Air India 171- Report 1

Air India Flight 171: Detailed Examination of Crash, Evidence, and Emerging Theories

Infographic

Document

Summary-

On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight 171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner en route from Ahmedabad, India, to London Gatwick, tragically crashed moments after takeoff. The aircraft impacted the B. J. Medical College hostel in Ahmedabad, resulting in a devastating loss of 241 lives onboard and at least 39 on the ground, making it one of India's deadliest aviation disasters. This incident is particularly notable as it represents the first fatal accident and hull loss for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner since its introduction in 2011. The ongoing investigation, led by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) with significant international cooperation from the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), is meticulously analyzing flight recorders and other evidence. Preliminary findings suggest the possible activation of the aircraft's emergency power system, indicating a potential loss of primary power or hydraulic function. Various theories, including engine failure, aerodynamic issues, and the impact of environmental conditions, are under rigorous examination. The tragedy has prompted immediate fleet-wide safety inspections by Air India and new regulatory measures by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), highlighting a renewed focus on aviation safety protocols and crisis management.

1. Introduction: The Air India Flight 171 Tragedy

1.1 Overview of the Incident

Air India Flight 171, designated as a regularly scheduled international service, involved a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, registered as VT-ANB.1 The flight was scheduled to depart from Ahmedabad Airport in India and proceed to London Gatwick Airport in the United Kingdom.1 However, on June 12, 2025, at approximately 13:38 IST (08:08 UTC), the aircraft experienced a catastrophic event shortly after departing, crashing into the hostel block of B. J. Medical College located in the Meghaninagar neighborhood of Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India.1

The impact led to a profound loss of life, affecting both those aboard the aircraft and individuals on the ground. This incident stands as one of India's most severe aviation disasters in recent decades.1 A critical aspect of this tragedy is its distinction as the first fatal crash and hull loss involving the Boeing 787 Dreamliner since its operational debut in 2011.1 The unprecedented nature of this event for the aircraft type immediately elevates the criticality of the ongoing investigation. Given the Boeing 787's generally strong safety record as a modern aircraft, the occurrence of its inaugural fatal accident suggests that the underlying cause may stem from an unusual or intricate failure mechanism, or potentially a confluence of several contributing factors, rather than a previously identified systemic design flaw. This circumstance places considerable impetus on the investigative bodies to ascertain a conclusive cause, a determination vital for upholding public and industry confidence in the operational integrity of the Dreamliner fleet globally. Furthermore, the presence of UK citizens (53 Britons) among the passengers and the destination being London Gatwick immediately internationalized the incident.1 This necessitated a collaborative investigative effort involving foreign aviation bodies, including the UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and representatives from Boeing and GE Aerospace.4 Such multi-national involvement is mandated by International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 13 protocols, which require participation from the state of design/manufacture, state of operator, state of registry, and states whose citizens were affected. This collaborative framework ensures a thorough and independent investigation but also introduces layers of coordination and complexity.

1.2 Flight Details and Context

The aircraft involved in the accident was an 11-year-old Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, identified by its registration VT-ANB and serial number 36279.1 The flight deck was under the command of Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, aged 55, who possessed extensive experience with over 10,000 hours flying widebody aircraft. He was assisted by First Officer Clive Kunder, aged 32, with over 3,400 hours of flying experience. Air India publicly affirmed that both pilots were "accomplished flyers" and "excellent professionals".1

The passenger manifest for Flight 171 listed 230 passengers, including 11 children and 2 infants, along with 12 crew members, bringing the total number of occupants to 242.1 The nationalities represented onboard included 169 Indian nationals, 53 British citizens, 7 Portuguese, and 1 Canadian.1

The casualty figures are substantial: 241 fatalities among those onboard, with only a single survivor.1 On the ground, the crash resulted in at least 39 fatalities and over 60 injuries.1 The cumulative death toll from the incident exceeded 280 individuals.1 The lone survivor, a 40-year-old British citizen of Indian origin, was seated in seat 11A, adjacent to an emergency exit. His account describes being thrown from the aircraft when the section he was in detached upon impact.1 This firsthand perspective, though anecdotal, offers crucial qualitative data that aligns with visual observations of the aircraft's flight path, which indicated a gradual descent while maintaining a nose-up orientation.1 This narrative can help corroborate or direct the interpretation of quantitative data from flight recorders, particularly regarding the sensation of the aircraft's performance and the sequence of structural failure.

Weather conditions at Ahmedabad Airport at the time of departure were reported as clear, with light surface winds ranging from 3 to 6 knots and visibility of 6 kilometers, with no significant cloud cover.1 Regarding maintenance, Air India stated that the aircraft was "well-maintained," with its most recent major inspection conducted in June 2023, and the next scheduled for December 2025. Furthermore, the right engine had undergone an overhaul in March 2025, and the left engine was inspected in April 2025. The airline affirmed that both the aircraft and its engines were regularly monitored and exhibited "no issues before the flight".9 The airline's assertion of a "well-maintained" aircraft with recent engine checks and no prior "red flags" directly contrasts with the catastrophic failure shortly after takeoff. If the aircraft was indeed well-maintained and showed no issues, the cause of the crash points more strongly towards an acute, sudden event (e.g., a critical system malfunction, external factor, or human error during a critical phase) rather than a gradual degradation of components. This shifts the investigative focus from long-term maintenance oversight to immediate operational parameters and crew actions.

Table 1: Air India Flight 171 Key Flight and Casualty Details

Detail	Description	Source Snippets
Flight Number	AI171	1
Aircraft Type	Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner	1
Registration	VT-ANB	1
Date of Accident	June 12, 2025	1
Time of Accident	13:38 IST (08:08 UTC)	1
Origin Airport	Ahmedabad Airport, India	1
Destination Airport	London Gatwick Airport, UK	1
Total Occupants	242 (230 Passengers, 12 Crew)	1
Onboard Fatalities	241	1
Onboard Survivors	1	1
Ground Fatalities	At least 39	1
Ground Injuries	60+	1
Total Fatalities	280+	1

2. The Crash Event: Sequence and Impact

2.1 Pre-Takeoff Conditions and Takeoff Roll

Air India Flight 171 commenced its takeoff roll from runway 23 at Ahmedabad Airport.1 Meteorological reports at the time indicated favorable surface conditions, with light winds ranging from 3 to 6 knots, excellent visibility of 6 kilometers, and an absence of significant cloud formations.1 However, a notable environmental factor was the ambient temperature in Ahmedabad, recorded at 40 degrees Celsius at 13:18 IST.15 This high temperature is a significant environmental factor because it directly affects air density and, consequently, engine performance. Less dense air at higher temperatures means engines produce less thrust and wings generate less lift at a given speed. This condition could necessitate a longer takeoff roll or impact climb performance, particularly if the aircraft was operating close to its maximum permissible takeoff weight (All Up Weight, AUW).

