July 22 (Reuters) – Air India said on Tuesday it has completed precautionary inspections of the fuel control switch locking mechanism on all its Boeing (BA.N), opens new tab 787 and 737 aircraft, with no issues detected.
The probe into the Air India crash that killed 241 of the 242 people on board and 19 on the ground is focused on the fuel control switches of the Boeing 787 jetliner, with a final report from India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) expected within a year of the incident.
The switches control fuel flow to aircraft engines, allowing pilots to start or shut them down on the ground, or manually intervene during in-flight engine failures.
Air India began voluntary inspections of the switches on July 12. India’s aviation regulator soon ordered all domestic carriers to conduct similar checks, prompting some foreign airlines and regulators to follow suit.
A preliminary report from the AAIB earlier this month found the switches had almost simultaneously flipped from ‘run’ to ‘cutoff’ shortly after takeoff, causing the engines to lose power.

A firefighter stands next to the crashed Air India Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner aircraft, in Ahmedabad, India, June 13, 2025. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab
The report cited a 2018 FAA advisory that urged operators of several Boeing models, including the 787, to inspect the locking mechanism on fuel cutoff switches to prevent unintentional movement.
The FAA and Boeing have privately issued notifications that the fuel switch locks on Boeing planes are safe, Reuters had reported.
Reuters reported last week, citing a source, that the cockpit recording on the Air India flight from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick suggested the captain cut fuel to the engines.
The AAIB has said it is too early to draw any conclusions.
Air India operates a fleet of Boeing 787 twin-aisle jets on its long-haul operations, while low-cost unit Air India Express operates the Boeing 737 single-aisle jets.
————————————

“I Promise I’ll Be Back for Dinner”: The Tragic Final Words of Air India Flight 171’s Pilot

On June 12, 2025, the aviation world was rocked by the catastrophic crash of Air India Flight 171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner en route from Ahmedabad, India, to London Gatwick Airport. The flight, carrying 242 passengers and crew, ended in tragedy just 32 seconds after takeoff, claiming the lives of 241 people on board and 19 on the ground. Among the haunting details emerging from the investigation is the final promise of Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, the pilot-in-command, who reportedly told his family, “I promise I’ll be back for dinner,” before boarding the ill-fated flight. This article delves into the events leading up to the crash, the preliminary findings, and the unanswered questions surrounding this devastating incident.

The Flight and Its Crew

Air India Flight 171 was a routine international flight departing from Ahmedabad’s Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport at 13:39 IST (08:09 UTC). The aircraft, a 12-year-old Boeing 787 Dreamliner powered by General Electric GEnx-1B engines, was carrying 230 passengers, including 169 Indian nationals, 53 Britons, seven Portuguese, and one Canadian, along with 12 crew members. The flight was commanded by Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, a seasoned pilot with over 15,600 flight hours, including 8,600 on the Boeing 787. His co-pilot, First Officer Clive Kunder, aged 32, had 3,400 flight hours, with 1,100 on the 787. Kunder was the pilot flying, while Sabharwal monitored the flight. Both pilots had passed pre-flight health checks, including breathalyzer tests, and were cleared to fly.

The flight began normally, with the aircraft cleared for a full-length takeoff on Runway 23. It reached a takeoff speed of 155 knots and lifted off at 13:38:39. However, just three seconds later, at a maximum recorded airspeed of 180 knots and an altitude of approximately 625 feet, disaster struck. Both engines lost power, and the aircraft began a rapid descent, crashing into the campus of B.J. Medical College, 1.5 kilometers from the runway, at 13:39:11. The impact ignited a fireball, destroying the fuselage and damaging several buildings, leaving only one survivor, Vishwash Kumar Ramesh.

The Haunting Final Words

Before boarding, Captain Sabharwal reportedly reassured his family with the words, “I promise I’ll be back for dinner,” a poignant promise that has since captured public attention. These words, shared by sources close to the investigation and reported in outlets like HBVL, reflect the routine confidence of a veteran pilot unaware of the tragedy awaiting him. The phrase has become a symbol of the human toll of the disaster, underscoring the personal loss felt by the families of the victims.

