NEVER SEEN BEFORE: Thermal Imaging Reveals Overheating in Air India Flight 171 Engines Before Fatal Crash

On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight 171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, crashed seconds after takeoff from Ahmedabad’s Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport, killing 241 of 242 onboard and at least 29 on the ground. While initial investigations pointed to a faulty pilot seat mechanism as the primary cause, a newly uncovered thermal image from one of the aircraft’s General Electric GEnx-1B67 engine casings has revealed critical overheating spots present before takeoff. Dismissed as normal by maintenance crews, these anomalies raise serious questions about pre-flight inspections, engine reliability, and Air India’s safety protocols. This 1,000-word article delves into the thermal imaging evidence, its implications, and the broader context of the tragedy.

The Crash Recap

Air India Flight 171 departed Ahmedabad at 13:39 IST, bound for London Gatwick with 230 passengers and 12 crew members. The aircraft struggled to climb, reaching only 625 feet before stalling and crashing into a medical college hostel in Meghani Nagar, igniting a fireball. The sole survivor, Vishwaskumar Ramesh, escaped through a broken emergency hatch. The crash site’s devastation, with temperatures reaching 1,500°C, complicated rescue efforts and victim identification. A preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) identified a fractured locking mechanism in the captain’s seat, which slid back during takeoff, causing Captain Sumeet Sabharwal to inadvertently reduce throttle settings, starving the engines. Biometric data also showed co-pilot Clive Kundar’s heart rate spiking to 160 bpm, suggesting panic may have delayed his response.

The Thermal Imaging Breakthrough

On June 27, 2025, investigators analyzing wreckage at the AAIB’s Hyderabad facility recovered a thermal imaging scan from the right engine casing of VT-ANB, the Boeing 787 involved. The scan, taken during a routine maintenance check 48 hours before the flight, revealed multiple overheating spots on the engine’s high-pressure turbine section, with temperatures reaching 650°C—well above the typical operating range of 450–500°C for the GEnx-1B67 during ground tests. These hot spots, concentrated around the turbine blades, indicated potential material fatigue or combustion inefficiencies.

Maintenance records show that the thermal anomalies were flagged by a junior technician but dismissed by the supervising engineer as “within acceptable limits” based on Air India’s standard operating procedures. The engine, serviced 11 days prior for unrelated vibration issues, was cleared for flight without further inspection. The AAIB, in collaboration with General Electric and the U.S. NTSB, is now investigating whether these hot spots contributed to the engine’s failure to deliver sufficient thrust during takeoff.

Engine Performance and the Crash

The GEnx-1B67 engines on the Boeing 787 are designed for high efficiency and reliability, with a failure rate of less than 0.002% per flight hour. However, the thermal imaging evidence suggests pre-existing stress in the right engine, potentially reducing its thrust output. The FDR data indicates that both engines spooled up to 92% N1 (fan speed) during takeoff roll, but the right engine’s exhaust gas temperature (EGT) was 15% higher than the left, a sign of internal inefficiencies. This asymmetry may have exacerbated the aircraft’s struggle to climb after the throttle was inadvertently reduced.

Aviation engineer Dr. Priya Menon explains, “Overheating in turbine blades can lead to microfractures or blade creep, reducing thrust efficiency. If the right engine was already compromised, the sudden throttle reduction would have hit it harder, causing an asymmetric stall.” The CVR reportedly captured Captain Sabharwal’s shout of “Thrust not achieved!” seconds before the crash, supporting the theory that engine performance was a factor, even if secondary to the seat malfunction.

Maintenance Oversights and Systemic Issues

The dismissal of the thermal anomalies points to gaps in Air India’s maintenance protocols. The airline’s 787 fleet, averaging 10.2 years in age, has faced scrutiny for inconsistent maintenance. A whistleblower report from 2024 alleged that Air India routinely skipped secondary inspections to meet turnaround schedules, a claim echoed by the engine maintenance log for VT-ANB. The decision to clear the engine despite thermal irregularities suggests either inadequate training or pressure to maintain flight schedules.

India’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) mandates thermal imaging as part of level-2 maintenance checks but allows airlines discretion in interpreting results. Industry standards typically flag temperatures above 600°C for further investigation, yet Air India’s threshold was reportedly set at 700°C, a leniency critics call “reckless.” Post-crash inspections of Air India’s 33 Boeing 787s revealed thermal anomalies in four other engines, prompting the grounding of 12 aircraft for urgent maintenance.

Broader Safety Implications

The thermal imaging revelation has reignited debates about aviation safety in India. Ahmedabad’s airport, located in a densely populated area, has long been criticized for inadequate safety buffers. The crash into the medical college hostel, just 300 meters from the runway, amplified the disaster’s toll. Mohan Ranganathan, an aviation safety expert, told The Hindu, “India’s airports often prioritize commercial efficiency over safety. Thermal imaging is a powerful tool, but it’s useless if findings are ignored.”

The incident also raises questions about the reliability of the GEnx-1B67 engine. General Electric has launched a review of its manufacturing and quality control processes, focusing on turbine blade durability. The FAA and EASA have issued directives for enhanced thermal imaging protocols on all GEnx-powered 787s, effective July 15, 2025. Boeing, already under pressure from the seat mechanism issue, is collaborating with GE to address potential design flaws.

Human and Mechanical Interplay

The thermal imaging evidence adds complexity to the human factors already under scrutiny. Co-pilot Kundar’s heart rate spike to 160 bpm, as revealed by biometric data, indicated acute stress when the captain’s seat slid back. If the right engine was underperforming due to pre-existing overheating, Kundar’s attempt to restore thrust may have been futile, compounding the cockpit’s chaos. The CVR, still under analysis, may clarify whether the pilots were aware of engine irregularities during their brief 30-second struggle.

Aviation psychologist Dr. Alan Cheung notes, “Pilots train for mechanical failures, but simultaneous issues—like a seat malfunction and engine asymmetry—can overwhelm even the best crews. The co-pilot’s stress response likely reduced his capacity to prioritize actions.” This interplay of mechanical failure and human limitation underscores the need for better cockpit ergonomics and real-time diagnostic systems.

Industry and Regulatory Response

The Air India 171 crash has prompted global action. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is accelerating its August 2025 summit on cockpit and engine safety, with a focus on integrating thermal imaging into real-time diagnostics. Air India has committed to retraining its maintenance staff and revising engine inspection thresholds. The DGCA is under pressure to enforce stricter compliance, with opposition leaders calling for an independent audit of India’s aviation sector.

Public outrage has also targeted Air India’s safety culture. Social media posts on X highlight passenger frustrations with the airline’s history of delays, poor service, and safety lapses. A viral post stated, “Air India ignored a ticking time bomb in Flight 171’s engine. How many more risks are they taking?” While misinformation, including AI-generated “reports” of sabotage, has been debunked, the thermal imaging evidence has fueled legitimate concerns about accountability.

Conclusion

The thermal imaging scan from Air India Flight 171’s engine casing, showing overheating spots dismissed as normal, reveals a critical failure in pre-flight safety checks. Combined with the seat mechanism fault and the co-pilot’s stress response, this evidence paints a picture of cascading failures that led to one of India’s worst aviation disasters. As the AAIB prepares its final report by July 30, 2025, the aviation industry must address systemic issues in maintenance, engine reliability, and human factors. The tragedy, which claimed over 270 lives, demands urgent reforms to ensure such oversights are never repeated.