Latest news with #RAT
News18
11 hours ago
- General
- News18
Power Failure Behind Ahmedabad Air India Crash? What Investigators Are Learning
Last Updated: Early findings suggest the aircraft may have suffered a power failure seconds after liftoff, but officials stress that the final cause will depend on black box data Officials familiar with the investigation into the June 12 crash of Air India flight AI-171 from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick suspect a sudden power failure shortly after takeoff may have brought down the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, which crashed into a medical hostel building after gaining an altitude of only 625 feet. While the final cause will be known only after black box data is decoded, initial visual assessments, including wreckage patterns, ATC reports, and takeoff videos, point to a failure of the aircraft's main electrical system within seconds of liftoff. The aircraft did not reach the minimum altitude required to execute an emergency turnaround or make use of its Ram Air Turbine (RAT), a backup system designed to power critical functions in case of total electrical loss. The black boxes — Flight Data Recorder (FDR) and Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) — have been recovered and are currently in the safe custody of the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), Civil Aviation Minister Ram Mohan Naidu Kinjarapu confirmed on Thursday. He said the investigation is progressing with full support from local authorities, and that key recovery work, including site documentation and evidence collection, has been completed, with further analysis now underway. In response to reports suggesting the black boxes were being sent abroad, the Ministry of Civil Aviation clarified that no final decision has been made. 'It has been reported in certain media outlets that the CVR/DFDR (black box) from the ill-fated AI171 flight is being sent abroad for retrieval and analysis… the decision regarding the location for decoding the flight recorders will be taken by the AAIB after due assessment of all technical, safety, and security considerations," the ministry said in a statement. According to a report in The Indian Express, an officer aware of the ongoing investigation said that early findings do not suggest cockpit error. Based on initial observations, the pilots are believed to have attempted to gain manual control using the Dreamliner's reversionary systems, but the lack of altitude left little room for recovery. The aircraft had reportedly pitched up for liftoff when the power failure occurred, but failed to climb beyond 625 feet — far below the safe path minimum of 3,600 feet. The officer further said that had the aircraft achieved an elevation of around 3,600 to 4,900 feet, the RAT might have been able to help sustain a glide or enable a Mayday return. Instead, the aircraft dropped sharply, with the impact separating the tail section due to its elevated nose position at the time of the crash. Investigators are now closely examining the aircraft's technical logs and maintenance records from the 24 to 48 hours before the crash. The aircraft had flown a round trip from Delhi to Paris on June 11-12 and had earlier completed a Delhi-Tokyo-Delhi sector. Officials are checking whether any crew or ground engineers reported anomalies, including ECAM (Electronic Centralised Aircraft Monitor) messages, engine thrust issues, or unusual sensor readouts. While sabotage has not been indicated, investigators are examining whether fuel contamination—such as water in the fuel—could have contributed to the suspected power failure. According to The Indian Express, the officer said this scenario may be a leading explanation if no direct technical fault (mechanical or electrical) is found. Water in aviation fuel is a known cause of power loss and may remain undetected until the aircraft is airborne, especially if it leads to corrosion or clogging in the fuel system. Chemical analysis of the wreckage, especially around the fuel tanks and delivery systems, is underway to identify any unusual chemical traces, impurities, or signs of corrosion. Forensic engineers have collected debris samples for lab testing, but much of the fuel system was damaged in the explosion and fire. Comparisons are also being drawn with a February 2020 incident at London's Gatwick Airport, where an Airbus A321 suffered dual engine failure shortly after takeoff. That aircraft returned safely to the airport after declaring Mayday thrice, but only because it had climbed to nearly 3,580 feet, investigators said. The UK's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), which is now in Ahmedabad to assist with the AI-171 probe, had concluded in the 2020 case that the failure was caused by fuel system contamination. Notably, engineers had found no faults in the aircraft before it was cleared to fly that night. As per The Indian Express, the officer pointed out that the Gatwick aircraft had shown signs of engine trouble on three previous flights. These included multiple attempts to start one engine and in-flight stalling messages. However, engineers had not conducted an extensive follow-up examination, resulting in the failure being missed. Investigators are now checking whether any such signs were overlooked in the case of AI-171. The Ahmedabad crash is the first known accident involving a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, a modern aircraft known for its fly-by-wire systems and backup electrical configurations. The Boeing 787 Dreamliner is designed to continue flight on a single engine and can operate on manual reversion in case of dual hydraulic failure — standard capabilities for the aircraft type. However, according to the officer cited by The Indian Express, the crash altitude was too low for any of these backup systems to be effectively deployed. The crash has raised serious questions around last-mile maintenance checks, fuel quality verification, and pre-flight inspection protocols. While a final conclusion will depend on flight data and chemical forensics, investigators are 'leaving nothing to chance" given the rarity of a failure involving the 787 platform.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
