Air India Flight Crashed Because the Pilot Turned Off the Engines: Indians Now Admit Intentional Act
By Leonard Berberi
The breakthrough regarding the June 12, 2025 accident. After months of disputes with U.S. officials, New Delhi is moving toward confirming the dynamics in the final report: the commander turned off the engines.
Indian investigators leading the probe into the Air India Boeing 787 crash in June 2025 are preparing to state in the final report that the aircraft went down because the two fuel switches were turned off by one of the pilots on board. In short, there was no technical defect, but rather a human intervention that was “almost certainly” intentional. This has been learned by Corriere from two Western sources familiar with recent discussions between New Delhi and Washington.
The Hoped-For Breakthrough
It is currently unclear whether there will be a detailed description of the dynamics, or if the report will proceed with an explicit attribution of responsibility—though the commander is the primary suspect. However, for the American experts assisting in the investigation, this is the breakthrough they had hoped for after weeks of sometimes heated confrontations with an Indian counterpart that, until now, had refused to recognize a human role in the tragedy.
The Crash
On June 12, 2025, the Air India jet bound for London Gatwick crashed shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad airport. 260 people lost their lives: 241 of the 242 on board, and 19 on the ground. The Boeing 787 lost thrust in both engines immediately after lifting off the runway and plummeted 32 seconds later onto a hostel for medical students. The lack of power was indicated by the deployment of the “Ram Air Turbine” (RAT), an emergency device that activates automatically in the event of a complete loss of electrical power and/or hydraulic pressure caused by the failure of both engines.
Investigations and Friction
The “RAT,” however, was of no use. The investigation triggered a long trail of friction, distrust, and alleged attempts to conceal evidence between the Indian investigators (responsible for the probe) and the U.S. experts (from the NTSB, Boeing, and the engine manufacturer, GE Aerospace) called in as parties involved in the aircraft’s manufacturing. Throughout the summer, the Americans did not hide their frustration with New Delhi’s approach.
Proven Scenarios
In all scenarios tested in a Boeing 787 flight simulator in the U.S., experts never encountered a dual engine shutdown caused by a technical failure. The only reasonable explanation has always been human intervention, whether intentional or an error.
Tensions increased further following the preliminary report published a month after the crash. That document established that the engines had shut down almost simultaneously after the fuel switches were moved from “Run” to “Cutoff.”
What the Preliminary Report Said
The preliminary report did not explain why the engines stopped working one second apart, but it included a decisive piece of information in a line and a half: the audio from the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) recorded one pilot—not identified—asking the other: “Why did you turn off the engines?” The response: “It wasn’t me.” The subsequent attempt to restart the engines was insufficient.
Suspicions Regarding the Commander
Assessments by Western experts—based on parameters from the Flight Data Recorder (FDR)—pointed the finger at the commander, Sumeet Sabharwal. At that moment, he was monitoring the flight while the first officer was flying. The engine shutdown occurred in sequence: first the left engine (the commander sits on the left), then the right.
This dynamic was confirmed by audio from the four onboard microphones. Furthermore, in the final seconds, the control column of the first officer, Clive Kunder, was pulled back in an attempt to make the aircraft climb, while the commander’s control column remained stationary.
The Two Black Boxes
Last December, Indian investigators from the Aircraft Accidents Investigation Bureau (AAIB) traveled to Washington to meet with NTSB colleagues. In the U.S. capital’s laboratories, they once again analyzed the data from the two black boxes. Sources explain that while flight parameters left no doubt that the engines were shut down because fuel was cut off, the audio—once cleaned of significant background noise—clarified which pilot did what. Above all, it ruled out an error.
One Year Later
The audio tracks were played in a specially prepared room to provide a better understanding of what happened in the cockpit. In the coming weeks, the conclusions—intentional engine shutdown—will undergo a “political” evaluation, according to sources who requested anonymity. For this reason, the final document—expected between June 8 and 12 (the anniversary of the crash)—might present a “softened” version to indicate that one of the pilots caused the crash. The intention is to avoid intense national controversy, as Western entities have been targeted by various TV commentators.
High-Level Discussions
The final outcome—including whether it is published at all—will depend entirely on evaluations made by the leadership of the Indian Ministry of Civil Aviation and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. When contacted, the NTSB invited inquiries to be directed to the Indian AAIB, per protocol. Indian authorities—the AAIB, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation, and the Ministry of Civil Aviation—did not respond to questions from Corriere.
Why the Change in Approach?
Why has New Delhi seemingly changed its position? According to sources, U.S. pressure and the threat of a “re-evaluation” of safety levels for Indian airlines—Air India and IndiGo—risk damaging the image of a country investing heavily in air transport, tourism, and trade. “Admitting that one of the pilots brought down the plane is increasingly judged as a sustainable sacrifice,” one source explains.
What to Expect in the Final Report
Experts consulted note that a final accident report is not written to assign blame, but to help aviation improve toward a zero-accident rate. Sources anticipate that the section of the report to watch will be the “Recommendations.” It is expected to include references to continuous psychological evaluation and the mental and physical well-being of pilots.
Additionally, it is possible the report will include a call for greater “vigilance” over critical controls (starting with fuel switches) by the monitoring pilot during critical flight phases, such as immediately after takeoff. This would allow for prompt intervention if a colleague were to move switches in a fatal manner.
February 10, 2026
Original Report & Reference – https://www.corriere.it
This is the English translation. Image is for representatitional purposes and is AI generated