Air India crash: From frenzy to fact

“This is where the captain of the Air India flight that crashed in Ahmedabad lived,” said a friend while driving through a premium residential area in Powai during a trip to Mumbai in early July.

While passing by the apartment complex named Jalvayu Vihar, the tragic scene that had aired nationwide only days before came hauntingly to mind. It showed the grieving father of pilot Sumeet Sabharwal paying his final tribute to his son as the mortal remains were brought home.

News reports say Captain Sabharwal, deeply devoted to his aging father nearing ninety, was even considering quitting his job to care for him.

Even days after the Mumbai trip, the Jalvayu Vihar premises, where Captain Sabharwal used to take his father out for fresh air, remained etched in memory. Yet even in the wildest reaches of imagination, no one could have foreseen that this Indian veteran pilot would one day be at the center of discussions as the villain behind the plane crash by aviation experts and media across the world.

Opening Pandora’s Box: The preliminary report
According to the preliminary report, released on July 12 by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau, the second-deadliest air crash in Indian history occurred when the fuel control switches on both engines were transitioned from the "Run" to "Cutoff" position immediately after takeoff, resulting in a loss of thrust. The Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner aircraft subsequently lost altitude rapidly and crashed, killing 260 people.

Preliminary reports of plane crashes are typically not investigative; their purpose is to outline what happened, not to determine root causes. They mainly serve to indicate whether any immediate safety measures or technical adjustments are needed for ongoing flight operations. The exact reason for the crash will be detailed only in the final report, which can take years; in the case of the mysterious Malaysian Airlines disappearance, it took four years.

The report also includes a conversation between the two pilots where one asked the other why he cut off the fuel switch. That part of the report is highly suggestive in nature.

However, the glaring lack of details – especially the full cockpit voice recording – leaves the door open to various hypotheses, including suicide-murder, pilot error, or technical failure.

The preliminary report of the plane crash has sparked media hysteria: Western outlets focus on a pilot suicide narrative, while the Indian media leans heavily toward a technical failure angle.

It’s time to take an objective look at the two leading theories behind the crash – and assess the ‘hard facts’ that may support and challenge each.

Scenario one: Was it intentional?
The pilot-induced crash theory, initially picked up by American and British tabloid dailies, later gained traction with prominent media outlets such as The Wall Street Journal and Reuters, where the blame squarely pointed to Captain Sabharwal.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the captain remained calm while the first officer panicked during the discussion about fuel switches, citing their “American sources”. As reported in many Western media, the captain, who was suffering from depression and other mental health issues, is believed to have deliberately cut off the fuel supply in an act of suicide.

Such a possibility deserves a serious investigation, as the fuel control switches were “transitioned” to the cutoff position one or two seconds after the takeoff, at a very crucial point from which an aircraft cannot be saved. If the incident had happened a few seconds earlier or later, the catastrophe could have been avoided.

Rare, but not uncommon
Cases of pilot murder-suicide have occurred multiple times in aviation history. The classic example of pilot suicide is the crash of the Lufthansa’s Germanwings airliner, in which the co-pilot, Andreas Lubitz, intentionally crashed the plane into the French Alps on 24 March 2015, killing 150 people, including himself. Investigators revealed that the co-pilot was suffering from a psychiatric condition and was on medication, details he concealed from the airline. However, even his closest friends remained unaware of that and described him as a cheerful character who seemed to enjoy his job.

Another incident was that of EgyptAir in 1999. The flight crashed into the Atlantic Ocean en route from New York to Cairo, killing all 217 passengers aboard. The recovered black box recordings revealed that the co-pilot, Gameel Al-Batouti disengaged the autopilot at an altitude of 33000 feet when the main pilot left the cockpit to lavatory.

A minute later, the Boeing 767 aircraft went into a deep dive that created zero gravity and weightlessness. The captain, who managed to return to the cockpit despite zero gravity, tried to correct the course by pulling back the control column. Al-Batouti, at that moment, flipped the fuel switch from `Run` to `Cut-off`, thereby leaving no chance for the pilot to save the plane. In the cockpit voice recording just before the crash, the captain was heard asking the co-pilot, “Did you shut the engines off?”

The EgyptAir incident evokes an eerie similarity with the Air India crash in many ways. Following the preliminary report, which suggested the criminal act of the co-pilot, both the Egyptian media and the government responded with great outrage. The disbelief in such a criminal act of pilot suicide stemmed from the long career record of Al-Batouti with no blemishes.  In its final report, the US National Transportation Safety Board concluded that pilot suicide was the probable cause, although it could not determine the motive behind the act.