12 hours ago
- General
- First Post
Air India crash: Cockpit error or fuel system contamination, what brought AI71 down? Probe looks at 2020 UK mishap
The 2020 incident, which involved an Airbus A321, saw the plane's both engines malfunction shortly after take-off. Fortunately, the plane had gained an altitude of almost 3580 feet and was able to make the roundabout read more This handout taken and posted on the X (formerly Twitter) account of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) On June 12, 2025 shows the back of an Air India plane after it crashed in a residential area near the airport in Ahmedabad. Image- AFP The officials investigating the Air India flight AI-171 crash are closely drawing parallels with a February 2020 incident at the UK's Gatwick airport, and are hunting for clues. The incident, which involved an Airbus A321, saw the plane's both engines malfunction shortly after take-off. The pilots made a Mayday call and returned to the airport after 11 minutes after a turnaround. Fortunately, the Airbus plane had gained an altitude of almost 3580 feet and was able to make the roundabout and touch down after declaring Mayday thrice. However, the people onboard the doomed Air India plane were not that lucky as it came crashing down after gaining the altitude of just 625 feet. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Looking for clues The UK Air Accident Investigation Branch (AIIB) later investigated the Airbus incident and found that the reason for the engine failure was fuel system contamination. This despite engineers clearing the aircraft for operations just ahead of the take-off. Notably, the AIIB investigators have joined the Ahmedabad plane crash probe. Officials are taking a look at AI-171's technical logs in the 24 hours preceding the crash. Plane lost power after take-off The officials meanwhile also appear to conclude that the plane lost power immediately after take-off, citing 'visual observation and wreckage'. 'The material evidence, which includes the wreckage and the videos of the takeoff as well as the crash, indicate a definite power failure on the flight. The cause will be known only when the black box data is recovered but we can estimate that since the flight was in a takeoff and its nose pitched up for the liftoff, the deployment of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) could not help the flight make a safe turnaround as it had not even achieved the minimum altitude of 3600 feet for a safe path,' Indian Express quoted an officer as saying. The officer also dismissed speculations around cockpit error, saying the pilots 'may have tried their best to gain manual control'. 'It does not appear to be a cockpit error… The observations are that the power failure occurred as soon as the flight was airborne and was unable to climb to the safe path altitude… the (Boeing) 787 Dreamliner has a provision for a manual reversion control system to allow pilots to regain control of critical systems in the event of a hydraulic failure. This system is a backup, using RAT to generate power, but there was no altitude cushion to ensure a safe glide downward or for the pilot to attempt anything… It just dropped on to the medical hostel building, with the tail being impacted and separated due to its liftoff position. Had it achieved an elevation of about 3600-4900 feet, it could have been a different story as planes can safely make Mayday landings with the RAT,' the officer said. On fuel contamination The officer said investigators were looking at technical log of the aircraft to examine whether any technical abnormalities were flagged by any of the previous captains or maintenance staff. 'The aircraft was incoming from Paris to Delhi and from Delhi to Ahmedabad… In fact, it made a round trip to Paris from Delhi on June 11-12. Just a day earlier, it had returned to Delhi after a round trip to Tokyo. We will check the technical logs to see if any of the engineering teams or pilots of the previous flight left comments on the performance of both engines or experienced any ECAM (Electronic Centralised Aircraft Monitor) message during the flight, accompanied by any thrust issues during flight,' the officer said. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'At this point, we have no reason to speculate a sabotage but if the cause of the engine failure is fuel contamination, which is most likely due to water, the maintenance records of the flight, which are also under scrutiny, will reveal if it was due to oversight or negligence or corrosion in the fuel system, leading to clogging which is rare if the aircraft is regularly serviced. Fuel contaminated with water is the most common cause of power loss in flights and, many times, cannot be detected until the aircraft is actually airborne,' the officer said.
