There have been new developments in the investigation of the Air India crash that occurred in June.
In that tragic incident, Air India Flight 171 was en route from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick when it collided with a building shortly after take-off. The crash resulted in the deaths of 241 passengers aboard the aircraft, along with 19 fatalities on the ground.
The sole survivor, Viswashkumar Ramesh from the UK, has recounted his ordeal, detailing how he managed to escape the debris.
The investigation into the crash commenced immediately, with a preliminary report issued by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) a month after the event, stirring controversy.
According to the report, cockpit switches controlling the fuel were allegedly shifted to the ‘CUTOFF’ position. The BBC noted that this action would have caused a fuel cut-off, leading to thruster power loss.
The switches were later moved back, and cockpit audio captures one pilot questioning the other about the ‘cut off’, to which the reply was that it hadn’t been done.
This has led to speculation about the pilots, Captain Sumeet Sabharwal and First Officer Clive Kunder. Former National Transportation Safety Board chairman, Robert Sumwalt, suggested that the report indicated no fault with the airplane or its engines.
On November 7, Sumeet’s father, Pushkar Raj Sabharwal, sought an inquiry by aviation experts from India’s Supreme Court, which was addressed on November 10.
He also advocated for an independent probe into the Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
Mr. Sabharwal criticized the AAIB, claiming that two officials from the bureau had implied his son had cut the fuel post-takeoff, a claim the government has refuted, describing the investigation as ‘thorough’ and ‘clean’.
Justices Surya Kant and Joymala Bagchi assured Mr. Sabharwal that his son was not at fault for the crash. Kant stated: “It’s extremely unfortunate, this crash, but you should not carry this burden that your son is being blamed.
“Nobody can blame him for anything.”
Justice Bagchi also reassured the father, emphasizing that the report did not accuse his son, adding: “One pilot asked whether the fuel was cut off by the other, the other said no.
“There’s no suggestion of fault in that report.”
The court criticized reports suggesting pilot error as ‘nasty reporting’, adding: “We are not bothered by foreign reports. Your remedy should then be before a foreign court. That is nasty reporting.
“No one in India believes it was the pilot’s fault.”