A curious detail observed was the Captain's decision to utilize the full length of Runway 23, which measures 11,499 feet, and to backtrack to the very edge before initiating the takeoff roll.15 This is generally considered unusual for an aircraft of the Boeing 787's class, which typically does not require the entire runway length for a standard takeoff. The Captain's action could suggest a pre-existing concern regarding the aircraft's All Up Weight (AUW) or anticipated performance limitations under the prevailing hot and less dense atmospheric conditions.15 This points to a potential "performance-limited takeoff" scenario, where the aircraft's capabilities are stretched by environmental conditions. While not necessarily a "cause" in itself, it could be a significant "contributing factor" if other issues (like engine underperformance or misconfiguration) were present, reducing the margin for error.

2.2 Critical Moments: Ascent, Mayday Call, and Rapid Descent

The flight's airborne phase was remarkably brief, lasting only 30 seconds.1 During this short period, the aircraft managed to achieve a maximum pressure altitude of approximately 625 feet (191 meters) above the runway before its ADS-B signal was lost at 08:08:50 UTC.1 A mere 36 seconds after takeoff, the flight crew transmitted a "mayday" call, reporting a critical "loss of power and thrust".1

Visual evidence gathered from security cameras positioned near the runway provides a chilling account of the final moments. The footage shows the aircraft initially gaining some altitude, followed by a gradual descent while simultaneously appearing to maintain a nose-up orientation, before ultimately crashing.1 One particular video captured the jet "slowly descending as if it were landing" just prior to a "giant fireball filling the sky" upon impact.3 The extremely short flight duration and the immediate "loss of power and thrust" mayday call strongly indicate a sudden, severe, and possibly unrecoverable failure mode. This rapid sequence suggests that the crew had very little time to react or implement emergency procedures. It implies that the problem was not a gradual degradation but an abrupt event, potentially affecting multiple critical systems simultaneously, leaving no margin for error or recovery at such a low altitude. This narrows the scope of investigation to immediate, high-impact events.

The observation that the aircraft was "pitching up" while "losing altitude" is a critical aerodynamic indicator.1 A nose-up attitude is typically associated with climbing flight. If the aircraft was pitching up but simultaneously losing altitude, it suggests a severe loss of lift relative to its weight and available thrust. This could point to a near-stall condition, a significant aerodynamic issue (e.g., incorrect flap settings), or insufficient thrust to maintain flight at that attitude. This visual evidence will be crucial when correlated with flight data recorder information on angle of attack, airspeed, and engine parameters.

2.3 Impact and Immediate Aftermath

The Air India Flight 171 crashed directly into a residential area within the Civil Hospital campus, specifically impacting the doctors' quarters and the students' hostel buildings of B. J. Medical College.1 The force of the impact triggered multiple explosions, followed by the rapid emission of thick plumes of smoke.1 The wreckage was extensive; the aircraft's partially intact stabilizers and tail cone were found lodged atop a multi-storey hostel building.1 Other significant debris, including the splintered fuselage and an embedded landing gear in a nearby wall, was scattered across the hostel complex and adjacent lanes.12 The crash site, located approximately 1.5 kilometers (0.9 miles) from the runway, was described by observers as resembling a "war zone," with minimal hope for survivors amidst the devastation.1 Images from the hostel's dining area shortly after the crash depicted aircraft parts and luggage strewn across the floor, with dining plates still containing food on the few tables that remained intact.20

The severity of the impact and the subsequent post-crash fire, which reached an estimated 1,500 °C (2,700 °F), meant that most bodies were "charred or mutilated beyond recognition".1 This condition severely complicated victim identification efforts, necessitating the collection of DNA samples from hundreds of relatives for mapping.8 The high number of casualties, particularly the ground fatalities, and the severe condition of the remains underscore the profound humanitarian impact of the disaster. The need for DNA identification for most victims indicates the extreme violence of the impact and the challenges faced by families in achieving closure.

The immediate response to the disaster was extensive, involving the rapid deployment of over 300 firefighters, 60 fire vehicles, and 20 water bowsers, along with multiple ambulances.1 Support teams from the Indian Army, Border Security Force, Central Reserve Police Force, and National Disaster Response Force were also deployed to assist with rescue and relief operations.1 All flight operations at Ahmedabad airport were temporarily suspended following the crash.1 The impact on ground infrastructure and personnel, such as medical students and doctors, adds a layer of complexity to the disaster response and subsequent compensation claims. It also raises questions about urban planning around airports and potential future regulations regarding building height and density in flight paths.

Table 2: Chronology of Air India 171 Incident and Investigation Milestones

Date	Time (IST)	Event/Milestone	Source Snippets
June 12, 2025	13:38	Flight AI171 takes off from Ahmedabad Airport (08:08 UTC)	1
June 12, 2025	13:38:36	Flight crew issues "mayday" call reporting loss of power/thrust (08:08:36 UTC)	1
June 12, 2025	13:38:50	ADS-B signal lost; aircraft crashes into B. J. Medical College hostel (08:08:50 UTC)	1
June 12, 2025	13:45	First call received by Ahmedabad Fire and Emergency Services	1
June 12, 2025	Evening	Air India organizes relief flights for next of kin and staff	21
June 12, 2025	Evening	Indian government sets up high-level committee to examine causes	11
June 13, 2025	Early AM	First enhanced airborne flight recorder (black box) recovered	1
June 13, 2025	Day	Gujarat ATS retrieves digital video recorder from wreckage	1
June 14, 2025	Day	DGCA mandates 'Enhanced Safety Inspection' across Air India's Boeing 787 fleet	4
June 14, 2025	Day	Air India announces interim payment of ₹25 lakh (approx. 21,000 GBP)	21
June 16, 2025	Day	Second enhanced airborne flight recorder (black box) recovered	22
June 16, 2025	Day	Technical team from Boeing lands in Ahmedabad to join probe	19
June 18, 2025	Day	Wall Street Journal reports preliminary finding of RAT activation	1
June 19, 2025	Day	Air India CEO confirms 26 of 33 B787s inspected, cleared for service	13
June 19, 2025	Day	Air India announces 15% reduction in international widebody flights until mid-July	13
June 19, 2025	Day	MoCA refutes reports of black boxes being sent abroad for analysis	22
Within 30 days	N/A	Preliminary report from AAIB anticipated	4
Within 1 year	N/A	Final comprehensive report expected (ICAO guidelines)	22

