BREAKING: Air India 171 Crash Was Set in Motion 11 Days Before Takeoff — A Faulty Fix Ignored by 2 Technicians Now Under Fire
📌 The incident that led to the disaster began with a “temporary fix” overlooked by 2 technicians – now under investigation.
BREAKING: Air India 171 Crash Was Set in Motion 11 Days Before Takeoff — A Faulty Fix Ignored by 2 Technicians Now Under Fire
On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight 171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner en route from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick, crashed just 30 seconds after takeoff, claiming the lives of 241 of the 242 passengers and crew on board, along with several others on the ground. The catastrophic incident, one of India’s worst aviation disasters in recent memory, has sent shockwaves through the global aviation community. A preliminary report from India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), submitted to the Ministry of Civil Aviation on July 8, 2025, has revealed a chilling detail: the disaster may have been set in motion 11 days prior due to a “temporary fix” overlooked by two technicians, who are now under intense scrutiny. This article delves into the emerging details of the investigation, the faulty maintenance practices, and the broader implications for aviation safety.
The Fateful 30 Seconds
Air India Flight 171 took off from Ahmedabad’s Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport at approximately 2:30 AM on June 12, 2025. According to flight tracking data and eyewitness accounts, the aircraft appeared to function normally during its initial climb. However, just 30 seconds after leaving the runway, the plane experienced a sudden loss of altitude and crashed into a densely populated neighborhood in Ahmedabad, resulting in a devastating explosion and fire. The wreckage, scattered across a wide area, left little hope for survivors. Only one passenger miraculously survived, though critically injured, while the crash claimed the lives of 241 others on board and an estimated 29 people on the ground.
The scale of the tragedy prompted an immediate investigation by the AAIB, supported by technical experts from Boeing, General Electric (the engine manufacturer), and the Indian Air Force. The black box, comprising the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder, was recovered and analyzed to reconstruct the sequence of events. Initial findings, as reported by The New York Times, pointed to a rare and catastrophic dual-engine failure, a scenario for which pilots on Boeing 787s are not trained to handle at such low altitudes (below 400 feet). However, the AAIB’s preliminary report has shifted the focus to a maintenance issue that may have been the root cause of the disaster.
A Faulty Fix 11 Days Prior
According to sources familiar with the investigation, the Boeing 787-8 involved in the crash underwent maintenance 11 days before the incident, on June 1, 2025. During this maintenance, technicians identified an issue with one of the aircraft’s engine control systems. Instead of performing a full repair, the technicians reportedly applied a “temporary fix” to address the issue, allowing the aircraft to return to service. This decision, described as a routine but risky practice in some maintenance operations, was not adequately documented or flagged for follow-up repairs, violating standard airworthiness protocols.
The two technicians responsible for the maintenance, whose identities have not been disclosed, are now under investigation by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and the AAIB. Sources indicate that the temporary fix involved bypassing a fault in the engine’s electronic control unit (ECU), which regulates critical functions such as fuel flow and thrust. This bypass, while allowing the aircraft to operate in the short term, may have contributed to the simultaneous engine failure during the ill-fated takeoff on June 12. The AAIB’s preliminary report suggests that the ECU fault, if left unaddressed, could have caused an unexpected power loss under the high-stress conditions of takeoff, leading to the crash.
Regulatory Scrutiny and Prior Warnings
The revelation of the faulty fix has intensified scrutiny of Air India’s maintenance practices. Just months before the crash, the DGCA had issued warnings to Air India Express, a subsidiary of Air India, for falsifying compliance documents related to Airbus A320 engine maintenance. The regulatory body also flagged Air India for operating three Airbus aircraft with overdue escape slide inspections and breaching pilot duty hour regulations in June 2025. These prior violations, as reported by the Times of India, raise questions about systemic issues in the airline’s safety and maintenance protocols.
Aviation safety experts have expressed alarm over the use of temporary fixes in critical systems like engine controls. Vibhuti Singh, a former legal expert at the AAIB, noted that such practices, while not uncommon, carry significant risks, particularly when operating in challenging environments or near restricted airspace. The DGCA’s earlier warnings about falsified records and overdue maintenance suggest that Air India may have struggled to adhere to stringent safety standards, potentially contributing to the chain of events that led to the Flight 171 disaster.
Investigation Details and Simulator Findings
To understand the crash, Air India pilots conducted a simulation of Flight 171’s conditions, replicating the aircraft’s configuration, including deployed landing gear and extended wing flaps. The simulation, conducted independently of the AAIB’s probe, aimed to test whether these settings could have caused the crash. According to a Bloomberg report, the simulation found that the configuration alone was insufficient to cause a crash, narrowing the focus to a mechanical or electrical failure. The activation of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT), an emergency power system, moments before impact further supports the theory of a critical system failure, as the RAT is typically deployed when primary power sources are lost.
The AAIB’s preliminary report, submitted on July 8, 2025, and expected to be released to the public by July 11, provides additional insights based on black box data. The report highlights the position of the fuel switches and the aircraft’s trim sheet, which ensures proper weight and balance. While the report remains inconclusive on the exact cause, it points to the engine failure as a primary factor, with the temporary fix emerging as a critical point of investigation. The involvement of Boeing and GE representatives underscores the complexity of the probe, as investigators examine maintenance records, fault history, and data from Boeing’s Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS).
Broader Implications for Aviation Safety
The Air India 171 crash has reignited concerns about aviation safety in India, particularly in light of recent incidents involving emergency landings, runway skids, and bomb hoaxes. The Economic Times reported that a parliamentary panel is now reviewing India’s aviation safety protocols, with participation from major airlines like Air India, IndiGo, and SpiceJet, as well as airport operators like Adani and GMR. Members of Parliament have expressed frustration over the lack of transparency in the investigation and the slow progress in analyzing the black box data.
The crash has also drawn international attention, with U.S. and U.K. legal teams reportedly preparing to sue Boeing over the incident. Peter Neenan, an aviation lawyer with Stewarts Law, has criticized Air India’s handling of compensation for victims’ families, alleging coercive tactics to minimize payouts. These allegations, combined with the maintenance lapses, paint a troubling picture of systemic issues that may extend beyond a single airline.
Calls for Accountability and Reform
The revelation that a faulty fix may have contributed to the crash has sparked outrage among victims’ families and the public. The AAIB’s final report, expected by mid-September 2025, will provide a comprehensive analysis of the crash’s causes and recommendations for preventing future tragedies. In the meantime, the two technicians under investigation face potential disciplinary action, while Air India and its parent company, Tata Sons, grapple with reputational damage and legal challenges.
Junior Civil Aviation Minister Murlidhar Mohol has stated that the investigation is exploring all possibilities, including sabotage, though no evidence of foul play has been confirmed. The focus on maintenance practices underscores the need for stricter oversight and adherence to safety standards across the aviation industry. As the investigation continues, the Air India 171 crash serves as a stark reminder of the consequences of cutting corners in aviation maintenance and the urgent need for reform to ensure passenger safety.
Conclusion
The Air India Flight 171 disaster is a tragedy that could have been prevented. The preliminary findings pointing to a faulty fix ignored by two technicians highlight the critical importance of rigorous maintenance protocols and accountability in aviation. As the AAIB continues its investigation, the global aviation community awaits answers that could shape the future of air safety in India and beyond. For now, the families of the 270 victims mourn their loss, and the industry faces a reckoning over practices that may have set this disaster in motion 11 days before takeoff.
