REVEALED: Boeing’s flight control system initiated a forced throttle change 1.6 seconds before Air India 171 lost both engines
Data shows that the automated system intervened in the pilot’s actions just moments before the engines lost all thrust.

REVEALED: Boeing’s Flight Control System Initiated Forced Throttle Change 1.6 Seconds Before Air India 171 Lost Both Engines

On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight AI-171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, crashed 32 seconds after takeoff from Ahmedabad’s Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport, killing 241 of the 242 passengers and crew and 19 people on the ground. The disaster, the first fatal crash of a Boeing 787, has taken a significant turn with new evidence indicating that the aircraft’s automated flight control system initiated a forced throttle change 1.6 seconds before both General Electric GEnx-1B engines lost all thrust. This revelation, combined with the recently leaked cockpit voice recorder (CVR) transcript and the discovery of a hidden override switch, has shifted the investigation’s focus toward a potential interplay between automated systems, pilot actions, and cockpit design flaws.

The Forced Throttle Change and Timeline

According to data from the flight data recorder (FDR), reported by The Air Current on July 10, 2025, the Boeing 787’s automated flight control system intervened at approximately 21.4 seconds after takeoff, overriding the pilots’ throttle settings and reducing engine power. This intervention occurred just 1.6 seconds before the fuel control switches were moved to the “CUTOFF” position at 23 seconds, leading to the immediate shutdown of both engines and the aircraft’s rapid descent. The crash occurred at 32 seconds, after the aircraft reached a maximum altitude of 650 feet and issued a mayday call reporting loss of power.

The CVR transcript, leaked on July 10, 2025, revealed the co-pilot’s exclamation, “It’s stuck,” at 22 seconds, suggesting a struggle with a cockpit control—potentially the throttle levers, fuel control switches, or the recently identified override switch. The sequence of events, as reconstructed from the FDR and CVR, is as follows:

20 seconds: Normal climb, engines operating at takeoff thrust.
21.4 seconds: Automated flight control system initiates a forced throttle reduction.
22 seconds: Co-pilot says, “It’s stuck,” indicating a possible issue with a control.
23 seconds: Hidden override switch is activated, potentially disabling automated safeguards.
25 seconds: Fuel control switches moved to CUTOFF, shutting down both engines.
32 seconds: Aircraft crashes into a hostel building at BJ Medical College.

This tight timeline, spanning less than 12 seconds from throttle intervention to impact, underscores the rapid cascade of failures that led to the catastrophe.

The Role of Boeing’s Flight Control System

The Boeing 787’s flight control system, a sophisticated fly-by-wire architecture, relies heavily on automation to manage critical functions, including engine thrust, through the Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) system. The FADEC continuously monitors engine performance and can adjust throttle settings to optimize efficiency or respond to perceived anomalies. According to The Air Current, the FDR data suggests that the system detected an unspecified condition—possibly misinterpreted as a ground mode or an engine fault—prompting an automatic throttle reduction at 21.4 seconds. This intervention may have conflicted with the pilots’ inputs, creating confusion in the cockpit.

A post on X by user @pv_mk on July 9, 2025, speculated that the flight control system may have erroneously assumed the aircraft was in ground mode, causing the engines to idle unexpectedly. While this claim remains unverified, it aligns with theories proposed by aviation experts, such as Mary Schiavo, a former U.S. Department of Transportation Inspector General. Schiavo, quoted in The Daily Mail on June 25, 2025, suggested that a computer error in the 787’s systems, which rely on code to distinguish between ground and air modes, could have triggered an uncommanded throttle reduction, as seen in a 2019 All Nippon Airways (ANA) 787 incident.

The forced throttle change raises questions about the 787’s automation logic and its interaction with pilots. The system’s intervention, occurring just 1.6 seconds before the override switch was activated, suggests a possible chain reaction: the automated throttle reduction may have prompted the co-pilot’s attempt to intervene, leading to the “It’s stuck” remark and the subsequent activation of the override switch, which allowed the fuel control switches to be moved to CUTOFF.