3. Investigation and Evidence

3.1 Role of Key Investigating Authorities

The formal inquiry into the Air India Flight 171 crash is primarily led by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB).6 A multi-disciplinary team from the AAIB commenced its investigation immediately on June 12, 2025.22 The AAIB, operating under the Ministry of Civil Aviation, is the designated authority for investigating aircraft accidents and incidents within India.23

The investigation benefits from extensive international cooperation. The US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are providing support and conducting their own independent investigations, a standard procedure given the aircraft's American origin (Boeing).6 Similarly, the UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) has formally offered its assistance and holds expert status in the Indian-led investigation, in accordance with ICAO Annex 13, due to the presence of UK citizens onboard the flight. A multidisciplinary team from the UK AAIB was deployed to India to support these efforts.4 Furthermore, experts from the Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), specifically Boeing and GE Aerospace (engine manufacturer), are actively assisting the probe.8 The involvement of multiple international and national agencies highlights the complex, interconnected nature of modern aviation accident investigations. While ICAO protocols ensure standardized investigation procedures and cooperation, the sheer number of stakeholders can lead to challenges in information sharing, differing priorities, and potential delays. The independence of each agency's probe, such as the NTSB's investigation due to Boeing's origin, is crucial for credibility but necessitates robust coordination mechanisms.

Beyond the accident investigation, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) India, the country's primary civil aviation regulatory body, is conducting parallel inquiries. The DGCA has mandated enhanced safety inspections across Air India's fleet.9 In parallel, the Indian government has established a high-level committee specifically tasked with examining the causes leading to the crash and formulating procedures to prevent and manage future aircraft emergencies.4 The DGCA's immediate mandate for enhanced safety inspections across Air India's Boeing 787 fleet and the formation of a government committee demonstrate a rapid regulatory response aimed at preventing recurrence, even before the definitive cause is known. This proactive approach, including the inspection of the entire 787 fleet and even 777 aircraft as a "confidence-building measure," indicates a strong commitment to restoring public trust and addressing potential systemic issues, rather than waiting for the final accident report. It suggests a shift towards more immediate, precautionary regulatory interventions after high-profile incidents.

3.2 Recovery and Significance of Flight Recorders (Black Boxes)

A critical step in the investigation was the recovery of the aircraft's two sets of enhanced airborne flight recorders (EAFRs), which combine the functions of both the Digital Flight Data Recorder (DFDR) and the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR). The first recorder was located on June 13, and the second on June 16.1

These "black boxes" are paramount to the investigation. The DFDR meticulously records thousands of flight parameters, including altitude, speed, engine performance, thrust settings, flap positions, autopilot inputs, acceleration, lift, and landing gear movements.4 The CVR, on the other hand, captures all cockpit audio, encompassing pilot conversations, emergency alarms, and any distress signals transmitted prior to the crash.4 The data extracted from these recorders is anticipated to "reveal everything" and provide rapid answers to fundamental factual questions surrounding the accident.4 The emphasis on the black boxes as the primary source for understanding what happened underscores their irreplaceable role in accident investigation, moving the process from speculation to data-driven conclusions. In the immediate aftermath of a crash, theories abound. The recovery of the black boxes, especially the DFDR with its "thousands of parameters," provides objective, time-synced data that can confirm or refute initial observations and expert speculations. This data is the foundation for determining the precise sequence of events and identifying the root cause, which is critical for future prevention.

Initial discussions emerged regarding the possibility of sending the black boxes abroad for analysis, particularly if they were found to be severely damaged or required advanced technological capabilities beyond those available in India's domestic facilities, with the United States being a likely destination.10 However, India's Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA) subsequently clarified that reports of the black boxes

being sent abroad were inaccurate, stating that the AAIB would make the final decision on the decoding location after a thorough assessment.22 The mention of India's recently inaugurated state-of-the-art black box laboratory, opened in April 2025 at the AAIB's Udaan Bhawan facility, indicates a strategic investment in domestic aviation safety infrastructure.22 While international cooperation is standard, the ability to conduct complex black box analysis domestically reduces reliance on foreign facilities, potentially expediting investigations and enhancing national expertise. This reflects India's ambition to become a major aviation hub and its commitment to self-sufficiency in critical safety domains.

3.3 Analysis of Visual Evidence: Photos and Videos

Visual evidence, including CCTV footage and amateur video recordings, has provided crucial initial insights into the crash sequence. A security camera video near the runway captured the aircraft initially gaining altitude, then gradually descending while appearing to pitch up, before disappearing from view and crashing approximately 30 seconds after takeoff, followed by a plume of fire and smoke.1 Another video, fortuitously recorded by a 17-year-old aviation enthusiast, documented the final seconds before impact.1 The Associated Press independently verified a social media video that depicted the jet "slowly descending as if it were landing" just before a "giant fireball filled the sky".3 Reuters also confirmed CCTV footage from the runway area, validating the location and date of the crash.18 The consistent visual evidence from multiple videos showing the aircraft pitching up while losing altitude strongly suggests an aerodynamic issue or insufficient thrust to maintain controlled flight. This visual pattern is a key indicator of a loss of lift or thrust-to-weight ratio. It supports theories related to engine performance, incorrect flap settings, or even an overweight condition, as these factors directly impact an aircraft's ability to climb or maintain altitude. The visual data provides a critical qualitative layer to the investigation before black box data is fully analyzed. The fact that a video was "caught by chance by a 17-year-old aviation enthusiast" highlights how citizen journalism and readily available technology (smartphones) now play an immediate role in documenting major incidents, providing valuable, albeit sometimes raw and unverified, initial evidence. While official CCTV footage is primary, such spontaneous recordings can offer unique angles or perspectives not captured by fixed cameras. Investigators will likely cross-reference and verify these public videos to build a comprehensive visual timeline of the crash.