According to Professor Robert Bor, who researched pilot mental health, the ‘intent’ emerges not on a fine morning but develops over a long period. Apart from psychological factors, grievance against the employer can also be a contributing motive, as seen in the 1999 Air Botswana flight, where a pilot stole a plane without passengers and committed suicide by ramming it into another aircraft parked in the airport.

Mental health concerns
In India, concerns about employee mental health and well-being continue to persist across sectors. Given this context, the possibility of a pilot already struggling with personal issues experiencing a severe psychological crisis in the workplace cannot be entirely ruled out.

Indian pilot associations, however, oppose the hypothesis and demand a thorough inquiry that involves pilots directly, insisting the process must be fair and based on objective facts.

Captain Sabharwal’s colleagues and those who have known him for a long time describe him as ‘a person who never drank, never smoked, and was a good professional’. They maintained that just because someone didn't have a happy marriage, it doesn't mean he had mental health issues.

What if it turns out that Captain Sabharwal’s seemingly suspicious actions in the cockpit were, in fact, a last-minute effort – using all his expertise – to save an aircraft that wasn’t responding as expected?

Scenario two: A case of technical failure?
Despite its legacy as a pioneer in global aviation, Boeing has come under increased scrutiny in recent years, with its aircraft more frequently involved in accidents or flagged for technical issues.

In the United States, Boeing is already facing regulatory action over its quality and manufacturing practices following the mid-flight door panel blowout on an Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 Max 9 last year.

On January 29, 2024, The Wall Street Journal published an exclusive report titled 'Alaska Airlines Plane Appears to Have Left Boeing Factory Without Critical Bolts'. A month later, Boeing found fifty 737 MAX aircrafts with misdrilled holes in fuselages.

It’s worth remembering that Boeing’s troubled 737 MAX crashed twice in less than five months – in 2019 and 2020 – claiming 346 lives. The back-to-back tragedies triggered a worldwide grounding of the aircraft for technical inspections and sent Boeing’s stock value into a steep decline.

Another major setback to Boeing’s technical credibility came when its Starliner spacecraft, carrying Sunita Williams and another American astronaut, suffered critical issues with its propulsion system and experienced helium leaks. As a result, NASA had to rely on SpaceX's Crew Dragon spacecraft to ensure their safe return to Earth after the astronauts were stranded for nine months, despite the mission originally being planned for just eight days.

How come a company reported with technical issues at home magically avoids them in other countries?

According to news reports, the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner that crashed in Ahmedabad had previously experienced major electrical and software issues that could have caused an ‘uncommanded’ movement of the fuel switches to the cut-off position.

The inspection of the wreckage, particularly the empennage or tail section of the aircraft, also points to the possibility of a contained electrical fire, though that alone would not lead to a double engine failure. Only a proper investigation can determine whether an electrical malfunction played a role in the Air India crash.

The US Federal Aviation Administration and the UK Civil Aviation Authority have called for inspections of the locking mechanisms in fuel control switches, highlighting a potentially unsafe condition affecting fuel shutoff valves across Boeing aircraft, including the 787 Dreamliner.

The aforementioned technical issues deserve detailed examination, especially in light of the recent incident involving a Boeing 787 Dreamliner operated by United Airlines on July 25th. One of its engines suddenly malfunctioned shortly after takeoff from Washington en route to Munich, forcing an emergency landing.

Boeing’s recent safety and quality lapses may stem from its increasing reliance on outsourcing in the manufacturing process. In its more than century-old history, Boeing has traditionally operated as an in-house manufacturer, with aircraft design and development taking place at its own facilities. (For trivia lovers: Boeing’s Everett factory, near Seattle, Washington, is the largest building in the world by volume.)

Boeing and Dreamliners
The Dreamliners were indeed a daring dream come true for Boeing. They redefined aviation by being the first passenger aircraft made largely of plastic composites, considerably reducing weight and increasing fuel efficiency.

However, with the ambitious 787 Dreamliner project, Boeing made a decisive break from its previous production model and embraced outsourcing. “The company aimed to develop the 787 Dreamliner quickly and inexpensively to compete with the Airbus A380. Instead of developing the aircraft in-house and sourcing parts from suppliers, Boeing decided to outsource 70% of the design, engineering, and manufacturing of entire modules to over 50 strategic partners”, said Christopher S Tang, one of the leading scholars of global supply chain management and a distinguished professor at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Whistleblowers like John Barnett, who worked for more than thirty years as a quality control manager at Boeing, raised crucial issues such as substandard parts and manufacturing shortcuts that could affect the quality and safety of 787 Dreamliners.

