Air India Crash: Simulation shows flight settings didn't cause accident, dual engine failure suspected: Report

A simulation of the Air India’s AI 171 flight has ruled out flight conditions alone causing the accident and has put the focus on dual engine failure, according to a report.

Last month, the Ahmedabad-London AI 171 crashed shortly after take-off in Ahmedabad. A total of 260 people, including 241 in the plane and 19 people on the ground, were killed in the accident.

Bloomberg has reported that a simulation by Air India’s pilots has shown during the investigation that final flight conditions, such as the landing gear deployed and the wing flaps retracted, did not alone lead to the crash and that dual engine failure is now suspected to be the cause.

The findings of the simulation along with the previous evidence of the aircraft deploying emergency-power turbine seconds before the crash has reinforced the focus on a technical failure as the cause of the accident, according to the report.

More from India

Air India Crash: Preliminary investigation report likely to be released by July 11, says report Families of Air India crash victims allege compensation coercion, airline denies

The purpose of the simulation was to reenact the flight of the AI 171.

Video from the time of the crash showed the aircraft failing to lift after take-off. Moments after take-off and just a few hundreds of feet in the air, the aircraft started to fall and eventually crashed within minutes into the BJ Medical College in the vicinity of the airport. Only one person in the plane, a passenger, survived.

The simulation was conducted separately from the formal investigation being conducted by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) of India, according to the report.

All available audio-visual evidence has so far suggested at technical failures of various kinds.

Impact Shorts

View All

India & China likely to resume direct flights within weeks: Report

Cargo plane's engine catches fire in Chennai

The footage from the time of crash has shown landing gear tilted forward. It suggests that the pilot had initiated the retraction sequence but that the retraction could not be completed because of some failure. This is backed by the fact that landing ger doors had not opened that suggests a loss of power or a hydraulic failure. It has also been learnt previously that an emergency power supply, called RAT, was activated shortly before the crash that further suggests the aircraft experienced engine failure or loss of power or some other system failure.