Post-impact photographs offer a stark depiction of the devastation. Images reveal the aircraft's tail cone, with damaged stabilizer fins, lodged near the top of one of the hostel buildings.1 The fuselage was splintered, and debris was strewn across the residential block and mess hall, with an aircraft tire and landing gear visibly embedded in a nearby wall.12 The crash site was described as resembling a "war zone," leaving little hope for survivors.12 Further images from the hostel's dining area showed aircraft parts and luggage scattered amidst dining plates still containing food, underscoring the sudden and violent nature of the impact.20

3.4 Official Statements and Initial Findings

Air India has issued multiple statements confirming the crash, expressing profound condolences, and emphasizing its commitment to supporting affected families.3 Both Air India CEO Campbell Wilson and Tata Sons Chairman N Chandrasekaran have publicly asserted that the aircraft was "well-maintained" with no "red flags" or prior "safety concerns," and that the pilots were "highly experienced" and "exceptional professionals".9 This strong defense of the aircraft's maintenance and crew's experience appears to be challenged by emerging preliminary findings.

Preliminary findings, as reported by The Wall Street Journal and cited in People.com, indicate that the aircraft's emergency power system, known as a Ram Air Turbine (RAT), was likely activated before the crash.1 The RAT is designed to deploy automatically in specific critical scenarios, such as the failure of both engines, critically low hydraulic system pressures, or a loss of cockpit instrument power.16 This activation is a strong diagnostic signal that points to a severe systemic failure, likely involving primary power generation (engines) or hydraulic systems. The RAT is a fail-safe mechanism, and its deployment indicates that the aircraft's core power or hydraulic systems were compromised to a degree that required a backup. This pushes the investigation to determine the

cause of this primary system failure, whether it was mechanical, fuel-related, or an external event like a bird strike. The fact that it deployed suggests the crew was facing a critical emergency related to fundamental aircraft operation. If the RAT was indeed deployed, the critical question for investigators becomes why it deployed. Was it due to dual engine failure, a complete hydraulic system failure, or a loss of cockpit instrument power? This distinction is crucial. "Loss of power and thrust" could be a symptom of various underlying issues. The RAT's specific triggers provide more precise avenues for investigation. The black boxes will differentiate between these, revealing whether the engines ceased to function, or if the power loss was due to another system failure that then affected engine performance or control. Another initial finding, reported via Wikipedia citing The Wall Street Journal, suggests that the wing flaps were properly deployed for takeoff.1

The investigation is proceeding according to international guidelines, with a preliminary report anticipated within 30 days and a final comprehensive report expected within a year.4 Investigators are meticulously examining various factors, including wing flap settings, potential engine power loss, cockpit alarms, and the accuracy of crew-inputted data such as temperature and aircraft weight.8 Furthermore, ground handling agencies at Ahmedabad airport are under scrutiny, with the phones of key staff members who cleared the aircraft for takeoff having been seized for examination.6

4. Theories on the Cause of the Crash

It is imperative to note that the following discussions represent prevailing theories and speculations based on initial observations and expert opinions. A definitive determination of the cause will only be made upon the conclusion of the official investigation.

4.1 Engine Power Loss and Emergency Power System (RAT) Activation

A prominent theory suggests a significant loss of engine power or thrust occurred shortly after takeoff.1 Supporting this theory is the flight crew's "mayday" call, explicitly reporting "loss of power and thrust".1 Further corroboration comes from preliminary findings indicating the likely activation of the aircraft's Ram Air Turbine (RAT), an emergency power generator, prior to the crash.1 The RAT is designed to deploy automatically when primary power systems fail, such as in cases of dual engine failure, critically low hydraulic system pressure, or loss of cockpit instrument power.16 An aviation expert's initial assessment of available video and audio recordings also points towards a failure of both engines, inferred from the observed RAT deployment.1 Another expert suggested that a double engine failure, possibly triggered by a bird strike, is the "most likely cause" given the aircraft's low altitude at the time of the reported power loss.32

However, some information appears to nuance this theory. Air India has maintained that both engines were "regularly monitored" and showed "no issues before the flight," citing recent overhauls and inspections.9 Additionally, one expert dismissed a single-engine failure scenario, noting that the available video footage did not show any yaw, which would typically result from asymmetric engine power.33 While the crew reported "loss of power and thrust," the RAT activation specifically points to a broader "emergency power system" activation, which could be due to engine failure, hydraulic failure, or electrical system issues. This distinction is crucial for investigators to determine the precise nature of the primary system failure.

4.2 Aircraft Performance Factors: All Up Weight (AUW) and Environmental Conditions

Another theory under consideration revolves around the aircraft's performance, specifically the impact of its All Up Weight (AUW) combined with prevailing environmental conditions. The temperature in Ahmedabad at the time of the incident was 40 degrees Celsius.15 High temperatures cause air to become less dense, which in turn reduces engine performance and the amount of lift generated by the wings. This necessitates greater thrust for takeoff and climb. The Captain's decision to use the full 11,499-foot length of Runway 23 and to backtrack to its very edge for takeoff is considered unusual for this aircraft type, potentially indicating a concern about the AUW or performance limitations under the hot conditions.15 This combination of high temperature and the Captain's conservative takeoff procedure points to a potential "density altitude" issue, where the aircraft performs as if it's at a higher altitude due to less dense air. While not necessarily a direct cause, it could be a significant contributing factor if other issues were present, reducing the margin for error.