Indian Express
17 hours ago
- General
- Indian Express
Air India plane crash: AI-171 probe looks at Gatwick takeoff incident 5 yrs ago for possible clues
Investigators probing the June 12 crash of Air India flight AI-171 from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick are taking a close look at a February 2020 incident in Gatwick, involving an Airbus A321, in which both engines malfunctioned immediately after takeoff. It led to a Mayday call before the aircraft returned to Gatwick 11 minutes later after a turnaround. In its 2020 investigation, the UK Air Accident Investigation Branch (AIIB), which is also in Ahmedabad to probe the June 12 crash, found that the reason for the engine failure was fuel system contamination even though engineers had found no fault prior to clearing it for flying that night. Officers aware of the ongoing investigation into the Ahmedabad crash said a thorough scrutiny of AI-171's technical logs in the 24 hours preceding the crash were being looked into as it was 'clear from visual observation and wreckage' that the flight suffered a power failure. Speaking to The Indian Express Thursday, an officer said the probe agencies, in primary observations from the available visual evidence, statements of the controllers of Ahmedabad Air Traffic Control (ATC), maintenance engineers who cleared the flight on the ground, and initial inspection of the wreckage, estimated that the aircraft experienced power failure of the main electric system within seconds of takeoff. 'The material evidence, which includes the wreckage and the videos of the takeoff as well as the crash, indicate a definite power failure on the flight. The cause will be known only when the black box data is recovered but we can estimate that since the flight was in a takeoff and its nose pitched up for the liftoff, the deployment of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) could not help the flight make a safe turnaround as it had not even achieved the minimum altitude of 3600 feet for a safe path,' the officer said. The black boxes and the DVR have been recovered but the officer said that the devices were damaged and file extraction would 'be a complicated process'. According to the officer, 'deliberations were on' about sending the black boxes to the US where the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) could help recover the recordings with advanced expertise. The wreckage of the Dreamliner, the officer said, had 'not hinted' at any cockpit error, and the pilots 'may have tried their best to gain manual control' for attempting a turnaround. 'It does not appear to be a cockpit error… The observations are that the power failure occurred as soon as the flight was airborne and was unable to climb to the safe path altitude… the (Boeing) 787 Dreamliner has a provision for a manual reversion control system to allow pilots to regain control of critical systems in the event of a hydraulic failure. This system is a backup, using RAT to generate power, but there was no altitude cushion to ensure a safe glide downward or for the pilot to attempt anything… It just dropped on to the medical hostel building, with the tail being impacted and separated due to its liftoff position. Had it achieved an elevation of about 3600-4900 feet, it could have been a different story as planes can safely make Mayday landings with the RAT,' the officer said. AI-171 had gained an altitude of only 625 feet when it came crashing down. The officer said that while probing the cause of engine failure, the most crucial aspect would be an analysis of the technical log of the aircraft for the preceding 24 to 48 hours to ascertain if any technical abnormalities had been experienced or noted down by the previous captains or maintenance staff. 'The aircraft was incoming from Paris to Delhi and from Delhi to Ahmedabad… In fact, it made a round trip to Paris from Delhi on June 11-12. Just a day earlier, it had returned to Delhi after a round trip to Tokyo. We will check the technical logs to see if any of the engineering teams or pilots of the previous flight left comments on the performance of both engines or experienced any ECAM (Electronic Centralised Aircraft Monitor) message during the flight, accompanied by any thrust issues during flight,' the officer said. 'At this point, we have no reason to speculate a sabotage but if the cause of the engine failure is fuel contamination, which is most likely due to water, the maintenance records of the flight, which are also under scrutiny, will reveal if it was due to oversight or negligence or corrosion in the fuel system, leading to clogging which is rare if the aircraft is regularly serviced. Fuel contaminated with water is the most common cause of power loss in flights and, many times, cannot be detected until the aircraft is actually airborne,' the officer said. Since the Ahmedabad crash is the first involving a Boeing 787, investigators are 'leaving nothing to chance'. 'The Dreamliner has an advanced electrical system… it can cover a sufficient distance safely on one engine as well… In case of dual hydraulic failure, the flight can be on manual reversion and be controlled for safe landing at the nearest available facility. The flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder will reveal what went wrong in about one minute,' the officer said. A chemical analysis of 'important and relevant' parts from the wreckage will reveal any unusually high level of contaminants. 'Since the explosion and the subsequent fire have damaged much of the aircraft, especially the fuel tanks, forensic engineers of the investigating team have gathered as much relevant debris as possible to find traces of elements that could indicate if there had been fuel contamination,' the officer said. The UK AAIB team is comparing notes with the February 2020 Gatwick incident findings. 'The entire duration of the flight was 11 minutes, as per the investigation of the UK AAIB… The incident was almost similar, except that the flight had gained an altitude of almost 3580 feet and was able to make the roundabout and touch down after declaring Mayday thrice… The findings of the investigation had concluded that the reason for the engine failure was fuel system contamination even though the engineers had found no fault prior to clearing it for flying that night,' the officer said. 'However, that investigation had revealed that the three flights, which the aircraft completed prior to the Gatwick takeoff, had experienced unusual signs of one of the engines as it had taken multiple attempts to start… and also relayed stalling messages during the flight… It was later found that the engineers who cleared the flight from Gatwick had not conducted extensive examination of the engine, which resulted in 'no fault' being found,' the officer said.
