ON June 12, 2025, tragedy struck Air India flight 171 bound for London from Ahmedabad, sending shockwaves worldwide. It crashed less than a minute after taking off, killing all but one of those on board. Another 19 people on the ground also died, taking the toll to 260. A time-bound impartial and informative inquiry is a basic expectation. A year on, there are more questions than answers on what led to the deadliest crash in Air India’s history after the Kanishka bombing in 1985. The investigation continues to spark intense controversy both in India and abroad. Any such probe is complex, but a disturbing aspect has been the free run for insinuation and conjecture. Amid claims of corporate influence and political pressure, it has triggered a debate on the conduct of such inquiries.
The preliminary report, issued by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau a month after the incident, proved to be contentious. The brief statement, provided without a transcript or any indication of who was speaking, sparked intense speculation about the actions of the pilots. The purpose of an air crash investigation is to find out the exact cause, and also learn from it to improve passenger safety. In the case of AI171, the information revealed led to a backlash. Pilots’ groups, safety campaigners, and the bereaved relatives warned against premature narratives undermining the integrity of the investigative process. A more disciplined, professional outlook would have helped.
The final report may well reveal uncomfortable findings. It was the world’s first crash involving a 787 Dreamliner, a Boeing model that has been in service since 2011. For the manufacturer, the conclusions will determine its safety, quality and engineering decisions. A troubling question still remains. Is it time for a different approach when investigating air crashes?
