Skip to content 
Search

Latest Stories

‘Too soon to blame Air India pilots for crash’

Report reveals crew's recovery effort during take-off

Air India crash

Investigators at the site of the Air India crash in Ahmedabad on June 13

SOME western papers have been too quick to suggest pilot error or sabotage in the Air India crash in Ahmedabad last month.

This is based on a couple of lines in the preliminary report on the crash: “In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff. The other pilot responded that he did not do so.”


It seems the crash was caused by fuel supply to the engines being cut off.

The exact quotes are not given and neither are the pilots identified.

The senior pilot was Sumeet Sabharwal, 56, who had clocked 8,200 flying hours. The co-pilot, Clive Kunder, 32, had 1,100 hours.

India’s civil aviation minister, Kinjarapu Ram Mohan Naidu, urged people not to jump to conclusions, but wait for the full report: “I believe we have the most wonderful workforce of pilots and crew in the whole world. I have to appreciate all the efforts the pilots and crew of the country are putting, they are the backbone of civil aviation. They are the primary resource of civil aviation. We care for the welfare and well-being of the pilots also. So let us not jump into any conclusions at this stage and wait for the final report.”

What many commentators have missed is that once the fault was detected, there was an attempt to restore the fuel supply. One engine restarted, but the other did not.

Perhaps Eastern Eye readers can make up their own minds by reading the preliminary report in full as I have done: https://static01.

nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/3e6e5 72bb0cd57e7/8d66090a-full.pdf

Take off speed was normal with fuel supply to both engines, but “immediately thereafter, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec. The Engine N1 and N2 began to decrease from their take-off values as the fuel supply to the engines was cut off.”

Next followed the exchange between the two pilots.

Then it seems action was taken quickly to restore fuel supply. The language is technical, but one gets a sense the pilots were trying desperately to reverse the downwards path of the aircraft.

The report states: “As per the EAFR (Enhanced Airborne Flight Recorder) the Engine 1 fuel cutoff switch transitioned from CUTOFF to RUN at about 08:08:52 UTC (Coordinated Universal Time). The APU Inlet Door began opening at about 08:08:54 UTC, consistent with the APU Auto Start logic. Thereafter at 08:08:56 UTC the Engine 2 fuel cutoff switch also transitions from CUTOFF to RUN. When fuel control switches are moved from CUTOFF to RUN while the aircraft is inflight, each engines full authority dual engine control (FADEC) automatically manages a relight and thrust recovery sequence of ignition and fuel introduction. The EGT (exhaust gas temperature) was observed to be rising for both engines indicating relight. Engine 1’s core deceleration stopped, reversed and started to progress to recovery. Engine 2 was able to relight but could not arrest core speed deceleration and re-introduced fuel repeatedly to increase core speed acceleration and recovery. The EAFR recording stopped at 08:09:11 UTC. At about 08:09:05 UTC, one of the pilots transmitted ‘MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY’.”

Is it possible there was a technical fault after normal take off that caused the fuel supply switch to flip from RUN to CUTOFF without pilot intervention?

Maybe this is one of those mysteries that sometimes happens with air crashes that will never be solved. But to me a technical malfunction appears to be a more credible explanation than deliberate sabotage and suicide by one of the pilots.

More For You

Comment: Last summer’s riots could erupt again without sustained action on cohesion

FILE PHOTO: Riot police hold back protesters near a burning police vehicle in Southport, England

Getty Images

Comment: Last summer’s riots could erupt again without sustained action on cohesion

Could this long, hot summer see violence like last year’s riots erupt again? It surely could. That may depend on some trigger event – though the way in which the tragic murders of Southport were used to mobilise inchoate rage, targeting asylum seekers and Muslims, showed how tenuous such a link can be. There has already been unrest again in Ballymena this summer. Northern Ireland saw more sustained violence, yet fewer prosecutions than anywhere in England last summer.

"We must not wait for more riots to happen" says Kelly Fowler, director of Belong, who co-publish a new report, ‘The State of Us’, this week with British Future. The new research provides a sober and authoritative guide to the condition of cohesion in Britain. A cocktail of economic pessimism, declining trust in institutions and the febrile tinderbox of social media present major challenges. Trust in political institutions has rarely been lower – yet there is public frustration too with an angry politics which amplifies division.

Keep ReadingShow less
The real challenge isn’t having more parties, but governing a divided nation

Zarah Sultana and Jeremy Corbyn

Getty Images

The real challenge isn’t having more parties, but governing a divided nation

It is a truth universally acknowledged that voters are dissatisfied with the political choices on offer - so must they be in want of new parties too? A proliferation of start-ups showed how tricky political match-making can be. Zarah Sultana took Jeremy Corbyn by surprise by announcing they will co-lead a new left party. Two of Nigel Farage’s exes announced separate political initiatives to challenge Reform from its right, with the leader of London’s Conservatives lending her voice to Rupert Lowe’s revival of the politics of repatriation.

Corbyn and Sultana are from different generations. He had been an MP for a decade by the time she was born. For Sultana’s allies, this intergenerational element is a core case for the joint leadership. But the communications clash suggests friction ahead. After his allies could not persuade Sultana to retract her announcement, Corbyn welcomed her decision to leave Labour, saying ‘negotiations continue’ over the structure and leadership of a new party. It will seek to link MPs elected as pro-Gaza independents with other strands of the left outside Labour.

Keep ReadingShow less
Amol Rajan confronts loss along the Ganges

Amol Rajan at Prayagraj

Amol Rajan confronts loss along the Ganges

ONE reason I watched the BBC documentary Amol Rajan Goes to the Ganges with particular interest was because I have been wondering what to do with the ashes of my uncle, who died in August last year. His funeral, like that of his wife, was half Christian and half Hindu, as he had wished. But he left no instructions about his ashes.

Sooner or later, this is a question that every Hindu family in the UK will have to face, since it has been more than half a century since the first generation of Indian immigrants began arriving in this country. Amol admits he found it difficult to cope with the loss of his father, who died aged 76 three years ago. His ashes were scattered in the Thames.

Keep ReadingShow less
One year on, Starmer still has no story — but plenty of regrets

Sir Keir Starmer

Getty Images

One year on, Starmer still has no story — but plenty of regrets

Do not expect any parties in Downing Street to celebrate the government’s first birthday on Friday (4). After a rocky year, prime minister Sir Keir Starmer had more than a few regrets when giving interviews about his first year in office.

He explained that he chose the wrong chief of staff. That his opening economic narrative was too gloomy. That choosing the winter fuel allowance as a symbol of fiscal responsibility backfired. Starmer ‘deeply regretted’ the speech he gave to launch his immigration white paper, from which only the phrase ‘island of strangers’ cut through. Can any previous political leader have been quite so self-critical of their own record in real time?

Keep ReadingShow less
starmer-bangladesh-migration
Sir Keir Starmer
Getty Images

Comment: Can Starmer turn Windrush promises into policy?

Anniversaries can catalyse action. The government appointed the first Windrush Commissioner last week, shortly before Windrush Day, this year marking the 77th anniversary of the ship’s arrival in Britain.

The Windrush generation came to Britain believing what the law said – that they were British subjects, with equal rights in the mother country. But they were to discover a different reality – not just in the 1950s, but in this century too. It is five years since Wendy Williams proposed this external oversight in her review of the lessons of the Windrush scandal. The delay has damaged confidence in the compensation scheme. Williams’ proposal had been for a broader Migrants Commissioner role, since the change needed in Home Office culture went beyond the treatment of the Windrush generation itself.

Keep ReadingShow less