The preliminary crash report on Air India Flight AI171 has led to global airlines, including Etihad Airways and Singapore Airlines, initiating urgent inspections of the fuel control switches on their Boeing 787 Dreamliners.
Indian Aviation regulator, DGCA also followed suit by ordering all airline operators to carry out inspection of the fuel control switch for disengagement of lock no later than 21 July 2025. The order as per the FAA noting of December 2018 meant for 737s, 787s and other aircraft type.
Air India’s own messaging, however continued to insist there were no mechanical faults with the aircraft that crashed in Ahmedabad on 12 June, killing all 260 people on board.
The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) revealed that both engine fuel control switches had been moved to the 'CUTOFF' position seconds after take-off, leading to a total loss of engine thrust. The finding has sparked industry-wide concern over whether safeguards built into the aircraft's cockpit — designed to prevent accidental shut-off — may have failed or been bypassed.
Etihad Airways issued a safety directive on 12 July, calling on its pilots to “exercise caution” while handling the switches and any controls nearby. The airline ordered a comprehensive engineering check across its Boeing 787 fleet to verify that the locking mechanisms on the fuel switches were working as intended. If the switches can be toggled without lifting the lock — a fail-safe to prevent accidental operation — the Throttle Control Module (TCM) must be replaced immediately.
Singapore Airlines has also launched similar inspections, underscoring how seriously the industry is taking the preliminary AAIB findings. Both airlines are acting out of an abundance of caution, even as US authorities and Boeing maintain the switch design is safe.
Published: undefined
In contrast, Air India CEO Campbell Wilson told staff that the AAIB report found no issues with the aircraft’s mechanical condition, fuel quality, or maintenance history. He emphasised that all mandatory tasks had been completed, the take-off roll showed no abnormalities, and both pilots had cleared their breathalyser tests with no medical concerns.
Wilson also confirmed that the aircraft’s TCM — where the fuel switches are housed — had been replaced in 2019 and again in 2023, as per Boeing's maintenance planning document (MPD); but he also stressed that no defects with the switches were ever reported.
However, Air India admitted to the AAIB that it did not act on a 2018 FAA advisory recommending checks of the switch locking mechanisms, as the bulletin was “advisory and not mandatory”.
The 2018 Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) from the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had warned of instances where fuel switch locks were disengaged, potentially allowing unintentional fuel cut-off. Boeing later issued its own guidance. However, both entities continue to assert that the locking feature meets regulatory standards and does not require an airworthiness directive.
Even after the Air India crash, the FAA reaffirmed that the system works as designed, while Boeing said it would continue supporting the investigation and defer to the AAIB under ICAO protocols.
Published: undefined
Under pressure following the growing international scrutiny, the DGCA issued a formal directive to inspect fuel switches of their Boeing 737 and 787 across Indian operators by 21 June. DGCA order says several airlines internationally and domestic have started inspection of their fleet as per FAA's 2018 Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin.
The AAIB’s preliminary report has not assigned blame or issued recommendations, but it has reignited questions about the effectiveness of cockpit safety systems, the role of pilot awareness, and how non-binding safety advisories are treated by airlines.
Modern aircraft fuel switches are designed with multiple layers of protection to avoid accidental operation — features installed after earlier-generation aircraft experienced unintentional fuel shut-offs. That these safeguards may have been circumvented, either by design failure or human error, has placed the spotlight back on Boeing’s cockpit ergonomics and training protocols.
For now, while global carriers inspect their fleets and regulators weigh their next moves, the aviation industry finds itself walking a tightrope between maintaining public confidence and addressing a potential design vulnerability that although flagged for long had not been acted upon universally.
Published: undefined
Follow us on: Facebook, Twitter, Google News, Instagram
Join our official telegram channel (@nationalherald) and stay updated with the latest headlines
Published: undefined