🧨 The mystery lives on. But now we have facts.

Good morning! India’s AAIB released its 15-page preliminary report on the tragic Air India 787 Dreamliner crash in Ahmedabad, shortly after midnight today. (657 words. Read Time: 2 mins)

✈️ Crash summary

• Fuel switches on both engines moved from “RUN” to “CUTOFF” 3 seconds after liftoff, starving the engines of fuel.
  
  

• Pilots turned them back on after 10 seconds—but it was too late. The aircraft couldn’t climb and crashed into a medical hostel.
  
  

🗣️ Cockpit confusion

• Cockpit voice reorder (CVR) audio captured one pilot asking, “Why did you cut off the fuel?”
  
  

• The other pilot denied it.
  
  

• The switches require manual lifting of an interlock latch, making accidental movement unlikely.
  
  

🔍 The big question: Why did the switches move?

This is now the heart of the investigation. These switches aren’t easy to move by mistake. So what happened?

🔧 Theory 1: Design or mechanical flaw

• On December 17, 2018, the FAA issued a Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) after reports that fuel control switch locks on some 737s were disengaged.
  
  

• The 787 was also covered in the advisory.
  
  

• But: It was non-mandatory. No Airworthiness Directive (AD) was issued.
  
  

• The AAIB confirms: Air India didn’t inspect the locking mechanisms on this aircraft.
  
  

If the final report pins the root cause on this issue, accountability may shift from crew error to design flaw.

🚨 Four tough questions arise:

1. Why didn’t Air India act on the SAIB in keeping with a safety first philosophy?
   
   

2. Why didn’t the FAA issue a mandatory directive?
   
   

3. Should Boeing have redesigned the switch entirely?
   
   

4. Why has the AAIB refrained from recommending any action to Boeing or GE?
   
   

💬 “We shouldn't have to expect pilots to compensate for flawed designs.” — Capt. Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger

🧍 Theory 2: Pilot error

✅ Why it’s considered:

• Rare human lapses do occur.
  
  

• Possible “muscle memory” from past aircraft or simulators.
  

❌ Why it’s challenged:

• Fuel switches need 4-step motion to activate.
  
  

• Both engines shut down within 1 second of each other—suggesting improbability of simultaneous pilot error.
  

➡️ Deeper CVR mic analysis could offer clarity.

🕳️ Theory 3: Deliberate action

✅ Why it’s considered:

• The switches were manually turned off.
  
  

• Past cases of pilot suicide exist (Examples: here, here and here)
  

❌ Why it’s challenged:

• Pilots sounded perplexed, attempted recovery.
  
  

• No cockpit struggle or nosedive.
  
  

• Impact angle was nose-up—not consistent with deliberate crash patterns.
  

➡️ Pilot psychology and motive still need probing.

💻 Theory 4: Software or electrical fault

A software malfunction or control system failure remains a remote but real possibility.

➡️ Investigators will now review sensor data, full authority digital engine control (FADEC) behaviour, and cockpit logic systems.

⚙️ What’s next

The hard part begins. Investigators will:

• Reconstruct pilot state of mind

• Deep analysis of cockpit voice from all microphones

• Examine switch design, tolerances, interlock integrity

• Study the FAA’s SAIB logic, Boeing’s response and Air India compliance with advisories

• Scrutinize relevant subsystems

• Rule out software or systemic failure or other possibilities
  

🛡️ The goal: Find the root cause. Prevent a repeat.