‘Passengers should know that air travel is one of the safest methods of transport and travel’. Photo Credit: Getty Image/ISTOCKPhoto
On June 12, 2025, Air India flight AI171’s deadly accident in Ahmedabad has opened floods for TRP-SEEKING media channels to create fear among air passengers. ‘Experts’ on YouTube channels are going to overboard with principles about what causes the accident, which are being wrapped by the audience. The media is reporting incidents even after a few days of the accident that includes Boeing 787 Dreamliner, such as flights of various airlines return to airports for various reasons, adding general anxiety.
AI171’s digital flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder (DFDR and CVR) have been retained by debris. The National Transport Safety Board of the United States (NTSB) and the United Kingdom’s Air Accident Investigation Branch is a part of the investigation and we should soon wait for accurate data. Boeing has a huge stake in the case and flood rumors of WhatsApp groups are something that the company needs to rapidly address the credibility of Dreamliner.
Some clues
The only survivor in the flight mentioned some channels that he had heard loudly a few seconds after the lights on the lift of and boards. The deployment of rat or Ram air turbine on the aircraft, which has been exposed to some YouTube channel post based on flight amateur video footage, has started discussing double engine failure due to power failure on the aircraft.
As mentioned earlier, the events incorporating other international airlines flying Boeing 787s have become a weapon for many people to condemn the aircraft. Fortunately, for us, waiting for the DFDR and CVR data to be released to the public – which will be a few years in India, which will be due to bureaucracy in removing any adverse signal against government agencies – CCTV footage issued by the airport operator (Ahmedabad) – and widely distributed on YouTube – can something like this happen. The statement issued by the authorities stated that the aircraft took the entire length of the runway to take off, there is another useful item to use to analyze the accident.
The length of runway 23 in Ahmedabad is 3,505 meters (11,499 ft) long. This length is based on the exterior temperature, which is 15 ° C on the day of the accident, the temperature reported was 37 ° C (the warm runway surface can exceed 40 ° C on a hot day) and the reported pressure was 1000 HPA. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) determines improvements for temperature doc.9157, and in this case the correct length will be only 9,068 feet (2,764m) of the runway. The performance of the engine is based on temperature and atmospheric pressure. When the aircraft’s flight management is recorded data in the computer, it will insist on the crew to give the right speed and emphasis. All take-off weights are based on losing an engine on an aircraft and climbing safely, which cleans all obstacles in their tech-off passage. As soon as an aircraft closes and the landing gear has to be withdrawn before reaching 35 feet, and the cockpit is indicated by an increase in the ultimate flight performance. In this case, the landing gear was not withdrawn and made a tremendous drag. Even with a loss of emphasis in an engine, the climbing shield will be severely affected.
In CCTV footage released by the airport operator, the take off acceleration appears normal in the first 18 seconds of the video. As the nose is raised for take off, one can see the nose swinging to the right, indicating the engine failure. If an officer’s statement, that the aircraft goes correctly at the end of the runway, the aircraft’s swing can be corrected to the right, it indicates the engine failure. Only DFDR can confirm whether it was a normal engine failure or due to an ingestion of a bird hit or debris. Due to these possibilities, living travelers can mention mention. The video frame shows the aircraft inside the dust cloud. Did it pick up the debris beyond the end of the runway? The Ads-B data indicates almost a lift at the end of the runway. One can see the exhaust from a left engine, which causes a cloud of dust for another pairs of seconds before stopping. The second engine may fail due to the ingestion or bird ingestion of the debris – the video clearly shows birds flying in the surrounding area. An officer’s statement that no bird was found on the runway is due to the fact that the aircraft may have swallowed birds beyond the runway in the overran area. The subsequent frames show the aircraft slowly drowning due to a stall and affect the building before exploding in flames.
Uniform event
On September 29, 1986, there was a similar phenomenon to fly from IC571, an Indian Airlines Airbus A300 aircraft with 185 passengers and 11 crew on a flight from Chennai to Mumbai. A report on the accident stated: ‘Copilot rotated the aircraft and when the aircraft received a 5 ° to 8 ° nose -up attitude, a loud noise was heard from the right after severe vibration. The commander took control of Kopilot at this stage and initiated action to cancel the takeoff. Reverse thrust and wheel brakes were installed, but the aircraft could not be stopped on the runway and rolled on the cacus ground. There was no fire but the aircraft was damaged beyond repair. All 196 people were evacuated; 14 of them were slightly injured. Possible cause: The commander was rotated for a lift-off after rejecting the take-off after making incorrect decisions, after a sharp sound and severe vibration from the correct engine due to the bird hit. ,
Equalities as flight safety studies are interesting. The take-off security speed is where an engine failure decides to continue or reject and stop a pilot within the end of the runway. Indian airlines pilots were crucified to take their own decisions, which saved everyone’s life on the board as the decision to reject was beyond the rotation and the take-off security pace.
In this case, the captain of AI 171, reaching almost the end of the runway before lifting. He is lost on the ground with his crew, passengers and many others. It is a choice of Hobson where a pilot has to decide in a partition second.
The long take off could have been due to run overloading. This writer has been told that many passengers have more than seven kg of hand. If someone buys duty for free, adds weight of what he buys and takes it with them on the board, it will result in additional weight – at least 10 kg of a passenger. When you add two tons of extra weight in a very hot day, it can explain the take-off run of the aircraft for a very long time.
Why did the pilots not recognize slow acceleration? Why did they forget to close the landing gear? Life was rejected to save the last 2,000 feet runway marking of the last 2,000 feet recognized by the pilots. DFDR and CVR should be answered.
Reconstruct the trust
Meanwhile, passengers should know that air travel is one of the safest methods of transportation and travel and Boeing 787 Dreamliner has set an amazing safety record for 14 years, something that is something that can trust. Boeing coined his hands with Boeing 737max Fiasco and Federal Aviation Administration and NTSB inactive. We hope they all get up on the occasion and rebuild the trust.
Captain A (Mohan) Ranganathan is a former airline instructor pilot and aviation safety advisor. He is also a former member of Civil Aviation Safety Advisory Council (CASAC), India
Published – June 18, 2025 12:16 AM IST