Air India 171 – EXPLORING Switch Scenarios
The prelim report for Air India flight 171 has been released and all commentary is now focussed on the fuel control switches. In this article I want to explore all of the possible scenarios with regards to the switches and see if there is any way the Air India 171 crash was not pilot error.
The Report
A key part of the Air India 171 report details the pilots speaking to each other.
One pilot asks Why did you cutoff? or it could also have been Did you cut off?
The other pilot replies That they did not do so.
Not Direct Quotes
It’s important to note that we are not given direct quotes in the prelim report. The Air India 171 report says
In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff.
https://i2.res.24o.it/pdf2010/Editrice/ILSOLE24ORE/ILSOLE24ORE/Online/_Oggetti_Embedded/Documenti/2025/07/12/Preliminary%20Report%20VT.pdf
The other pilot responded that he did not do so.
Why Was This Pounced On?
Why have so many commentators pounced on this part of the report to hint that we could be looking at pilot suicide?
Flight Data Recorder
Because the report also says the “Enhanced Flight Data Recorder” shows
The aircraft achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 Knots IAS at about 08:08:42
https://i2.res.24o.it/pdf2010/Editrice/ILSOLE24ORE/ILSOLE24ORE/Online/_Oggetti_Embedded/Documenti/2025/07/12/Preliminary%20Report%20VT.pdf
UTC and immediately thereafter, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned
from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec
2+2 = ?
So we have one of the pilots implying the engine fuel control switches are in the “Cutoff” position and we have the flight data recorder also saying that the fuel control switches are in the cutoff position.
This sounds like a slam-dunk. The fuel control switches were definitely in the “Cutoff” position. Or were they?
Assumptions
Lets look at the two possible assumptions.
1.That the fuel control switches were physically in the “Cutoff” position and
2.That they were not physically in the “Cutoff” position but EICAS indicated that they were.
Is it possible to make an argument for both possibilities?
Physically in Cutoff
In this scenario, the pilot asking, did you cutoff?, has actually seen the physical switches and they were in the cutoff position.
Is there any scenario where the switches would/should be put in the cutoff position so early in the takeoff?
I’ve mentioned in a previous article that I think no.
I’m not an aviation expert but listening to commentary from experts I don’t think there is anything that could happen to the plane in this stage of flight that could be helped by turning off the fuel to both engines.
If the fuel switches were physically in the cutoff position, I think the only reasonable explanation, with the information we have, is that they were put there by one of the pilots.
Switch Issue 737
The report mentioned an issue with switches on a 737 where the fuel control switch did not have to be pulled out before it was switched.
If we assume for one moment that this was the case on this 787, is it possible that the switches could fall back to the cutoff position due to acceleration force?
Personally I don’t know but the commentators on YouTube, who I tend to trust, seem to think that this is next to impossible for even one switch. For two switches at the same time to do the same thing I think the chances are even lower.
And if the switches did somehow fall back on their own into the cutoff position. The pilots would have been alerted in all sorts of ways (cockpit warnings), with checking the fuel control switch position being the top of the memory checklist for dual engine failure. The report says the fuel control switches were in the off position for 10 seconds for one engine and 14 seconds for the other.
Summary
In normal circumstances, I can’t see any reason why either pilot would wait so long to correct a problem like this with the fuel control switches.
So bringing this together, I can’t envisage any circumstance where the actual switches physically being in the cutoff position can be seen as a good thing. And if the change of position occurred accidentally, I would imagine the problem would have been rectified almost immediately. And this is not what we are told happened in the Air India 171 prelim report. The switches took 10 seconds to be switched back.
Digitally Indicated As Shutoff
Let’s assume for one moment that the switches are reported in EICAS as being switched to cutoff but actually aren’t. What would have to happen for this situation to materialise?
Again, I’m not an aviation expert so take this with a pinch of salt.
I believe there would be redundancy in the switches. Each switch would send two separate signals to separate systems to confirm the actual position of the switch. For a switch to be recorded as off when it was actually on would need a failure in the switch and a failure in both of the separate systems monitoring the switch status. At best there would be a conflict recorded and highlighted to the pilots ie that two software systems were in conflict over the switch position. The chances of the switch and two software systems both failing to recognise a problem with the switch I think is probably close to impossible. And for two switches to have the same problem at close to the same time reduces the chances even more.
Is it possible that further up the line we have a system that has gone rogue and read a position that is “Cutoff” when it is actually “Run”. I have no idea but the chances seems extremely small.
The Two Scenarios
Looking at both scenarios, the chances of either of them happening by accident seems to be close to impossible, which leaves us with the reason so many have pounced on pilot suicide as the answer. The situation is easily explainable if one of the pilots has deliberately put the fuel control switches to cutoff.
Suicide Hypothesis
If for a moment we entertain the possibility that Air India 171 was brought down deliberately by one of the pilots, which way do I think is the most likely?
No flying pilot has put the switches to Cutoff, flying pilot is concentrating on flying the plane and trusted the non flying pilot to do his best to save the plane.
Some Baseless Speculation
Is it possible that there is some inbuilt software in the plane that detected a condition it didn’t like and took it’s own action eg shut the fuel supply valves. And is it possible that this could be recorded by the flight data recorders as the switches being set to cutoff rather than the fuel control valves being set to cutoff?
Perhaps.
The Boeing 737 Max MCAS situation seems to have been something like this. If I read it correctly.
Boeing admitted MCAS played a role in both accidents, when it acted on false data from a single angle of attack (AoA) sensor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuvering_Characteristics_Augmentation_System
In the 737 Max case, according to Wikipedia, MCAS took data from a single sensor. Perhaps there is less redundancy than we would hope.
The Air India 171 prelim report makes no mention of fuel valve status in the report, only switch status. This could be something, it could be nothing.
RAT
In isolation, it seems almost unbelievable that the plane would make an unordered action like switching off the fuel control valves.
But if the RAT was automatically deployed by the systems on the plane, then the “plane acting on it’s own” theory goes from almost inconceivable to possible. In my opinion.
For the RAT to deploy automatically, before the fuel control switches were logged as in the cutoff position, it suggest’s that the systems on the plane are acting on some input and without pilot intervention.
It’s a Shame
Given how big a thing the RAT deployment could be, it’s a shame the prelim report does not see fit to give the exact time of it’s deployment and also sees fit not to say how the RAT was deployed (ie automatically or manually).
Additionally
And if indeed we are talking about the plane doing something autonomously, this could explain the delay in the fuel control switches going from Cutoff and back to Run. If the switches were already in Run, there would have been nothing the crew could have done to change their status to run.
But as I said, this is completely baseless speculation. The fact is the 787 has been operating for years with no safety issues, as far as I am aware.
My Personal Thoughts
My personal thoughts is we have to go with the most likely scenario with the facts that we have, and at the moment I think it points to the pilot or pilots, unfortunately.
Having said that, I do find it strange that the plane flew into the ground so gradually with no sudden movements. To me this indicates no struggle in the cockpit and no malicious intent. But if there were a saboteur pilot, they could have been so confident that the plane would crash they didn’t need to do anything more. And the early RAT deployment and fuel cut off switch movements are simply a ruse to make it look like an accident.
Air India 171 Switch Scenarios – Summary
I’m sure with more information things will become much clearer and all the speculation can end. Unfortunately, the prelim report has left some of the most obvious and biggest questions unanswered.
If you want to get more StrikeEngine updates on Air India 171, subscribe to the StrikeEngine newsletter and YouTube channel.
