Legal Challenge Emerges Over Air India 171 Investigation as Technical Failures Under Scrutiny
Senior aviation attorney Mike Andrews, representing families of over 100 victims from the Air India 171 Boeing 787 Dreamliner crash, has challenged the preliminary investigation's focus on pilot error, demanding greater transparency in the probe of India's deadliest aviation disaster.
The catastrophic crash occurred eight months ago when the London-bound aircraft carrying 242 people plummeted 32 seconds after takeoff from Ahmedabad's Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Airport, marking the first fatal crash of a Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
Technical Defects Predate Crash
Andrews, whose firm Beasley Allen has filed Freedom of Information Act requests in the United States, highlighted critical technical concerns that Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration were aware of years before the tragedy.
"In 2018, Boeing and the FAA were aware of problems with these fuel switches," Andrews stated, referencing an FAA airworthiness bulletin that flagged potential inadvertent disengagement of locking mechanisms on Boeing fuel control switches across multiple 787 models.
The bulletin identified issues where switches "could inadvertently transition to cut off," indicating manufacturers were cognisant of systemic problems well before the Air India incident.
Investigation Methodology Questioned
The attorney, who previously represented Ethiopian Airlines crash victims in the Boeing 737 Max disasters, drew parallels between the cases, noting an "immediate rush to blame pilots instead of waiting for thorough investigation to determine technical problems."
Andrews criticised the preliminary report's presentation of decontextualised pilot communications, arguing such snippets appeared designed to assign blame rather than establish factual causation.
India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau conducted meetings with US National Transportation Safety Board officials in December, suggesting the investigation extends beyond simple pilot error scenarios.
Complex System Interactions
The legal team has identified potential malfunctions in the Thrust Control Malfunction Accommodation system, which determines aircraft ground or airborne status, and the Full Authority Digital Engine Control system managing engine power output.
"The computer system can read erroneous data or have a malfunction in the TCMA, which can make it appear as if fuel switches have transitioned when they have not," Andrews explained, highlighting the complexity of modern aviation systems.
Families Seek Transparency
The legal challenge reflects broader concerns about aviation safety oversight and manufacturer accountability in an era of increasingly sophisticated aircraft systems. Andrews emphasised the importance of comprehensive investigation over expedient conclusions.
"We need thorough, transparent investigation so families can have the answers they deserve," he stated, noting conflicting reports about the investigation's progress have complicated families' understanding of the process.
The case underscores ongoing debates about aviation safety protocols, manufacturer disclosure obligations, and the balance between technological advancement and operational reliability in commercial aviation.