Preliminary Investigation Findings

The preliminary report released by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) on July 8, 2025, revealed a chilling detail: seconds after takeoff, both fuel control switches in the cockpit moved from the “RUN” to the “CUTOFF” position, one second apart, starving the engines of fuel and causing an immediate loss of thrust. This action, typically performed only after landing, led to a catastrophic dual-engine failure at a critically low altitude. The cockpit voice recorder (CVR) captured a brief exchange between the pilots, with one asking, “Why did you cut off?” and the other responding, “I didn’t.” The report did not identify which pilot spoke, leaving a critical gap in understanding the sequence of events.

The switches were returned to the “RUN” position within seconds, triggering an automatic engine relight. Engine 1 began spooling up, while Engine 2 had relit but failed to regain sufficient thrust before the crash. At 13:39:05, one pilot issued a desperate “MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY” call, but air traffic control received no further response. CCTV footage confirmed the deployment of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), a backup power source that activates during major systems failure, and showed the landing gear in the “down” position, indicating the aircraft’s inability to retract it due to the power loss.

Theories and Speculation

The movement of the fuel control switches has become the focal point of the investigation, raising questions about whether it was due to human error, mechanical failure, or intentional action. The switches, located on the center console, are designed with spring-loaded locking mechanisms to prevent accidental movement, making an inadvertent flip highly unlikely. Several theories have emerged:

Pilot Error or Intentional Action: Some reports, including one from The Wall Street Journal, suggest Captain Sabharwal, as the monitoring pilot, may have moved the switches, while Kunder, occupied with flying, was unlikely to have done so. However, the CVR’s ambiguity and the pilots’ denial in the recording complicate this theory. Speculation about deliberate action, such as sabotage or a mental health-related incident, has been fueled by reports of Sabharwal’s past bereavement leave and Kunder’s alleged mental health issues, though both were medically cleared to fly. India’s Federation of Indian Pilots has criticized such speculation as premature and insensitive.

Mechanical or Software Malfunction: A similar incident on an All Nippon Airways Boeing 787 in 2019, where a software glitch triggered an automatic fuel cutoff, has raised questions about whether a similar malfunction occurred. However, the AAIB report found no mechanical faults in the aircraft or its GEnx engines, and fuel samples were deemed satisfactory, ruling out contamination.

External Factors: Early theories of bird strikes or flap misconfiguration were dismissed, as CCTV showed no significant bird activity, and flight data confirmed proper flap settings. The absence of smoke or flames from the engines further ruled out a flameout.

The Investigation’s Challenges

The AAIB, supported by the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Boeing, GE Aerospace, and UK investigators, faces a complex task. The CVR’s full transcript, expected in the final report due in 2026, is critical for identifying the pilots’ voices and clarifying their actions. Experts like Peter Goelz, former NTSB managing director, have emphasized the need for cockpit video recorders to visually confirm who operated the switches, a recommendation yet to be implemented on the 787.

The investigation is also examining the aircraft’s maintenance history, pilot training records, and simulator performance to rule out systemic issues. Air India’s simulation of the crash, which failed to replicate a dual-engine failure through electrical faults, underscores the rarity of such an event at low altitude.

Impact and Aftermath

The crash, the first fatal incident involving a Boeing 787, has sent shockwaves through the aviation industry. Air India, operating 33 Dreamliners, has faced scrutiny over its maintenance practices, though no systemic issues have been identified. Families of the victims, like Imtiyaz Ali and Badasab Syed, have expressed frustration with the preliminary report’s lack of clarity, demanding the release of the full CVR transcript.

The sole survivor, Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, reported feeling a “sudden application of thrust” before the crash, possibly due to the pilots’ attempt to recover or a somatogravic illusion from pitching up. His survival offers a glimmer of hope amid the tragedy, but the loss of 260 lives, including 19 on the ground, has left a lasting scar.

Conclusion

The final words of Captain Sabharwal, “I promise I’ll be back for dinner,” echo as a heartbreaking reminder of the human cost of aviation disasters. While the preliminary report points to the fuel control switches as the immediate cause of the crash, the “why” remains elusive. Was it a tragic error, a rare malfunction, or something more sinister? As investigators piece together the wreckage and analyze the black boxes, the world awaits answers that may bring closure to grieving families and ensure such a tragedy is never repeated.