and other places but couldn't find the source of the fumes and when they began spreading in the passenger cabin, the crew declared an emergency and diverted to land safely. In Feb 2022, a TUI airlines B787-800 flying from Amsterdam to Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic returned to Amsterdam after a howling noise came from door 2L. A small hole in the door seal caused the sounds and the pilots decided to divert. In Aug 2019, a Japan Airlines flight from Tokyo to Bangkok landed back in Tokyo two hours after departure. Passengers complained of growling sounds and vibrations coming from the main door towards the front of the Boeing 787-800 Dreamliner, according to reports. On ground inspection a small gap was found in the door seal through which pressurised air was escaping, creating strange noises and vibrations. There were no cabin pressurisation problems, and no oxygen masks were deployed. The aircraft was returned to service about 30 hours after the incident. In none of these three cases did the aircraft suffer from a cabin depressurisation problem. A senior commander said, 'This kind of leak can happen if a door seal is slightly out of place or it has gone old. It does not affect cabin pressurisation at all. Hypothetically if we assume all 8 doors develop this problem, even then pilots get enough advance warning to initiate a descent down to 10,000 ft as is the standard practice in a cabin decompression emergency. ' Capt Amit Singh, an air safety expert, said, 'The question is, was it a one-off thing or is it a regular occurrence? It could be a combination of maintenance issues and how the door was closed.'
