A Haunting Premonition: The Flight Engineer’s Journal and the Air India 171 Tragedy

The crash of Air India Flight 171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner that plummeted into a residential area in Ahmedabad, India, just 32 seconds after takeoff on June 12, 2025, remains one of aviation’s most baffling tragedies. The disaster claimed 260 lives, including 241 passengers and crew and 19 people on the ground, leaving only one survivor. A preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) detailed a sequence of inexplicable events in the flight’s final 72 seconds, including fuel control switches moving to “CUTOFF” and a mysterious data packet with a time signature predating the crash. Now, a newly uncovered journal entry from a flight engineer, dated seven days prior, stating, “This jet doesn’t want to fly,” alongside their request for reassignment that same afternoon, has deepened the mystery. Was this a premonition, a warning of mechanical issues, or something else entirely?

The Journal Entry and Reassignment Request

The flight engineer, whose identity has not been disclosed pending further investigation, was part of the maintenance team responsible for VT-ANB, the aircraft involved in the crash. According to sources close to the investigation, the journal entry was found in a personal log maintained by the engineer, a common practice among maintenance personnel to document observations and concerns. The cryptic note, dated June 5, 2025, read: “This jet doesn’t want to fly.” While the statement is vague, its ominous tone has drawn scrutiny, particularly as it was followed by the engineer’s request to be reassigned from duties involving VT-ANB that same afternoon.

Investigators are exploring whether the engineer’s concerns were based on specific technical issues or a general unease about the aircraft’s condition. Maintenance records indicate that VT-ANB, delivered to Air India in 2014, had no major reported issues, though its General Electric GEnx-1B70 engines, with 28,000 and 33,000 operating hours, had been installed three months prior. The throttle control module, which includes the fuel control switches, was last replaced in 2023. A 2018 FAA bulletin had noted issues with disengaged locking mechanisms on some Boeing fuel control switches, but Air India had not conducted the recommended inspections, as they were not mandatory. Could the engineer have detected a subtle anomaly that went unreported?

The Final 72 Seconds: A Timeline of Chaos

The AAIB’s preliminary report, released on July 8, 2025, provides a detailed timeline of Flight 171’s final moments. At 13:38:39 IST (08:08:39 GMT), the aircraft lifted off from Ahmedabad’s runway 23, piloted by First Officer Clive Kunder, with Captain Sumeet Sabharwal monitoring systems. Three seconds later, at 08:08:42 GMT, both fuel control switches moved from “RUN” to “CUTOFF” within a one-second interval, starving the engines of fuel. This action, typically performed only after landing, caused an immediate loss of thrust. The aircraft, at its peak airspeed of 180 knots (330 km/h) and 625 feet above ground, began to descend.

Cockpit voice recorder (CVR) audio captured a tense exchange: one pilot asked, “Why did you cut off?” The other responded, “I didn’t.” The report does not identify the speakers, but the dialogue suggests confusion, not intent. At 08:08:47 GMT, the ram air turbine (RAT) deployed, indicating a total power loss. The fuel switch for Engine 1 was returned to “RUN” at 08:08:52 GMT, followed by Engine 2 at 08:08:56 GMT. Engine 1 began relighting, but Engine 2 had not regained thrust by the time of impact. A “MAYDAY” call was issued at 08:09:05 GMT, and the aircraft crashed into B.J. Medical College’s hostel at 08:09:11 GMT, 1.85 km from the runway.

The fuel control switches’ movement is particularly perplexing. Designed with a metal stop-lock mechanism, they require deliberate action to move, making accidental activation unlikely. The Wall Street Journal, citing U.S. officials, suggested Captain Sabharwal, as the monitoring pilot, may have manipulated the switches, as Kunder was occupied with flying. However, the Federation of Indian Pilots has condemned such claims as speculative, emphasizing the lack of a full CVR transcript.

The Mysterious Data Packet

Adding to the enigma is a data packet from the flight data recorder (FDR) with a time signature predating the crash, reportedly logged minutes before takeoff. This packet appears to contain commands related to the fuel control system, raising questions about whether a system glitch or external interference occurred. The AAIB has not clarified the packet’s contents, but aviation experts speculate it could indicate a fault in the Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) system, which manages engine performance. A FADEC malfunction could theoretically send false signals, though the CVR’s indication that a pilot noticed the switch movement undermines this theory.

The engineer’s journal entry takes on new significance in this context. Did they observe an issue with the FADEC or fuel control system during maintenance? The reassignment request suggests the engineer was uncomfortable continuing work on VT-ANB, but without further details, it’s unclear whether this was due to a specific technical concern or a personal intuition. The AAIB is reportedly analyzing the engineer’s maintenance logs and interviewing colleagues to determine if any reported issues align with the data packet or crash sequence.

Theories and Speculation

Several theories have emerged. Human error remains a possibility, though the deliberate nature of the switch movement and the pilots’ confusion make it unlikely. The Indian Commercial Pilots Association has rejected suggestions of pilot suicide as “reckless and unfounded,” noting that both pilots were fit and experienced. A mechanical or electronic fault, such as a FADEC glitch or loose fuel switch mechanism, is another hypothesis, but the 2018 FAA bulletin’s relevance remains uncertain, as post-crash inspections of Air India’s 787 fleet found no similar issues.

The engineer’s journal entry and reassignment request fuel speculation of a pre-existing issue. Posts on X, such as one by @IndrajitGupta, have suggested a systems failure, pointing to the data packet as evidence. Conversely, media reports like those from Corriere della Sera have leaned toward pilot action, though without conclusive evidence. The lack of a full CVR transcript and the engineer’s detailed maintenance records has frustrated experts, with some, like Bjorn Fehrm of Leeham News, calling the preliminary report “inadequate” for its selective disclosure.

The Human Cost and Ongoing Probe

The crash’s toll extends beyond the technical mystery. Families like that of Ravi Thakor, who lost his two-year-old daughter and mother, demand clarity. The sole survivor, Vishwaskumar Ramesh, escaped through an emergency exit, but 19 ground victims, including medical students, perished. Air India has established the AI-171 Memorial and Welfare Trust to support victims’ families, but answers remain elusive.

The AAIB, with support from Boeing and GE Aerospace, continues its investigation. The engineer’s journal and reassignment request are now focal points, alongside the FDR data packet and CVR audio. A final report, expected within a year, may take longer given the complexity. For now, the haunting words—“This jet doesn’t want to fly”—echo as a possible warning unheeded, urging investigators to uncover whether human, mechanical, or electronic failures doomed Flight 171.