Expert speculation has also raised the possibility that unweighed carry-on baggage, averaging an additional 5 kg per passenger, could cumulatively add approximately 1 ton to the aircraft's AUW, a weight not typically accounted for in the crew's calculations.15 If this is a widespread practice, it represents a hidden risk factor that might warrant re-evaluation of industry-wide baggage handling and weight calculation protocols, even if not the primary cause of this specific crash. Conversely, one expert has stated that it is "very unlikely that the plane was overweight or carrying too much fuel".32 The DGCA's initial surveillance of Air India's Boeing 787 fleet also "did not reveal any major safety concerns," and confirmed that aircraft systems were compliant with safety standards.9

4.3 Aerodynamic Configuration: Flaps and Landing Gear Anomalies

The aircraft's aerodynamic configuration during takeoff has also been a subject of scrutiny. Aviation analysts reviewing early video footage noted that the landing gear appeared to remain deployed "longer than is usual" or was "not correct" and should have been retracted.12 Some experts speculated that the wing flaps might have been set incorrectly for takeoff or were "fully in (i.e., zero flaps)" during the final seconds of the flight.32 One theory posited that the First Officer might have inadvertently retracted the flaps to the zero position instead of retracting the undercarriage, which could lead to a "power-on stall" due to insufficient lift for the given speed and high drag from the extended landing gear.33 The aircraft's low maximum altitude (only 625 feet) and its apparent struggle to climb before descending are consistent with a condition of insufficient lift.1

However, a preliminary finding from The Wall Street Journal, cited in Wikipedia, reported that the flaps "had been properly deployed for take-off".1 This direct contradiction between expert visual analysis and preliminary findings from data sources is a key area for the investigation to resolve. The black box data on flap position and landing gear status will be definitive in resolving this critical aspect, determining if an aerodynamic configuration error was a cause or if the visual observations were misleading or symptoms of another failure (e.g., hydraulic issues preventing gear retraction). Furthermore, the possibility that the landing gear remained down due to a hydraulic problem has also been suggested.32 If a human error, such as an incorrect flap setting or retracting flaps instead of gear, is confirmed, it would shift focus to crew training, checklist adherence, and cockpit resource management. If it was a system malfunction, it would point to mechanical or software issues.

4.4 Other Speculations: Human Factors, Bird Strike, and Sabotage Concerns

Beyond the primary technical theories, other factors are being considered. Investigators are examining human factors, specifically whether the flight crew correctly inputted critical information regarding ambient temperature and aircraft weight. Errors in this data could potentially lead to incorrect wing flap settings, impacting takeoff performance.8

The possibility of a bird strike leading to a double engine failure has been raised by Dr. Jason Knight, a senior lecturer in fluid mechanics, particularly given the aircraft's low altitude.32 However, official reports indicated "no unusual bird activity" in the vicinity of the airport at the time of takeoff.33

A more speculative theory involves the possibility of "sabotage" or a "cyber attack" by an "enemy country" targeting the aircraft's systems, a concern voiced by a Shiv Sena (UBT) leader.27 While investigators have stated they "are not ruling out the possibility of sabotage" and have seized the phones of ground staff involved in handling the flight, concrete evidence supporting this specific theory has not been publicly presented, unlike the more detailed technical discussions surrounding engine and aerodynamic issues.6 In high-profile crashes, speculative theories often emerge. While investigators must explore all possibilities, the emphasis on black box data and technical analysis suggests that the primary focus remains on mechanical and operational causes unless compelling evidence for external interference emerges. The seizure of ground staff phones is a standard investigative procedure to rule out any procedural breaches or unusual communications, not necessarily an affirmation of sabotage.

Ultimately, various theories are circulating, encompassing mechanical failure, environmental conditions, and human error.15 The comprehensive investigative scope, where investigators are considering a wide range of factors, from human input errors to external events like bird strikes and even sabotage, demonstrates a thorough, multi-faceted approach to accident causation. Modern aviation accident investigations are rarely attributed to a single cause; it is often a chain of events or a combination of contributing factors. By examining human factors, environmental conditions, maintenance records, and potential external threats, the AAIB and its international partners are building a holistic picture to identify all contributing elements, ensuring that safety recommendations address the full spectrum of risks.

Table 3: Summary of Leading Theories and Associated Evidence/Observations

Theory	Key Evidence/Observations	Supporting Experts/Sources	Contradictory/Nuancing Evidence
Engine Power Loss / RAT Activation	- "Mayday" call reporting "loss of power and thrust".1	- Preliminary finding: Ram Air Turbine (RAT) likely activated.1	- RAT deploys on dual engine failure, low hydraulic pressure, or cockpit power loss.16	- Expert analysis of video/audio suggests dual engine failure based on RAT.1	- Double engine failure (possibly bird strike) "most likely cause" given low altitude.32	Flight crew (mayday call), Wall Street Journal (preliminary finding), aviation experts (Captain Steve Scheibner, Dr. Jason Knight) 1	- Air India: Engines "regularly monitored," "no issues before flight".9	- No yaw in video suggests no asymmetric power (rules out single engine failure).33	- No unusual bird activity reported.33
Aircraft Overweight / Environmental Factors	- Ahmedabad temperature 40°C at takeoff.15	- High temps reduce air density, engine performance, and lift.15	- Captain used full 11,499 ft Runway 23, backtracked (unusual, suggests AUW concern).15	- Unweighed handbags (5kg/passenger) could add 1 ton to AUW.15	Aviation expert (military aviator perspective) 15	- Expert states "very unlikely" plane was overweight/too much fuel.32	- DGCA surveillance found "no major safety concerns" with 787 fleet.9
Aerodynamic Configuration (Flaps/Landing Gear)	- Landing gear appeared down "longer than usual" or "not correct" in videos.12	- Experts speculated flaps set incorrectly or "fully in (zero flaps)".32	- Theory: FO retracted flaps instead of gear, causing "power-on stall".33	- Low altitude (625 ft max) and struggle to climb consistent with insufficient lift.1	Former British Airways pilot (Alastair Rosenschein), Flightradar24 director (Ian Petchenik), aviation security analyst (Paul Edwards) 32	- Preliminary finding: Flaps "properly deployed for take-off".1	- Landing gear remaining down could indicate hydraulic problem.32
Other Speculations (Human Factors, Bird Strike, Sabotage)	- Investigators examining crew input errors (temp, weight) affecting flap settings.8	- Possibility of bird strike leading to double engine failure.32	- Political leader questioned "sabotage" or "cyber attack".27	- Investigators "not ruling out sabotage"; ground staff phones seized.6	Aviation safety consultant (Jeff Guzzetti), senior lecturer in fluid mechanics (Dr. Jason Knight), Shiv Sena (UBT) leader 8	- No unusual bird activity reported.33	- No concrete evidence yet presented for sabotage/cyber attack from official sources.

