‘Advisory, not mandatory’: Air India responds to FAA bulletin on fuel switch, says all directives complied with
In a revelation that has sent shockwaves through aviation circles, India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) has released its preliminary findings on the crash of Air India Flight AI171, which tragically claimed 260 lives last month. Among the most startling disclosures in the 15-page report is that the fuel control switches, critical components that regulate engine power—were found to have moved from the “RUN” to the “CUTOFF” position moments before the aircraft went down.
The incident occurred shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad, with the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner en route to London. The aircraft had reached its top recorded speed when, according to flight data, Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel switches transitioned to CUTOFF sequentially, within one second of each other. This effectively cut off fuel supply to the engines in mid-air. The switches then reverted to RUN, and the engines appeared to respond, gathering thrust. But the recovery was short-lived.
A chilling distress call, “MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY” was transmitted. Then, silence.
The FAA bulletin that raised early flags
The AAIB report references a 2018 Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) issued by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which flagged the “potential disengagement of the fuel control switch locking feature” on certain Boeing aircraft. While the SAIB was not designated as an Airworthiness Directive, which would have made compliance mandatory, it nonetheless highlighted the possibility of inadvertent switch movement during flight, a scenario that now appears eerily prescient.
The FAA had based its SAIB on operator reports from Boeing 737 models, where some fuel switches were installed with disengaged locking mechanisms. However, since the issue did not meet the FAA’s threshold for a mandatory safety directive, airlines were left to act—or not—at their discretion.
Advisory, Not Mandatory: The grey zone
Air India informed investigators that while it was in full compliance with all mandatory airworthiness directives and service bulletins for the aircraft, it had not conducted inspections suggested in the 2018 SAIB. It said the bulletin was “advisory and not mandatory.”
Maintenance records further revealed that the aircraft’s throttle control module had been replaced in both 2019 and 2023, yet no known procedural lapses or regulatory violations occurred during those changes. In short, no corners were cut, no rules were broken, just a safety recommendation, sitting in the grey zone of aviation protocol, unheeded by the industry at large.
The unanswered question in the cockpit
Perhaps the most haunting line in the AAIB’s report is not found in the technical data, but in the cockpit conversation captured before impact. One pilot is heard asking the other: “Why did you cut off fuel?” The reply: “I didn’t.”
The preliminary report does not speculate on whether the fuel cutoff was intentional, accidental, or triggered by a system malfunction. It offers no conclusion or blame, but paints a sobering picture: two pilots fighting to regain control as their engines lost power, not to mechanical failure or external attack, but to something as deceptively simple as a switch flip.
Boeing and Air India respond
Boeing, in a statement, said it is fully supporting the investigation and remains in close contact with its customer. “Our thoughts remain with the families and loved ones affected by this tragedy,” the company stated.
Air India, for its part, reiterated that it is cooperating fully with the AAIB and all other relevant authorities, adding that it is working with regulators to enhance procedural safety where necessary.
A tragedy in the gaps
The crash of AI171 stands as a grim reminder that in aviation, safety often lies not just in what is required but in what is recommended. When lives hang in the balance at 30,000 feet, even an advisory can mean the difference between flight and free fall.
For now, the investigation continues. But one truth is already clear: a switch meant to power engines may have instead powered tragedy.
News