Context

• The crash of Air India flight AI171 on June 12, 2025, in Ahmedabad has sent shockwaves across the aviation community and the general public.
• While investigators await definitive data from flight recorders, speculative media coverage and widespread misinformation have begun shaping public perception, leading to heightened fear and mistrust.
• Amid these developments, it is important to analyse the circumstances surrounding the crash, explore plausible technical causes based on available data, draw parallels to a historical incident, highlighting media responses, and transparency and patience as investigations unfold.

The Rise of Misinformation in the Wake of Tragedy

• In the immediate aftermath of the AI171 crash, mainstream and social media platforms were flooded with conjecture.
• Self-proclaimed experts on YouTube and fear-mongering television segments amplified public anxiety.
• Incidents involving other Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft were also sensationally reported, despite lacking any direct connection to AI171’s crash.
• These reactions, aimed more at capturing viewer attention than delivering facts, risk distorting public understanding of air safety.
• Amid this climate of speculation, it is crucial to await findings from official sources.
• The recovery of the Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR) and the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) provides the foundation for an authoritative analysis.
• Furthermore, the involvement of respected international bodies such as the United States’ National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the United Kingdom’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) assures a level of impartiality and technical rigor.

Plausible Technical Causes Based on Available Data

• Technical Clues
  • One of the most compelling eyewitness accounts comes from the sole survivor, who reported a loud thud shortly after take-off, accompanied by flickering lights.
  • Supplementary evidence from amateur footage and CCTV recordings shows that the aircraft used the full length of the runway before lifting off.
  • These elements suggest an abnormality in take-off performance, potentially linked to engine malfunction or external interference.
  • Several technical details support this hypothesis. Ahmedabad’s Runway 23 is 3,505 meters long, sufficient under standard temperature conditions.
• Early Indicators from the Crash
  • The temperature on the day of the crash was 37°C, reducing effective runway length significantly due to decreased air density and engine performance, a factor explicitly addressed in ICAO’s Doc. 9157.
  • This reduction to an effective 2,764 meters may have compromised take-off performance, especially if the aircraft was overloaded, as suspected.
  • The landing gear was reportedly not retracted post lift-off, increasing aerodynamic drag.
  • Furthermore, visual cues from the video suggest a swing to the right during rotation, a potential sign of left engine failure.
  • A dust cloud visible behind the aircraft, followed by the cessation of exhaust emission from the left engine, supports the theory of debris or bird ingestion causing sequential engine failure.
  • The presence of birds in the vicinity and possible ingestion beyond the runway, where no remains could be recovered, are consistent with this line of reasoning.
• The Weight Factor and Procedural Concerns
  • Another important angle is the aircraft’s potential overloading.
  • While official data is yet to confirm this, reports suggest passengers were carrying excess cabin baggage, which, combined with duty-free purchases, may have added over two tonnes of unaccounted weight.
  • On a hot day with limited runway and degraded engine performance, this excess could delay acceleration, elongate the take-off roll, and reduce the margin for error in the event of engine failure.
  • Moreover, questions remain regarding cockpit response. Why was slow acceleration not detected in time to abort take-off?
  • Why was the landing gear not retracted after liftoff, increasing drag and compromising climb rate?
  • The answers lie in the forthcoming DFDR and CVR analyses, which will illuminate whether cockpit workload, technical malfunctions, or decision-making breakdowns contributed to the crash.

Historical Parallels: Learning from Past Incidents

• The 1986 crash of Indian Airlines flight IC571 bears similarities worth noting.
• That incident involved a bird strike and the subsequent rejection of take-off after rotation, a manoeuvre typically discouraged but ultimately life-saving in that instance.
• While the pilots faced criticism, the action preserved all lives on board, highlighting the complex, high-stakes decisions pilots must make under extreme pressure.
• AI171’s captain faced an equally unforgiving scenario. Nearing the runway’s end at lift-off and possibly dealing with partial thrust loss, he had to make a critical decision with limited options.
• Unlike IC571, the situation did not allow room for an effective recovery, underscoring the limitations even experienced pilots face when multiple variables, heat, weight, engine issues, and time, converge.

Media Responsibility and Public Trust

• The role of the media in shaping narratives around air disasters is critical. In the case of AI171, many outlets abandoned journalistic caution in favour of sensationalism.
• Not only does this erode public trust, but it also undermines confidence in one of the safest modes of transport.
• Air travel, including on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, has a stellar safety record.
• The aircraft has served reliably for over a decade, and while Boeing has been under scrutiny for past failures, notably with the 737 MAX, the Dreamliner’s performance has remained commendable.
• The aviation community, regulators, and manufacturers now face a dual responsibility: to transparently investigate and report on the AI171 tragedy and to actively counteract misinformation that can destabilise public confidence.

The Way Forward: Navigating Tragedy with Patience and Precision

• As speculation swirls, the need for accurate, data-driven analysis becomes paramount.
• While the full picture will only emerge after detailed examination of flight data, early indicators, engine failure, possible overloading, heat-induced performance degradation, and delayed gear retraction, suggest a chain of failures rather than a single catastrophic event.
• In the meantime, stakeholders must focus on rebuilding trust.

Conclusion

• The crash of Air India flight AI171 is a sobering reminder of the complex interplay between human decisions, mechanical systems, and environmental variables in aviation.
• The Boeing 787 remains a highly safe aircraft, and air travel continues to be far safer than most other forms of transportation.
• This tragedy, while devastating, should prompt reflection, not panic, and ultimately lead to a stronger, safer aviation ecosystem.