5. Consequences and Industry Response

5.1 Casualties and Victim Identification Efforts

The Air India Flight 171 disaster resulted in a catastrophic loss of life, with 241 fatalities among the passengers and crew, and at least 39 individuals killed on the ground, bringing the total death toll to over 280.1 The sole survivor was a British national of Indian origin.1 The high number of casualties, particularly the ground fatalities, and the severe condition of the remains, many of which were "charred or mutilated beyond recognition," underscore the profound humanitarian impact of the disaster.3 This necessitated extensive DNA mapping for victim identification, with hundreds of relatives providing samples.8 As of June 19, 2025, 210 victims had been identified through DNA testing, and a total of 222 individuals had been identified, with their bodies released to their respective families.9 The post-mortem process for all deceased individuals was completed in a remarkable 13 hours, a testament to the coordinated and dedicated efforts of medical and forensic teams.34 The need for DNA identification for most victims indicates the extreme violence of the impact and the immense challenges faced by families in achieving closure. Beyond immediate fatalities, the severe injuries sustained by over 60 individuals on the ground and the psychological trauma experienced by survivors, first responders, and affected communities, such as the medical college students, will have lasting effects not immediately captured by casualty counts. This highlights that the consequences extend beyond immediate physical harm to include long-term mental health support, community rebuilding, and the ripple effect on public perception of aviation safety.

5.2 Air India's Immediate Actions and Support for Affected Families

In the immediate aftermath of the tragedy, Air India implemented a comprehensive crisis response strategy focused on supporting the affected families. The airline established Friends & Relatives Assistance Centres at key airports, including Ahmedabad, Mumbai, Delhi, and London Gatwick.21 Dedicated hotlines were activated to provide immediate assistance and information.21 Air India, in collaboration with the Tata Group, deployed volunteers to Ahmedabad to coordinate with families, offering support for hospital assistance and facilitating the repatriation of mortal remains.21

Financial support was also promptly extended. Air India initially offered ₹1 crore (approximately 85,000 GBP) as compensation for each deceased person. This was supplemented by an additional interim payment of ₹25 lakh (approximately 21,000 GBP) provided to the families of the deceased and the sole survivor.21 The airline conveyed its deep condolences, emphasizing that it considers the family members of the deceased "part of our larger family".21 Air India's swift establishment of assistance centers, hotlines, and financial support demonstrates a proactive and compassionate approach to crisis management, aiming to mitigate the immediate suffering of affected families. In major aviation disasters, the initial response of the airline significantly impacts public perception and trust. By quickly addressing the immediate needs of families, Air India is attempting to manage the crisis effectively and demonstrate accountability beyond legal obligations. The compensation offers, while substantial, also highlight the complex legal framework of aviation accidents, particularly under the Montreal Convention. These initial payments do not preclude further legal claims, especially if negligence is proven, which could lead to "unlimited damages" and a total payout exceeding ₹1,000 crore or even ₹4,000 crore ($475 million). This points to the long-term financial and legal ramifications for the airline and its insurers.

5.3 Fleet-wide Safety Inspections and Operational Adjustments

Following the crash, India's aviation regulatory body, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), immediately mandated 'Enhanced Safety Inspection' across Air India's entire fleet of 33 Boeing 787 Dreamliners.4 As of June 19, 2025, 26 of these 33 aircraft have successfully completed the inspections and have been cleared for service, with the remaining aircraft undergoing planned maintenance and scheduled for checks in the coming days.13 Going beyond the DGCA's mandate, Air India voluntarily decided to extend enhanced safety checks to its Boeing 777 aircraft as a "confidence-building measure".13 This decision to inspect Boeing 777s, which were not involved in the crash, as a "confidence-building measure" goes beyond the DGCA's initial mandate for 787s. This indicates a deeper level of internal commitment to safety and public reassurance, potentially driven by the desire to restore confidence in the entire widebody fleet and the airline's brand. It suggests that the incident is prompting a broader internal safety review, not just a reactive response to regulatory directives.

These comprehensive safety checks, coupled with existing geopolitical tensions leading to airspace closures in the Middle East and night curfews in parts of Europe and East Asia, have resulted in significant operational disruptions for Air India. This has led to a "higher-than-usual number of cancellations," with 66 flights cancelled between June 12 and June 17, and numerous delays.10 To mitigate these challenges and ensure operational stability, Air India announced a temporary reduction of its international widebody flight schedule by approximately 15% from June 20 through at least mid-July.13 This measure aims to increase the availability of reserve aircraft to manage unforeseen disruptions. The immediate, fleet-wide inspections demonstrate a commitment to safety, but they directly result in operational disruptions. This highlights a critical tension in aviation: ensuring maximum safety often comes at the cost of operational efficiency and passenger convenience. The airline's decision to reduce flights by 15% reflects a strategic choice to prioritize safety and operational stability over maintaining full capacity, a necessary step to rebuild trust.

5.4 Legal Implications and Compensation Framework

The Air India Flight 171 crash carries substantial legal and financial implications, primarily governed by the Montreal Convention. India is a signatory to this multilateral treaty, having incorporated its provisions into the Carriage by Air Act 1972.35 The Convention establishes a two-tier compensation system for international air travel accidents. The first tier imposes strict liability on airlines, obligating them to pay a minimum of SDR 128,821 (approximately ₹1.6 crore or ₹1.82 crore) per victim, regardless of fault.35 This represents an absolute minimum compensation. The second tier allows for unlimited damages if negligence or misconduct on the part of the airline is proven. In such cases, compensation would be determined based on actual losses, including lost income and loss of companionship.35

The total compensation payout for this incident could potentially exceed ₹1,000 crore 35, with some estimates suggesting it could reach as high as ₹4,000 crore ($475 million), positioning it as one of India's most expensive aviation insurance events in history.37 Air India reportedly maintains a $1.5 billion liability insurance policy, which is largely reinsured in the London market, intended to cover such costs.37 For ground casualties, Air India has offered ₹1 crore to the families of deceased medical college students and staff.35 However, securing higher compensation for ground victims is typically more challenging under existing legal frameworks.35 The potential ₹4,000 crore liability represents a significant financial burden, even with insurance. This incident will likely test the limits of Air India's liability insurance and could influence future underwriting, pricing, and risk management practices in the global aviation insurance market. If negligence is proven, especially against the aircraft manufacturer, it could trigger even larger, uncapped liabilities, potentially leading to increased premiums or stricter policy terms for airlines globally. Furthermore, the handling of compensation claims, particularly the distinction between strict liability and negligence-based claims, and the treatment of ground casualties, could set important legal precedents within India's aviation jurisprudence. How the courts interpret and apply the Montreal Convention in this specific context, especially concerning the "unlimited damages" clause and compensation for non-passenger victims, will be closely watched by legal professionals and could influence future aviation accident litigation.