India.com
a day ago
- General
- India.com
Video Captures Last 3 Seconds Before Ahmedabad Crash: Did Air India Flight Suffer Total Power Failure?
Ahmedabad: Nine national and international aviation bodies are now investigating the tragic June 12 crash of an Air India flight in Ahmedabad. A crucial clue may lie in a 19-second rooftop video shot by a teenager, which purportedly captured a rare and telling detail just seconds before impact – the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) system deployed mid-air. Group Captain Mohit Chaturvedi (retd), a former IAF pilot who now flies VVIP aircraft, analysed the video and flagged the RAT deployment as a potential sign that all main engines and power sources failed during takeoff. 'This hints at total electrical system failure,' he said. Chaturvedi explained that commercial aircraft like the Boeing 787 have multiple power safeguards. Normally, power is generated through two Integrated Drive Generators (IDG) on the engines and a third unit in the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) located in the tail. If all three fail, each engine still carries a backup generator. If those fail too, the load shifts to two small Permanent Magnetic Generators (PMGs) used to power essentials like landing lights. But if even PMGs go offline, only one last failsafe remains – the RAT system. Mounted behind the landing gear, it works like a wind turbine, deploying automatically in emergencies to generate enough power to run flight-critical systems. 'The RAT being visible in the crash video means that all primary and backup systems failed. This was not a normal technical snag,' Chaturvedi said. He believes the pilot issued a Mayday call and likely said 'loss of thrust', but did not get time to relay further details. 'Without AC power, even a second's delay can knock out flight displays. If the pilot cannot see ahead, control is impossible,' he said. Chaturvedi also pointed out a key design change in the Boeing 787 – unlike older models that used hydraulic systems powered by engine bleed-air, the 787 uses electric pumps to generate hydraulic pressure. This saves weight but makes the aircraft more dependent on uninterrupted electrical supply. If AC power is lost entirely, landing gear, flight controls and nose-wheel steering could stop responding. 'If the APU and both IDGs failed, the gear would not retract. And that would disrupt the aircraft's aerodynamic balance during climb,' he explained. He noted that the plane appeared to veer left shortly before crashing. 'This could be linked to asymmetric thrust or disrupted control surfaces,' he added. Regarding takeoff protocol, he stressed that both pilots perform precise calculations before liftoff, accounting for runway length, aircraft weight, temperature and humidity. These parameters determine the takeoff speed and angle. Could the crash be due to pilot error during input? 'Highly unlikely,' Chaturvedi said and added, 'Even if flaps were wrongly configured, the system triggers a warning. The computer will not accept incorrect settings.' He dismissed theories about fuel sabotage: 'That is baseless. The fuel tank is centrally located, but controls are in the cockpit. No one outside can cut off fuel. Also, fuel is loaded via external bowsers, and DGCA rules mandate that all such units be seized after a crash.' He added, 'A Boeing 787 can fly 45 minutes on a single engine. Each one delivers 53,000 pounds of thrust. One engine failure would not have brought it down, especially right after takeoff.' Another expert, Group Captain Chandraprakash Dwivedi (retd), who has logged over 3,000 flying hours, agreed. 'Most crashes occur during landing or takeoff, but dual-engine failure is extremely rare. Only seven such cases have occurred globally. In 2009, both engines failed on a US flight and the pilot landed safely in the Hudson River,' he said. He believes Ahmedabad's crash points to a serious technical breakdown. 'Both engines failing at the same time is nearly impossible in Indian aviation history. The investigation will confirm what exactly went wrong,' he added. Both experts suggest that a complete electrical collapse, not a simple pilot error or fuel glitch, may have led to a fatal failure of systems. The RAT deployment, captured just three seconds before impact, could be the most important clue investigators have.
Time of India
2 days ago
- General
- Time of India
AI crash: Did engines fail during takeoff? Clue found at 625 feet; WSJ report sparks new doubt
A Wall Street Journal report has revealed that Air India Flight 171's emergency power system, known as the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), was active just 50 seconds after takeoff, raising fresh concerns about a possible engine failure. The crash, which occurred near Ahmedabad and killed 241 people, is now under deeper scrutiny as investigators probe critical system malfunctions. Show more Show less
