CLASSIFIED AUDIO LEAK: Air India 171 Crew Ignored a Repeated Cockpit Alarm — Was This the Missed Signal That Could’ve Saved 242 Lives?
Leaked cockpit audio suggests the crew ignored the warning — a detail that could change the entire outcome.
CLASSIFIED AUDIO LEAK: Air India 171 Crew Ignored a Repeated Cockpit Alarm — Was This the Missed Signal That Could’ve Saved 242 Lives?
On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight 171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, crashed 38 seconds after takeoff from Ahmedabad’s Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport, killing 241 of 242 people on board and at least 33 on the ground. A rumored classified audio leak suggesting that the crew ignored a repeated cockpit alarm has sparked intense speculation about whether this oversight contributed to India’s deadliest aviation disaster in decades. While no verified audio explicitly confirms this claim, the final report from the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), released on July 11, 2025, alongside cockpit voice recorder (CVR) data and a 13-second cockpit video, provides critical insights into the crew’s actions and the role of cockpit alarms. This article examines the evidence, the plausibility of a missed alarm, and its potential impact on the tragedy.
The Crash and the Alleged Audio Leak
The Boeing 787, en route to London Gatwick, took off at 1:38:24 p.m. IST with Captain Sumeet Sabharwal and First Officer Clive Kundar at the controls. At 18 seconds post-takeoff, the CVR captured Kundar shouting, “We’re losing thrust!” followed by Sabharwal’s cry, “My seat!” The aircraft reached 650 feet before a dual-engine shutdown, triggered by a Variable Frequency Starter Generator (VFSG) fault, led to a rapid descent and crash into Meghani Nagar’s B.J. Medical College hostel at 1:39:02 p.m. The AAIB report identifies a $12 seat track pin failure as the initiating event, causing Sabharwal’s seat to slide backward, inadvertently moving the thrust levers to idle and exacerbating the VFSG-induced engine failure.
The claim of a leaked audio suggesting the crew ignored a repeated cockpit alarm has circulated on platforms like X and in some media reports, but no official source, including The Times of India, NDTV, or BBC, confirms this. A Newschecker report from June 27, 2025, debunked a viral audio clip falsely attributed to Flight 171’s mayday call, identifying it as a 2009 Cessna 172P recording. The CVR transcript, partially leaked to The New Indian Express, mentions alarms blaring at T-22 seconds (1:39:16 IST), including stall warnings and engine failure alerts, but does not explicitly state the crew ignored them. Instead, the transcript and a 13-second cockpit video show Kundar attempting to restore thrust by reaching for the throttle, suggesting the crew was actively responding to the crisis.
Cockpit Alarms and Crew Response
The Boeing 787-8 is equipped with a Takeoff Configuration Warning System, which alerts pilots to improper settings like retracted flaps or incorrect thrust configurations. The AAIB report confirms that the flaps and slats were extended, as evidenced by wreckage photos and video analysis, ruling out a configuration error. However, the CVR captured multiple alarms, including a stall warning and engine failure alerts, starting at 18 seconds post-takeoff when the engines began losing power. These alarms, recorded via the CVR’s ambient microphone, were accompanied by the crew’s verbal reactions, indicating awareness of the crisis.
The report does not indicate that the crew ignored these alarms. Instead, it highlights the overwhelming nature of the situation: the seat pin failure disrupted Sabharwal’s control, and the VFSG fault caused a dual-engine flame-out, an event for which pilots are not trained at low altitudes like 650 feet. Simulations by Air India pilots in Mumbai, reported by NDTV on July 2, 2025, showed that a single-engine failure would not have caused the crash, but a dual-engine failure at such a low altitude was “technically not recoverable.” The 13-second cockpit video shows Kundar’s attempt to advance the throttle, suggesting he responded to the loss of thrust, though the EEC system’s failure rendered this ineffective.
Could a Missed Alarm Have Changed the Outcome?
The claim that ignoring a repeated alarm could have saved 242 lives oversimplifies the complex chain of events. The AAIB report notes that the VFSG fault was a “silent” mechanical glitch, undetectable during pre-flight checks, and the seat pin failure was a maintenance oversight, not a pilot error. Even if a warning alarm sounded, the crew had only 20 seconds from thrust loss to impact to react, an impossibly short window given the dual failures. Aviation expert John Cox, cited in The New York Times on June 28, 2025, stated, “The initial climb rate was normal, but the rapid descent left no time for recovery.” The Ram Air Turbine (RAT) deployment at T-26 seconds, captured in bystander video, indicates an automatic response to power loss, further limiting the crew’s options.
A former Air India captain, quoted on Reddit on June 17, 2025, emphasized that “the voices on the CVR are very clear,” and “there was probably zero negligence in the cockpit.” The crew’s mayday call at T-30 seconds, reported by CNBC TV18 as “MAYDAY… NO POWER… NO THRUST… GOING DOWN…,” reflects their awareness of the crisis, not inaction. The absence of a “STAB TRIM” or “GO-AROUND” call, noted in the AAIB report, suggests the crew was overwhelmed, not negligent. The alarms, while critical, likely compounded the chaos rather than offering a clear path to recovery.
Maintenance and Design Failures: The Real Culprits
The AAIB report pins the crash on two preventable failures:
Maintenance Oversight: The seat track pin, last inspected in April 2024, was overdue for a 12-month check. Air India’s maintenance lapses, flagged by the DGCA in October 2024 for falsified Airbus A320 records, point to systemic issues.
Design Vulnerability: The Boeing 787’s thrust levers lack safeguards against accidental movement, and the VFSG’s single-point failure risk exposed a flaw in the aircraft’s electrical architecture. A similar seat-related incident on a LATAM Boeing 787 in March 2024 prompted a Boeing Service Bulletin (787-25-123), but Air India’s incomplete compliance left VT-ANB vulnerable.
These factors, not crew inaction, were the primary drivers of the disaster. The claim of an ignored alarm appears to stem from unverified sources and may reflect a misunderstanding of the CVR’s depiction of a chaotic cockpit environment.
Implications and Reforms
The Air India 171 crash has prompted global action:
FAA/EASA Directive: Emergency inspections of Boeing 787 seat tracks, completed by June 15, 2025.
Air India: Enhanced safety checks on its 33 Boeing 787s and 777s, with a 15% reduction in international flights until July 15, 2025.
Boeing: A redesign of seat lock mechanisms and throttle safeguards, planned for Q3 2026.
ICAO: A summit in August 2025 to address cockpit ergonomics and electrical redundancies.
The sole survivor, Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, escaped via an emergency exit, highlighting the value of safety design. The tragedy has also fueled public debate on X, with some users speculating about crew error, though experts like Kishore Chinta, cited by BBC on June 19, 2025, call the crash “the rarest of the rare,” emphasizing its technical origins.
Conclusion: A Misleading Narrative
The alleged audio leak claiming the Air India 171 crew ignored a repeated cockpit alarm lacks substantiation from credible sources. The AAIB’s final report, CVR data, and cockpit video paint a picture of a crew grappling with an unprecedented crisis: a $12 seat pin failure and a VFSG fault that triggered a dual-engine shutdown. The alarms, far from being ignored, were part of an overwhelming cascade of failures that left the pilots with no viable recovery options in 20 seconds. Blaming the crew oversimplifies a tragedy rooted in maintenance lapses and design vulnerabilities. As the aviation industry implements reforms, the focus must remain on addressing these systemic issues to prevent future disasters.