5.5 Regulatory Changes and Long-Term Safety Enhancements

The Air India Flight 171 tragedy has catalyzed significant regulatory and operational changes aimed at enhancing aviation safety. The Indian government's high-level committee is specifically tasked with formulating procedures to prevent and handle future aircraft emergencies, with a focus on refining Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).4 The DGCA has issued directives to Air India, urging strict adherence to regulations, strengthening internal coordination across engineering, operations, and ground handling units, and ensuring adequate availability of spare parts to mitigate delays.9

In a direct response to the crash's impact on a residential area, the DGCA has introduced strict new draft rules, the Aircraft (Demolition of Obstructions) Rules, 2025. These rules empower authorities to identify and demolish or trim high-rise structures and trees that breach safety height limits around aerodromes.38 This immediate drafting of new rules for demolishing obstructions near airports directly links to the crash's impact site and indicates a reactive but necessary legislative response to prevent similar ground impacts. This regulatory change suggests that the crash has exposed a critical gap in existing urban planning and aviation safety regulations around airport vicinities. The new rules aim to mitigate the risk of ground casualties and structural damage in the event of low-altitude aircraft failures, reflecting a lesson learned from this specific tragedy.

Looking to the future, aviation experts emphasize the crucial role of technology in enhancing safety. This includes integrating artificial intelligence (AI) for real-time data analysis, predictive maintenance, AI-powered air traffic control, and advanced pilot training simulators.39 The discussion around integrating AI for predictive maintenance, real-time data analysis, and advanced pilot training points to a broader, long-term trend in aviation safety. While the immediate investigation focuses on the crash's direct cause, the broader industry response includes leveraging advanced technologies to move from reactive accident investigation to proactive risk mitigation. This signifies a recognition that human-machine interfaces and data analytics will be increasingly central to future aviation safety protocols, aiming to detect potential issues before they escalate into incidents.

6. Conclusion: Lessons Learned and Path Forward for Aviation Safety

The Air India Flight 171 crash stands as a profound and tragic event, serving as a stark reminder of the inherent complexities and risks within commercial aviation, even with highly advanced aircraft like the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, which had maintained an impeccable safety record until this incident.1

The ongoing investigation, spearheaded by the AAIB India with robust international collaboration from leading aviation safety bodies, is critical to definitively determining the root cause or causes of this disaster. This will be achieved through the meticulous analysis of the recovered flight recorders and other material evidence.1 Preliminary findings, particularly the indication of emergency power system activation, point towards potential issues with engine performance or hydraulic systems, which will undoubtedly be a central focus of the continuing inquiry.1

The incident has elicited immediate and significant responses from both Air India and Indian regulatory authorities. These include comprehensive, fleet-wide inspections of Boeing 787 aircraft, operational adjustments resulting in temporary flight reductions, and the proactive drafting of new safety regulations specifically addressing obstructions around airports.4 The substantial legal and financial implications of the crash, governed by the Montreal Convention, underscore the robust global accountability framework that underpins aviation safety.35

Moving forward, the aviation industry must reinforce its commitment to strict adherence to all safety protocols. This includes continuous investment in advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence for predictive maintenance and enhanced pilot training simulators. Furthermore, regulatory frameworks must continuously adapt to address evolving risks and the challenges posed by urban development in proximity to airports.39 The tragedy of Air India Flight 171 must serve as a pivotal moment for India's rapidly expanding civil aviation sector, reinforcing the fundamental principle that public trust and uncompromising safety standards are paramount for its sustained growth and global standing.

Works cited

1. Air India Flight 171 - Wikipedia, accessed June 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India_Flight_171

2. Air India plane crashes in Ahmedabad with 242 people on board Boeing 787; lone survivor reported, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/air-india-plane-crash-ahmedabad-flight-ai171-to-london-gatwick/

3. Fiery Air India crash kills 241 people aboard, leaving 1 survivor, airline says, accessed June 19, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/india-plane-crash-cad8dad5cd0e92795b03d357404af5f8

4. Black boxes analyzed for cause of Air India crash that killed 270, accessed June 19, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/air-india-plane-crash-black-box-boeing-cc344f02b4abfef9b29789f3d02dd4f0

5. AAIB Update: Air India flight AI171, Ahmedabad to London Gatwick - GOV.UK, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/aaib-update-air-india-flight-ai171-ahmedabad-to-london-gatwick

6. AI 171 crash probe widens: Ahmedabad airport ground staff quizzed, phones seized, sabotage angle not ruled out - Times of India, accessed June 19, 2025, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/ai-171-crash-probe-ground-handling-agencies-at-svpi-airport-questioned/articleshow/121916217.cms

7. FAA Statement on Air India Flight AI171 | Federal Aviation Administration, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-statement-air-india-flight-ai171

8. Air India black box recovered after crash that killed 241 onboard and several others on the ground, accessed June 19, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/air-india-plane-crash-ahmedabad-survivor-boeing-787-18a1e45cb65bd716d6529b8922cc94b7

9. Air India says Dreamliner plane 'well-maintained' before Ahmedabad crash, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2025/Jun/19/air-india-says-dreamliner-plane-well-maintained-before-ahmedabad-crash

10. Air India crash: N Chandrasekaran makes important statement; says AI 171 Boeing 787 Dreamliner had 'new engine', 'clean history' & 'no red flags', accessed June 19, 2025, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/air-india-crash-n-chandrasekaran-makes-important-statement-says-ai-171-boeing-787-dreamliner-had-new-engine-clean-history-no-red-flags/articleshow/121948268.cms

