AI171 Crash Mystery: Pilot's Father Demands Supreme Court Probe Amid Cover-Up Claims

The father of the pilot who died in the AI171 crash has approached the Supreme Court demanding a fair investigation. He claims the current probe by aviation authorities is biased and technically deficient. The petition alleges critical evidence about systemic electrical failures was ignored. It seeks an independent committee headed by a retired judge to uncover the truth.

Key Points: AI171 Crash Victim's Father Seeks Supreme Court Monitored Probe

  • Father alleges current DGCA investigation ignores critical evidence and systemic failures
  • Petition claims RAT deployment occurred before any pilot manual input
  • Investigation failed to examine Boeing 787's Common Core System design flaws
  • Legal plea seeks retired Supreme Court judge-led independent inquiry committee
3 min read

AI171 crash: Pilot's father approaches Supreme Court demanding independent and fair probe

91-year-old father of deceased pilot approaches Supreme Court demanding independent investigation into Air India Dreamliner crash that killed 241 people in Ahmedabad.

"The hasty and unfounded attribution of the crash to pilot error, without corroborative evidence or comprehensive technical analysis, renders the investigation arbitrary - Petition to Supreme Court"

New Delhi, October 16

Father of late Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, who was the Pilot-in-Command of the Air India pilot in a June crash in Ahmedabad that killed 241 people, has approached the Supreme Court seeking a retired judge-monitored fair, transparent, and technically sound probe into the crash of Air India Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner aircraft.

Pushkaraj Sabharwal, aged 91, alongside the Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP), filed a petition urging the court to constitute a judicially monitored inquiry committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge and comprising independent aviation experts.

The plea said the probe presently being undertaken by the Union Ministry of Civil Aviation and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), and the preliminary report dated June 15 submitted pursuant to that investigation, are "defective and suffer from serious infirmities and perversities".

It sought directions that all prior investigations conducted by the DGCA into the accident, including the preliminary report dated July 12, be treated as closed and all relevant materials, data, and records be transferred to the judicially monitored committee or court of inquiry.

"Respondents have conducted a perfunctory, biased, and technically deficient investigation into the crash of Air India Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner (VT-ANB), ignoring critical inconsistencies, material evidence, and plausible systemic causes, thereby undermining the credibility of the inquiry. The hasty and unfounded attribution of the crash to pilot error, without corroborative evidence or comprehensive technical analysis, renders the investigation arbitrary, perverse, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India," the plea stated.

It said that the preliminary report suffers from "serious technical defects and omissions" which render its conclusions unreliable.

It fails to analyse the significance of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) deployment, neglects to investigate potential failure of Boeing's Common Core System (CCS), and offers no adequate explanation for the simultaneous loss of multiple redundant safety and data systems--factors indicative of a systemic electrical collapse rather than human error, it added.

The petition further said that the report's conclusion attributing causation to pilot error is inherently implausible and contrary to recorded data, as the RAT deployment occurred before any manual pilot input.

"The failure to correlate crew control inputs with RAT extension demonstrates non-application of mind and suppression of material facts, thereby violating the mandate of fair, rational, and evidence-based investigation guaranteed under Article 14," it further stated.

The investigation has failed to examine or rule out design-level or software integration failures within the Boeing 787's CCS, despite expert warnings regarding cascading and common-mode failures, said the plea.

It further added, "The omission to conduct independent software forensic analysis or fault-injection testing vitiates the integrity of the findings and defeats the purpose of an independent technical inquiry envisaged under Annexe 13 of the Chicago Convention."

- ANI

Share this article:

Reader Comments

R
Rohit P
As someone working in aviation, I can say the technical points raised about RAT deployment and CCS failures are critical. Blaming pilots without proper technical analysis is unfair and dangerous for future safety.
D
David E
The father's courage at 91 is inspiring. When 241 lives are lost, we deserve answers based on evidence, not convenient conclusions. The Supreme Court should definitely intervene here.
A
Ananya R
Boeing has had multiple issues with their aircraft worldwide. Why are we quick to blame our pilots? We need an independent investigation that looks at all possibilities, including manufacturing defects.
S
Sarah B
While I support transparency, we should also trust our institutions. DGCA has experienced professionals. Maybe the father's grief is clouding judgment? Let's wait for the court's decision.
V
Vikram M
This case shows why we need stronger aviation safety regulations in India. The technical details mentioned about software forensic analysis are crucial. Jai Hind! 🇮🇳
K
Kavya N
My cousin was on that flight. We need the truth, not cover-ups. The families deserve closure and assurance that such tragedies won't happen again due to negligence.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50