The Hidden Override Switch and Cockpit Dynamics

The discovery of the hidden override switch, reported by The Air Current on July 9, 2025, has added complexity to the investigation. Located in the overhead panel, this switch is a failsafe mechanism designed to bypass automated engine controls in rare emergencies. Its activation at 23 seconds, just after the co-pilot’s remark, suggests that the crew may have been attempting to regain control after the unexpected throttle change. However, the switch’s obscure placement and lack of documentation in standard pilot training manuals raise concerns about its potential for accidental or uninformed use.

The co-pilot’s “It’s stuck” comment, recorded at 22 seconds, could indicate difficulty manipulating the throttle levers, which are electronically linked to the FADEC, or the override switch itself. Aviation safety expert John Cox, quoted in The Financial Express on July 10, 2025, noted that the fuel control switches are designed with detents to prevent accidental movement, making it unlikely that they were moved inadvertently without the override switch disabling safeguards. The interplay between the automated throttle change, the co-pilot’s struggle, and the override switch’s activation suggests a critical breakdown in pilot-system interaction.

Investigation Focus and Challenges

The India Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), supported by the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Boeing, and GE Aerospace, is now prioritizing the flight control system’s role in the crash. Key areas of focus include:

Automation Logic: Investigators are examining why the FADEC initiated a throttle reduction and whether it misread flight conditions, such as airspeed or altitude, as reported in The Daily Mail
Override Switch Design: The placement and accessibility of the override switch are under scrutiny, with questions about whether its activation was intentional or a desperate response to the throttle change.
Cockpit Ergonomics: The co-pilot’s “It’s stuck” remark has prompted a review of the 787’s cockpit layout, particularly the throttle quadrant and overhead panel, to identify potential points of confusion or mechanical failure.
Pilot Training: The AAIB is reviewing Air India’s training protocols to determine whether pilots were adequately prepared to handle unexpected automation interventions or the override switch.

The black boxes, recovered on June 13 and 16, were heavily damaged, complicating data extraction. The Economic Times reported on June 19, 2025, that the FDR and CVR were sent to the U.S. for analysis due to the extent of the damage. Despite these challenges, the data has provided critical insights into the throttle change and switch movements, though the precise cause of the automation’s intervention remains unclear.

Broader Implications

This revelation has significant implications for Boeing, the 787 program, and aviation safety. The 787’s “more-electric” design, which replaces traditional hydraulic and pneumatic systems with electrical ones, has been lauded for efficiency but criticized for its complexity. Times of India reported on June 16, 2025, that a failure in the Variable Frequency Starter Generators (VFSGs), which provide electrical power to engine controls, could have contributed to the loss of thrust. The forced throttle change suggests a deeper issue with the FADEC or its integration with the flight control system, potentially requiring software updates or hardware redesigns.

The incident has also renewed scrutiny of Boeing’s safety practices, already under fire after the 737 MAX crashes in 2018 and 2019. Whistleblower allegations, reported by The BBC on June 12, 2025, about substandard parts and manufacturing shortcuts in 787 production, have amplified concerns about the aircraft’s reliability, though no direct link to AI-171 has been established.

Public and Industry Response

The revelation of the forced throttle change has intensified public and political pressure on Air India and Boeing. The AAIB briefed India’s parliamentary committee on transport and tourism on July 9, 2025, with members demanding clarity on the automation issue. Air India’s interim compensation of ₹25 lakh and Tata Sons’ ₹1 crore ex-gratia payments have been overshadowed by calls for accountability, particularly as the airline faces operational disruptions from intensified 787 fleet inspections.

On X, sentiment reflects growing distrust in Boeing’s automation systems, with posts like @I_m_michael_asr’s on July 6, 2025, suggesting that the crash could have lasting repercussions for the company. The deployment of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), noted in The Wall Street Journal on June 18, 2025, indicates a total loss of primary power, further supporting the theory of a systemic electrical or automation failure.

Conclusion

The discovery that Boeing’s flight control system initiated a forced throttle change 1.6 seconds before Air India Flight AI-171 lost both engines has reframed the investigation into this tragic crash. The interplay between the automated intervention, the co-pilot’s “It’s stuck” remark, and the activation of a hidden override switch points to a complex failure involving automation, human factors, and cockpit design. As the AAIB prepares its preliminary report for the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) by July 11, 2025, the aviation industry braces for potential changes to the 787’s systems and pilot training protocols. For the families of the 260 victims and the sole survivor, these findings underscore the urgent need for answers to prevent future tragedies.