11. Remains of Air India crash victims are handed over to relatives, accessed June 19, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/air-india-plane-crash-boeing-dna-test-b44556b7c0e9e04adcece615262e439e

12. In 34 seconds: 3 photos that tell the full horror of Ahmedabad-London Air India flight AI-171's final moments, accessed June 19, 2025, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/in-34-seconds-3-photos-that-tell-the-full-horror-of-ahmedabad-london-air-india-flight-ai-171s-final-moments/articleshow/121817176.cms

13. "Aircraft and its engines showed no issues before flight," says Air India CEO on AI-171 crash, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.aninews.in/news/national/general-news/aircraft-and-its-engines-showed-no-issues-before-flight-says-air-india-ceo-on-ai-171-crash20250619180926

14. Air India crashed plane's engines were 'inspected' in recent months: Tata's airline tells Maharaja Club members - The Economic Times, accessed June 19, 2025, https://m.economictimes.com/industry/transportation/airlines-/-aviation/air-india-crashed-planes-engines-were-inspected-in-recent-months-tatas-airline-tells-maharaja-club-members/articleshow/121953488.cms

15. AUW! Could Air India Flight AI-171's weight have doomed it? - The New Indian Express, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.newindianexpress.com/web-only/2025/Jun/13/auw-could-air-india-flight-ai-171s-weight-have-doomed-it

16. Air India Flight's Emergency Power System Likely Activated Before Fatal Crash: Report, accessed June 19, 2025, https://people.com/air-india-flights-emergency-power-system-likely-activated-before-fatal-crash-report-11757306

17. Air India Crash: Boeing 787's emergency power system was likely active before crash, accessed June 19, 2025, https://m.economictimes.com/industry/transportation/airlines-/-aviation/air-india-crash-boeing-787s-emergency-power-system-was-likely-active-before-crash/articleshow/121925970.cms

18. CCTV footage shows moment Air India plane crashes in Ahmedabady | ABS-CBN News, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK7C4AU2Sdc

19. Ahmedabad plane crash: Mobile phones of ground staff seized, CCTV footage under scanner as '360-degree' probe unfolds, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2025/Jun/18/ahmedabad-plane-crash-mobile-phones-of-ground-staff-seized-cctv-footage-under-scanner-as-360-degree-probe-unfolds

20. After Air India flight crashed into medical campus, surviving doctors rushed to save lives, accessed June 19, 2025, https://nationalpost.com/news/world/after-the-air-india-flight-crashed-into-a-medical-campus-the-surviving-doctors-rushed-to-save-lives

21. Updates on AI171 | Air India Newsroom & Press Releases, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.airindia.com/in/en/newsroom/press-release/Information-on-AI171-incident.html

22. Air India Plane Crash: Will black box be sent abroad for probe? Govt refutes claim, warns 'refrain from speculation' - Mint, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.livemint.com/news/air-india-plane-crash-will-black-box-be-sent-abroad-for-probe-govt-refutes-claim-warns-refrain-from-speculation-11750335775895.html

23. Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (India) - Wikipedia, accessed June 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_Accident_Investigation_Bureau_(India)

24. Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau - Ministry of Civil Aviation, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.civilaviation.gov.in/banner-tab/aircraft-accident-investigation-bureau

25. Home | Directorate General of Civil Aviation | Government of India, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.dgca.gov.in/

26. Directorate General of Civil Aviation (India) - Wikipedia, accessed June 19, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directorate_General_of_Civil_Aviation_(India)

27. Air India plane crash: 'Was there any cyber attack by enemy country?' asks Sanjay Raut; questions possibility of 'sabotage', accessed June 19, 2025, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/air-india-plane-crash-was-there-any-cyber-attack-by-enemy-country-asks-sanjay-raut-questions-possibility-of-sabotage/articleshow/121843253.cms

28. Photos: Air India flight 171 crash – KIRO 7 News Seattle, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.kiro7.com/news/trending/photos-air-india/PWFTVPTTV5FSNNQT7YSETJICY4/

29. IND: Air India Boeing 787 Headed to London Crashes After Takeoff - Getty Images, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.gettyimages.com/editorial-images/news/event/air-india-boeing-787-headed-to-london-crashes-after-takeoff/776336135

30. Photos: Air India flight 171 crash - WFTV, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.wftv.com/news/trending/photos-air-india/PWFTVPTTV5FSNNQT7YSETJICY4/

31. Rescue efforts take place at the site of the Air India flight crash.... News Photo - Getty Images, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/rescue-efforts-take-place-at-the-site-of-the-air-india-news-photo/2219449577

32. What happened to Air India Flight 171? - Aviation experts review crash video, accessed June 19, 2025, https://news.sky.com/story/what-happened-to-air-india-flight-171-aviation-experts-review-crash-video-13382605

33. What went wrong with AI 171? - Deccan Herald, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/what-went-wrong-with-ai-171-3585336

34. Ahmedabad AI-171 Crash: Post-Mortem Concludes In Record Time Amid Probe Into Gujarat Horror? Watch - YouTube, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDmo5hcsMWs

35. Air India faces Rs 1000 cr liability as legal claims mount after AI171 crash, accessed June 19, 2025, https://m.economictimes.com/opinion/et-commentary/air-india-faces-rs-1000-cr-liability-as-legal-claims-mount-after-ai171-crash/articleshow/121891333.cms

36. Air India faces disruptions as crash prompts deeper checks and flight delays, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2025/Jun/19/air-india-faces-disruptions-as-crash-prompts-deeper-checks-and-flight-delays

37. What is the Montreal Convention—and can Air India's insurers weather the ₹4,000-crore AI171 crash storm?, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.fortuneindia.com/personal-finance/what-is-the-montreal-conventionand-can-air-indias-insurers-weather-the-4000-crore-ai171-crash-storm/124176

38. Air India Crash Fallout: DGCA Drafts Demolition Rules After Deadly AI-171 Plane Tragedy, accessed June 19, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpNMxEEJa9w

39. We can't afford to be casual about protocols: Why AI 171 must be a turning point in India's aviation journey - The Economic Times, accessed June 19, 2025, https://m.economictimes.com/opinion/et-commentary/we-cant-afford-to-be-casual-about-protocols-why-ai-171-must-be-a-turning-point-in-indias-aviation-journey/articleshow/121937510.cms