Captain Sabharwal was a 56-year-old veteran pilot with decades of experience, known by his colleagues as a soft-spoken, responsible professional who never drank alcohol and was devoted to his career.
According to a Wall Street Journal report published on July 16th, new details are emerging from the Air India crash investigation that happened last month. The focus has now shifted to Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, with officials suggesting he deliberately turned off the fuel switches that led to the tragic crash near Ahmedabad airport, killing 241 out of 242 people on board.
However, this conclusion raises serious questions about whether we’re getting the full picture. The preliminary report mentions that the fuel control switches were turned off in quick succession – just one second apart – during takeoff. While investigators are calling this evidence of deliberate action, there’s another possibility that deserves equal attention: could this have been a Boeing aircraft malfunction disguised as pilot error?
Captain Sabharwal was a 56-year-old veteran pilot with decades of experience, known by his colleagues as a soft-spoken, responsible professional who never drank alcohol and was devoted to his career. His friend and fellow Air India pilot Kapil Kohal described him as someone driven by “sheer love of flying” and excellent at mentoring younger pilots. First Officer Clive Kunder, 32, was equally passionate about aviation, having dreamed of flying since childhood and recently excited about operating the Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
The question we must ask is this: why would such experienced and dedicated pilots suddenly decide to crash their own aircraft? The preliminary report itself admits it found “nothing out of the ordinary” before the fuel switches were turned off. As former NTSB official Ben Berman noted, there was nothing to prompt emergency procedures or stress the crew during what should have been a routine takeoff.
Here’s where Boeing’s responsibility comes into focus. The Boeing 787 Dreamliner has had various technical issues since its introduction. If the fuel control switches malfunctioned – perhaps due to electrical problems, software glitches, or mechanical failure – it could create exactly the sequence described in the report. Modern aircraft systems are incredibly complex, and even experienced pilots can struggle when multiple systems fail simultaneously.
Consider this scenario: what if the switches moved on their own due to a Boeing design flaw or malfunction? The pilots’ conversation recorded in the black box – where the First Officer asked why the switches were moved and the Captain denied doing so – suddenly makes more sense. Both pilots could have been telling the truth, with neither actually moving the switches manually.
The fact that both switches were turned back on after 10 seconds suggests the pilots were desperately trying to restore fuel flow, which supports the theory that this was an emergency response to an unexpected malfunction rather than a deliberate act. If someone wanted to crash the plane intentionally, why would they try to restart the engines?
Boeing has a track record of aircraft issues that were initially blamed on pilot error before the truth emerged. The 737 MAX crashes initially saw some finger-pointing at pilot training and competence before investigations revealed the MCAS system failures. Could history be repeating itself with the 787 Dreamliner?
The Wall Street Journal report mentions that some U.S. officials believe criminal authorities should review the matter, treating it as a potential crime rather than a safety mishap. While this approach might seem thorough, it could also be a way to shift blame away from Boeing and onto the deceased pilots who cannot defend themselves.
India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau has wisely not ruled out “possible design flaws, malfunctions or maintenance issues” and has involved aviation medicine and psychology experts in the investigation. Air India’s CEO Campbell Wilson has also urged staff to avoid drawing premature conclusions, stating the investigation is “far from over.”
The truth is, aircraft manufacturers and regulatory bodies sometimes prefer to blame pilots rather than admit to expensive design flaws that could require costly fixes across entire aircraft fleets. It’s easier and cheaper to point fingers at human error than to ground planes and retrofit thousands of aircraft worldwide.
As Indians, we should demand a thorough investigation that doesn’t rush to blame our skilled pilots without examining all possibilities. Captain Sabharwal and First Officer Kunder dedicated their lives to aviation and passenger safety. They deserve better than being scapegoated for what might have been a Boeing system failure.
The preliminary report’s lack of clarity on crucial technical details, combined with the rush to assign blame to the pilots, raises red flags about the investigation’s direction. Before we accept that these experienced aviators deliberately crashed their aircraft, we need Boeing to answer hard questions about their 787 Dreamliner’s fuel control systems and whether similar malfunctions could happen again.
Until then, the families of the victims and the aviation community deserve answers based on facts, not convenient assumptions that protect aircraft manufacturers at the expense of pilot reputations and passenger safety.
