Just two weeks after an Air India Boeing 787 crashed tragically near Ahmedabad, India, killing 229 passengers, all 12 crew members, and 19 people on the ground, aviation safety experts are zeroing in on two critical areas: determining the cause of the first fatal 787 accident and understanding the perceived lack of transparency from investigators.
The aircraft, registered VT-ANB, went down shortly after takeoff on June 12, 2025. The flight, AI171, was bound for London Gatwick Airport from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport. Despite the passage of time and international assistance, India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), leading the probe under International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards, has publicly released minimal technical details.
Silence Surrounds the Investigation
While the AAIB launched its investigation immediately, and technical advisors from leading international bodies like the U.S. NTSB, the UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch, Boeing, and GE Aerospace were quickly on site, a striking silence has surrounded the public release of factual findings. This is despite indications, such as accident scene cleanup efforts, that the critical on-site phase of the investigation is progressing.
Former NTSB investigator Greg Feith voiced concerns to Aviation Week, stating, “I am concerned right now that the investigative process is not moving forward at the pace it should be.” He emphasized that with the level of subject matter expertise present, significant work should be accomplished quickly, and factual information should be released during the on-site phase, even if initial findings aren’t disclosed.
Flight Recorder Data Offers Hope
A significant step forward was confirmed on June 26. The AAIB announced that the aircraft’s two combined cockpit voice and digital flight data recorder units had been moved from the accident site to a New Delhi lab on June 24. While this transfer occurred more than a week after their recovery (June 13 and June 16), data extraction from one of the devices reportedly began on June 25.
This development offers the most immediate hope for the release of pertinent details regarding the accident sequence, potentially to key stakeholders or the public. ICAO guidance suggests an interim report within 30 days of a major accident, but initial factual updates often surface much sooner, particularly when findings could have wider safety implications.
What Little We Know About Flight AI171
Verified airport surveillance video provides some clues about the aircraft’s final moments. Departing from Runway 23 at 1:39 p.m. local time in clear, hot, and humid weather, the 787’s flightpath suggests it lacked sufficient power to maintain altitude.
The aircraft climbed for approximately 14 seconds.
It then leveled off.
Immediately descended into a dense residential area just over 1 nautical mile from the airport.
The entire flight lasted only about 30 seconds.
Video analysis shows only minor signs of potential flight control input – a slight side-to-side roll and increasing angle of attack near the end of the descent. The landing gear remained extended. While the video hints at potential power issues, investigators have not publicly validated it or commented on its contents. Speculation also exists based on witness audio potentially capturing the sound of a ram air turbine (RAT) deployment, an emergency power generator, though this remains unconfirmed by officials.
Initial details released soon after the crash by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), also part of India’s Ministry of Civil Aviation (MOCA), confirmed a Mayday call reporting a lack of thrust, though this specific detail has not been officially confirmed by the AAIB.
Parallel Regulatory Actions
In parallel with the crash investigation’s quiet progression, the DGCA has taken highly publicized safety-focused actions:
New 787 Checklist: Ordered Air India to implement a mandatory predeparture checklist for its 33 Boeing 787s, focusing on fuel systems, cabin air compressors, electronic engine control systems, engine-driven actuators, hydraulic systems, and takeoff parameters review. This was prompted by a review of “repetitive snags” in the 15 days before the accident, although no direct link to the crash cause was made. Initial checks under this protocol reportedly found no technical issues on other Air India 787s.
Executive Removals: Ordered the removal of three Air India scheduling executives over repeated flight and duty time rule violations.
- Increased Surveillance: Enhanced system-wide oversight, documenting violations found during inspections, from maintenance issues to outdated simulator software.
- aviationweek.com
These actions by the DGCA appear aimed at conveying competence and proactivity following a disaster that deeply impacted the public and global aviation community.
The Challenge of Transparency
The contrast between the public DGCA actions and the AAIB’s minimal communication highlights a potential struggle to balance investigative integrity with increasing calls for transparency, especially given the potentially far-reaching implications of the accident. India’s accident investigators have relatively less experience leading major air transport crash probes compared to their counterparts in the U.S. or Europe. This lack of extensive experience may contribute to challenges in quickly grasping the demands of managing a high-profile investigation and proactively releasing factual information.
As Greg Feith noted, the current void of information fuels “rampant speculation” that can unfairly target the aircraft, engines, or flight crew. Obtaining and releasing initial factual data from the flight recorders is now seen as the most crucial step to providing clarity and potentially guiding the complex investigation forward.
