When Systems Fail, Who Gets Blamed? Unpacking the Ahmedabad Air Crash Narrative

 A Crash, A Captain, and A Convenient Story

Ahmedabad Air Crash, AI171, BJ Medical College, Ahmedabad

On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight AI171 crashed into Ahmedabad’s B.J. Medical College seconds after takeoff. Within 32 seconds, 260 lives were lost — including the pilots. But what followed wasn’t just investigation. It was a narrative ready to deploy, long before all the facts were known.

Boeing 787’s cockpit voice recorder (CVR) was still in transit. No psychological reports had been filed. The fuel control switches were confirmed to be in “CUTOFF” mode — but the why was still unanswered.

Yet, by July 17 — just five days after the AAIB’s preliminary report — the Wall Street Journal had framed the pilot, Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, as a likely suicide case. The source? Anonymous officials. The evidence? A two-line CVR exchange without names, timestamps, or verification.

This wasn’t forensic journalism. It was narrative control.

Watch the Educational Video

The Pilot Who Wasn’t Heard

Captain Sabharwal had logged over 15,000 flight hours — 8,600 of those on Boeing 787s. He was senior, stable, and by all accounts, calm under pressure. The AAIB transcript even reflected composure — not panic. Not resignation.

So why did global media so quickly jump to the suicide theory? Why were his credentials ignored, his voice unnamed, and his family unconsulted?

Because framing a dead pilot is easy. Convenient. Uncontested. But that doesn’t make it true.

A Known Flaw, A Missing Theory

Well before the crash, Boeing had been warned about fuel switch vulnerabilities in the 787. These switches were:

·         Poorly labeled,

·         Placed near other active toggles,

·         And highly prone to accidental activation during high-vibration takeoff.

In 2019, ANA faced a similar incident — an air-ground signal error triggered a landing mode mid-climb. The system cut engine power on its own.

Yet the AAIB ignored this clear precedent. They didn’t mention it. Boeing didn’t clarify it. Media didn’t question it.

It was technical amnesia — serving the silence.

The Investigator or the Accused?

Within days of the crash, Boeing executives were in India. Their top leadership met Indian officials before the black boxes were even opened. Was this normal assistance — or preemptive narrative shaping?

Globally, independent agencies like those in France or Brazil delay involving aircraft makers until after basic local analysis. India, however, gave Boeing early access, risking objectivity.

Who benefits from a softened storyline?
Who loses if the truth points to systems, not Sabharwal?

A Question Bharat Must Ask

If a switch was faulty, why was it never fixed? If the pilot was calm, why was he accused? If another airline faced a similar event, why was it erased?

Unless Bharat demands independent oversight, the truth about AI171 may stay buried beneath headlines, corporate influence, and convenient silence.

Watch the Hindi Video here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Vegan Food: A Hindu Solution to Climate Change

From Food to Pharma: The Corporate Cycle India Refuses to Enter