Despite a reputational crisis, Boeing continues to secure government contracts, all while maintaining a significant footprint in Washington’s lobbying circles. According to a Bloomberg report, among the ten largest government contractors, Boeing occupies the top position in terms of spending on federal lobbying, with the amount coming to a staggering 14.4 million dollars.

These troubled years also marked the end of Boeing’s decades- long dominance in the global aviation market. Airbus – Boeing’s European archrival – surpassed it in both orders and deliveries, becoming the new market leader. Boeing is now facing new challenges from Chinese competitors in the aircraft market, particularly from COMAC, China’s state-owned manufacturer, which currently supplies mostly domestic airlines but is poised to enter the global market.

While Scenario Two raises the possibility of a technical failure or manufacturing lapse, it comes with a crucial caveat: The Air India crash marks the first-ever fatal accident involving a Dreamliner since the aircraft entered service in 2011. Widely regarded as one of the world’s most advanced and safest aircraft, the Boeing 787 had maintained an unblemished safety record until this incident. More than one billion passengers have safely flown on it in the past 14 years, a record unmatched by any other wide body aircraft.

Following the crash, the Indian Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) instructed airlines to inspect the fuel control switches in their Boeing 737 and 787 fleets. No issues were reported. According to news reports, most international carriers also conducted similar inspections and found no anomalies.

Dreaming safer skies
The dream of flying has been one of humanity`s deepest aspirations – an idea that has captured the imagination for centuries, from Daedalus’ wings in Greek mythology to the Pushpak Viman in Indian epics and the Flying Carpet in Arabian tales. Across the ages, there have been countless attempts to conquer the skies, most notably Leonardo da Vinci’s aeronautical sketches.

However, humans had to wait until the twentieth century to make flying a reality. Though it was the Wright brothers who built the first flying machine in 1903, it was only after William E. Boeing founded his namesake company in 1916 that the era of modern aviation truly began.

Over time, Boeing airplanes transformed how people around the world connect, fulfilling one of humanity’s deepest desires: the urge to travel. What propelled Boeing and the aviation industry to remarkable success was its passion and genuine commitment to research and experimentation– and, above all, its eagerness to learn from its own mistakes.

It’s worth recalling the words of William E. Boeing, quoted on the cover of the company’s Corporate Citizenship Report:

 “We are embarked as pioneers upon a new science and industry in which our problems are so new and unusual that it behooves no one to dismiss any novel idea with the statement that ‘it can't be done’. Our job is to keep everlastingly at research and experiment, to let no new improvement in flying and flying equipment pass us by.”

Such a scientific urge has been instrumental in making air travel humanity’s safest mode of transportation, with IATA’s 2024 Safety Report recording only seven fatal accidents out of 40.6 million flights worldwide last year.

Aviation’s progress is written in blood – each crash pushing the industry toward safer skies and smarter aircrafts. Through every drop of blood spilled in the wreckage of past crashes, aviation learned, evolved, and carved its safety protocols to make flying safer.

What the moment demands is not media frenzy or blame games, but an urgent and objective examination of the first-ever Boeing 787 Dreamliner crash –  including the unsettling possibility of pilot suicide –  and an open-minded approach to identifying and addressing potential technical flaws to improve the aircraft.

Tailpiece
A clear explanation and sound recommendations are expected in the final report on the Air India crash in Ahmedabad, particularly concerning aviation safety precautions and employee health. Hopefully, it will also provide some guidelines on how the media – particularly online portals with deep reach through social media – should ‘report’ and ‘explain’ air accidents.

The US National Transportation Safety Board, like the Indian authorities, found the ‘selective and unverified reporting’ troubling. On July 18, Chairperson Jennifer Homendy dismissed media coverage on the Air India crash as ‘speculative’ and ‘premature’.

We need a global standard, or at least a set of agreed best practices, for reporting plane crashes accurately and objectively. Otherwise, even prominent media outlets may succumb to popular sentiment, devolving into tabloid-style coverage filled with obstructive speculation and premature blame.
(Social anthropologist and novelist Thomas Sajan and US-trained neurologist Titto Idicula, based in Norway, write on politics, culture, economy, and medicine)