Gold Rate: ₹9467.62 /g Silver Rate: ₹109.19 /g
Follow on
Deals OTT Releases Gadgets Exams Accidents Crime Indian Railways Indian Armed Forces Airlines India Tamil Nadu Kerala Karnataka Maharashtra West Bengal Gujarat

Air India 171 Tragedy: What Really Happened? A Captain’s Expert Breakdown

Share this article
Link copied!
Air India 171 Tragedy: What Really Happened? A Captain’s Expert Breakdown

In the wake of the Air India 171 crash, aviation communities and the public worldwide are searching for answers. In a special episode of Ask the Captain, veteran pilot Captain Steve addresses the key technical questions raised about the crash. From the cause of thrust loss to RAT deployment and flap configurations, here’s a complete decoded breakdown of the expert insights.


How Did the Sole Survivor Make It?

  • The survivor was seated just in front of the wing spar, one of the strongest points in the aircraft.
  • The wing spar absorbed much of the impact, possibly sparing the force where the survivor sat.
  • Captain Steve calls it “nothing short of a miracle.”

Landing Gear: Why Was It Down?

  • Video shows the gear remained down, but evidence suggests the pilots did raise the gear handle.
  • However, due to power loss, the hydraulic/electrical system failed to fully retract it.
  • The gear wheels were angled backward, a sign the system may have partially attempted retraction.

What Is the RAT (Ram Air Turbine) and Why Does It Matter?

  • The RAT is an emergency device that deploys during complete engine or electrical failure.
  • It provides minimal hydraulic and electrical power, enabling limited control and communication.
  • RAT deployment in this case strongly suggests dual engine failure.

Loud Bang After Takeoff: What Was It?

  • The sole survivor reported a loud bang 30 seconds after takeoff.
  • Likely causes:
    • RAT deployment noise as it slams into the airstream.
    • Structural damage or part of the aircraft hitting an object.
  • Lights also reportedly flickered, reinforcing the RAT theory.

🛬 Flap Configuration: Were the Wings Clean?

  • Early speculation of premature flap retraction has been dismissed.
  • Wreckage photos show:
    • Leading-edge slats deployed
    • Flaps set at ~5°, confirming proper takeoff configuration.
  • Flaps were not the cause of lift loss—thrust loss was.

High Temperatures and Vapor Lock?

  • Reported temperatures: 37°C to 43°C.
  • High heat can disrupt engine airflow or cause fuel vaporization (vapor lock).
  • Vapor lock may lead to:
    • Fuel turning into gas
    • Loss of engine thrust
  • It’s rare, but not impossible under extreme heat and pressure.

The Mayday Call: What Did It Reveal?

  • Pilots radioed “no thrust achieved” shortly after takeoff.
  • That suggests both engines lost power during climb-out.
  • Combined with RAT deployment and loss of lift, this aligns with a catastrophic dual engine failure.

🛫 Takeoff Performance: Did They Use the Whole Runway?

  • Witnesses reported dust clouds as the aircraft lifted off.
  • Captain Steve explains this is likely due to:
    • Thrust vector angle
    • Dry conditions, not necessarily overrun.
  • Engines were producing thrust at that moment—but failed soon after.

First Officer’s Experience: Was It Enough?

  • Reported to have 1,100 flight hours.
  • Below the 1,500-hour U.S. minimum, but may be standard under different regulations.
  • Captain Steve praises the professionalism and training of the crew.

RAT Deployment: What Does It Confirm?

  • On the 787, RAT is deployed for:
    • Dual engine failure
    • Major electrical or hydraulic failure
  • In this case, the only failure that causes lift loss is engine failure.
  • Therefore, RAT + wing stall = confirmed engine flameout.

Was It a Stall?

  • The aircraft mushed into the ground after lift was lost.
  • Classic signs of stall seen:
    • Nose drop
    • Tail sag
    • Loss of airspeed
  • Thrust loss led to loss of energy in the wings, inducing stall.

Fuel Contamination or Vapor Lock?

Three possible causes for fuel starvation:

  1. Fuel control levers off — not plausible.
  2. Contaminated fuel (water, particles) — extremely rare, but possible.
  3. Vapor lock — high temperature may have turned fuel to vapor, starving engines.

All are speculative, but not ruled out.


Did the Pilots Have Time to Save the Aircraft?

  • The entire sequence—from rotation to crash—lasted under 60 seconds.
  • Dual engine restart procedures require more altitude and time.
  • Not enough time for checklists or recovery.

Final Words on the Crew

Captain Steve’s closing thoughts:

“These were some of the best-trained pilots in the world.
To send a mayday in English under pressure — that shows presence of mind.”


A 100-Billion-to-One Event

This tragedy was an extraordinarily rare event. While investigations continue, early signs point to a dual engine flameout, likely due to mechanical or environmental causes. As the aviation community continues to analyze and learn, lessons will be implemented to ensure this never happens again.

India | Gujarat | Ahmedabad
Share this article
Link copied!

