Air India 787 Crash Preliminary Report Wrong
Air India 787 Crash Preliminary Report Wrong
The Air India Boeing 787 preliminary crash report starts off with the old familiar saw of pilot error. All the media’s putative experts chimed in with pilot error because they know even less.
The fact is the fuel cutoff switches cannot be switched off accidentally and require that they be pulled up, over a stop, and then down. So, unless someone wanted to commit suicide, those switches were not the cause of loss of engine power. They cannot be moved accidentally.
However, those switches must be cycled in the event of engine failure as part of the engine failure emergency checklist
What the Indian investigators are describing as the cause of the accident is in fact the crew’s last-ditch effort to restart the engines to regain thrust, further to the emergency checklist.
Neither pilot could understand why the engines were suddenly losing thrust and followed the checklist, but since they are dead and can tell no tales, they will be unfairly blamed.
The report noted two items of high importance.
The first is that the throttle control module was replaced twice in this aircraft. That means this airplane had three throttle control modules, and that suggests an endemic problem with that critical device. The second is a bulletin by the FAA to inspect the fuel control switches, as some were installed without the locking feature that prevents accidental disengagement. Air India didn’t conduct those inspections which would have taken minutes, because they were not denominated as “Mandatory” by the FAA.
SAIB’s are usually preceded by a Service Letter or Bulletin by the manufacturer but the report was silent about that.
“The FAA issued Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) No. NM-18-33 on December 17, 2018, regarding the potential disengagement of the fuel control switch locking feature. This SAIB was issued based on reports from operators of Model 737 airplanes that the fuel control switches were installed with the locking feature disengaged. The airworthiness concern was not considered an unsafe condition that would warrant an airworthiness directive (AD) by the FAA. The fuel control switch design, including the locking feature, is similar on various Boeing airplane models, including part number 4TL837-3D which is fitted in B787-8 aircraft VT-ANB. As per the information from Air India, the suggested inspections were not carried out, as the SAIB was advisory and not mandatory. The scrutiny of maintenance records revealed that the throttle control module was replaced on VT-ANB in 2019 and 2023. However, the reason for the replacement was not linked to the fuel control switch. There has been no defect reported pertaining to the fuel control switch since 2023 on VT-ANB.”
I remain convinced that the Reduced Thrust Takeoff System caused loss of power of both engines, and this flight deck crew was a victim like everyone else who died that day. Having said that, the history of throttle control modules being replaced twice and the fuel control switches not being inspected suggests a problem a lot deeper than what the report seems to say on the surface. It is incomprehensible that something as important as a locking feature on fuel control switches on both engines being inoperative is not a Mandatory inspection shows the FAA is still asleep at the switch. The locking feature prevents inadvertent activation of the switch!
This will happen again unless someone uses science and responsible accident investigation techniques like thinking like a pilot, to figure this out. I would start with the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis for the Reduced Takeoff Thrust System.
The Wolk Law Firm
Arthur Alan Wolk
July 12, 2025