You can now subscribe free to our RagaDecode whatsapp channel for updates

Subscribe
Back to Home

Quick Info

What caused the Air India 171 crash according to Captain Steve?
Captain Steve attributes the crash primarily to a dual engine flameout, likely caused by either mechanical or environmental issues. The combination of thrust loss, RAT deployment, and wing stall supports this theory.
Who is Captain Steve and why is he relevant to the crash discussion?
Captain Steve is a veteran pilot featured in a special episode of 'Ask the Captain'. His technical insights help decode complex aviation events, making him a trusted voice in interpreting details of the Air India 171 crash.
How did the sole survivor of the Air India 171 crash manage to survive?
The survivor was seated just in front of the wing spar, one of the aircraft’s structurally strongest points. The wing spar absorbed much of the crash’s impact, possibly shielding the survivor from the most devastating forces.
Why was the landing gear still down during the crash?
Although the pilots raised the gear handle, a power loss likely prevented the hydraulic and electrical systems from fully retracting the gear. The backward angle of the wheels indicates a partial retraction attempt.
What is a RAT (Ram Air Turbine) and why is it important in this crash?
The RAT is an emergency device that deploys during complete engine or electrical failure, providing minimal hydraulic and electrical power. Its deployment in this crash strongly suggests that both engines failed.
What did the loud bang heard after takeoff indicate?
The bang was likely caused by either RAT deployment, which makes a loud noise when hitting the airstream, or structural damage. It occurred about 30 seconds after takeoff, consistent with the timeline of system failures.
Were the flaps and slats properly configured for takeoff?
Yes, wreckage photos confirm that the leading-edge slats were deployed and flaps were set at approximately 5°, which is standard for takeoff. Improper flap configuration was not a factor in the crash.
Could high temperatures have caused the engine failure?
Yes, extreme heat between 37°C to 43°C could have caused vapor lock, where fuel vaporizes and disrupts engine operation. Though rare, such conditions can result in loss of engine thrust.
What did the mayday call reveal about the crash?
The mayday call included the message 'no thrust achieved,' indicating both engines lost power shortly after takeoff. This supports the conclusion of a dual engine failure.
Did the aircraft use the full runway for takeoff?
Witnesses noted dust clouds during liftoff, but Captain Steve explains this was likely due to the thrust vector and dry runway conditions. It doesn’t necessarily mean the aircraft overran the runway.
Was the first officer experienced enough to handle the situation?
The first officer had around 1,100 flight hours, below the U.S. minimum of 1,500 but potentially acceptable under other regulations. Captain Steve praised the crew’s professionalism and composure.
What does RAT deployment confirm about the incident?
RAT deployment, along with the aircraft’s stall and thrust loss, confirms a dual engine failure. The RAT only deploys under such critical failures, providing minimal backup systems.
Was the aircraft stalled before the crash?
Yes, the aircraft showed signs of a stall, including nose drop and tail sag. The stall was induced by loss of airspeed due to thrust loss, leading to insufficient lift.
Could fuel contamination have caused the engine failure?
Fuel contamination, such as water or particles, is considered extremely rare but possible. It remains one of the speculative causes under investigation.
Is vapor lock a plausible explanation for the crash?
Yes, vapor lock caused by high ambient temperatures could turn fuel into vapor, starving the engines. Though speculative, it is not ruled out as a contributing factor.

In-Depth Answers

Did the pilots have a chance to recover the aircraft?
No, the entire sequence from takeoff to crash occurred in under 60 seconds, providing insufficient time or altitude to attempt engine restarts or complete emergency procedures.
What was Captain Steve’s final assessment of the crew?
Captain Steve commended the pilots as among the best-trained in the world. Their ability to send a clear mayday in English under extreme pressure was a testament to their training and composure.
Why is this event considered a 100-billion-to-one occurrence?
Because dual engine flameouts during takeoff are extraordinarily rare. The confluence of mechanical or environmental issues leading to total thrust loss is nearly unprecedented.
What are the potential causes of dual engine flameout mentioned in the article?
Potential causes include vapor lock due to heat, contaminated fuel, and very rare system failures. These possibilities remain under investigation but are considered plausible based on available evidence.
How did the RAT help during the emergency?
The RAT provided just enough hydraulic and electrical power to maintain basic control and communication, critical after the engines failed and the primary systems lost power.
What is the function of the wing spar in an aircraft crash?
The wing spar is a critical structural component that absorbs significant impact energy. Its strength may explain the survival of the lone passenger seated near it.
Was premature flap retraction a cause of the crash?
No, early speculation about flap retraction has been ruled out. Evidence from the wreckage confirms proper flap deployment for takeoff.
What is vapor lock in aviation engines?
Vapor lock occurs when fuel vaporizes in the fuel lines due to high temperatures, preventing liquid fuel from reaching the engines. This can cause engine thrust loss or failure.
Why was RAT deployment noise significant in this crash?
The loud bang reported by the survivor likely coincided with RAT deployment. This noise is consistent with the turbine rapidly deploying into the airstream during a system failure.
What kind of stall did the aircraft experience?
The aircraft experienced an aerodynamic stall characterized by a loss of lift, nose drop, and tail sag. This occurred after engine thrust was lost, causing airspeed to decay rapidly.
What role did environmental conditions play in the crash?
High temperatures may have contributed to fuel vaporization and potential vapor lock, which could have led to engine failure. Dry runway conditions also created visible dust but didn’t affect takeoff performance.
Subscribe Buy Me a Coffee