Mechanical Engineering Analysis of the

Ahmedabad Air India Flight 171 Crash

Introduction
On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight 171, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner (registration VT-ANB,
manufacturer serial no. 36729), crashed shortly after takeoff from Sardar Vallabhbhai
Patel International Airport in Ahmedabad, India. The London-bound flight, carrying 230
passengers and 12 crew, experienced a catastrophic failure less than 30 seconds after
liftoff, resulting in the loss of all but one person on board and numerous casualties on
the ground. This report provides a preliminary mechanical engineering analysis of the
incident, based on the currently available information, focusing on potential mechanical
and structural factors that may have contributed to this tragic event. The investigation is
currently being led by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), with
assistance from international bodies including the NTSB, FAA, Boeing, GE Aviation, and
the UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch [1].

Initial Observations and Technical Context

The aircraft, powered by GE Aviation GEnx-1B67 engines, failed to maintain altitude after
takeoff, making a seemingly controlled descent into a residential area approximately
one nautical mile from the runway end. Crucially, surveillance video of the incident
shows no visual evidence of bird strike, external damage, or erratic maneuvers such as
sudden pitch, roll, or yaw. The landing gear also remained extended throughout the brief
flight sequence. A distress call from the pilots, reportedly indicating 'no thrust,' suggests
a critical power loss or control issue immediately following liftoff [1].

This particular Boeing 787-8 had accumulated 39,450 flight hours and nearly 7,400 cycles
since its delivery to Air India in 2014. It is notable that this incident marks the first fatal
accident involving a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, a type that has otherwise maintained an
exemplary safety record across its global fleet of 1,189 delivered aircraft [1]. The
recovery of the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder, commonly known as
'black boxes,' is a critical step in understanding the sequence of events and identifying
the root cause of the crash [2].
References

[1] Sean Broderick. "Air India Boeing 787 Accident Probe Reveals Few Clues." Aviation
Week Network, June 13, 2025. https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/safety-ops-
regulation/air-india-boeing-787-accident-probe-reveals-few-clues [2] CBS News. "Air
India plane crash investigators reportedly find first 'black box' from Boeing 787-8
wreckage in Ahmedabad." CBS News, June 13, 2025. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/
air-india-plane-crash-flight-171-black-boxes-boeing-787-wreckage-ahmedabad/

Preliminary Mechanical Failure Analysis

The reported 'no thrust' condition immediately after takeoff is a critical piece of
information, strongly suggesting a failure within the propulsion system. Given that the
aircraft is a twin-engine Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner powered by GE Aviation GEnx-1B67
engines, a complete loss of thrust in both engines simultaneously is a highly improbable
event without a common cause. This points towards several potential mechanical failure
scenarios:

1. Engine Malfunction (Both Engines)

While rare, a simultaneous failure of both engines could occur due to:

• Fuel Contamination or Starvation: Contaminated fuel or an interruption in fuel

supply to both engines could lead to a rapid loss of thrust. This would involve a
systemic issue affecting the fuel tanks, fuel lines, or fuel pumps. Investigations
would need to examine fuel samples from the aircraft and the refueling source, as
well as the integrity of the fuel delivery system.
• Software or Control System Malfunction: Modern aircraft engines are heavily
reliant on sophisticated electronic engine control systems (EECS) or full authority
digital engine controls (FADEC). A software glitch or a critical electrical system
failure affecting both FADEC units could lead to an erroneous command or loss of
control over engine parameters, resulting in thrust loss. The black boxes will be
crucial in analyzing any such commands or system responses.
• Foreign Object Debris (FOD) Ingestion: While surveillance video reportedly
showed no signs of bird strike, other forms of FOD (e.g., runway debris) could
potentially be ingested by both engines, leading to severe damage and thrust loss.
However, simultaneous ingestion by both engines immediately after takeoff is less
likely unless the debris field was exceptionally wide.
2. Flight Control System Failure

Although the pilots reported 'no thrust,' a primary flight control system malfunction
could indirectly lead to a perceived lack of thrust or an inability to climb. For instance:

• Stall Condition: A failure in the angle of attack sensors or flight control computers
could lead the aircraft into an aerodynamic stall, where the wings can no longer
generate sufficient lift. While not a direct thrust issue, it would manifest as an
inability to gain altitude. The fact that the descent was described as 'seemingly
controlled' might contradict a full aerodynamic stall, but a partial or incipient stall
cannot be ruled out.
• Trim System Malfunction: An uncommanded pitch trim runaway could force the
aircraft's nose down, making it impossible for the pilots to gain altitude even with
adequate thrust. This would put immense strain on the control surfaces and
potentially lead to structural failure if not corrected.

3. Structural Failure

While less likely given the initial observations of no visible external damage, a subtle
structural failure could have occurred:

• Control Surface Jamming: A mechanical jam in the linkages or actuators of

critical control surfaces (e.g., elevators, ailerons, rudder) could render the aircraft
uncontrollable, leading to a crash. This might not be immediately visible externally.
• Landing Gear Malfunction: The report states the landing gear remained down. A
failure in the landing gear retraction mechanism, while not directly causing a crash,
would increase drag significantly, potentially contributing to the inability to climb if
combined with even a minor thrust deficit.

4. Human Factors and Crew Response

While the focus of this analysis is mechanical, it is important to acknowledge that human
factors often play a role in aviation accidents. The crew's response to an emergency,
their training, and the clarity of their communications (e.g., the 'mayday' call) will be
thoroughly examined by investigators. The interaction between mechanical failures and
human response is a critical aspect of accident investigation.

5. Maintenance and Fatigue

The aircraft's age (built in 2010, delivered in 2014) and accumulated flight hours/cycles
(39,450 flight hours, ~7,400 cycles) suggest it was a well-utilized airframe. Investigators
will scrutinize maintenance records, recent repairs, and any recurring technical issues.
Material fatigue, while typically a long-term concern, could contribute to component
failure if not properly managed through inspection and maintenance programs.

Conclusion of Preliminary Analysis

The 'no thrust' report from the pilots is the most compelling initial clue, pointing
towards a severe issue with the propulsion system. The absence of visible external
damage or erratic flight behavior in the surveillance video suggests an internal
mechanical or system failure rather than an external event. The recovery and analysis of
the black boxes will be paramount in determining the precise nature of the failure,
whether it was engine-related, a flight control system malfunction, or a combination of
factors. Further investigation will involve detailed examination of the wreckage,
metallurgical analysis of failed components, and simulation of the flight profile to
corroborate findings.

Engineering Recommendations and Future

Considerations
Based on this preliminary analysis, several engineering recommendations and areas for
future consideration emerge, pending the full investigation results:

1. Thorough Engine System Review (GE GEnx-1B67): Given the reported 'no thrust'
condition, a comprehensive review of the GE GEnx-1B67 engine fleet, particularly
those with similar operational hours and cycles, should be undertaken. This review
should focus on potential common failure modes, software vulnerabilities in the
FADEC systems, and fuel system integrity. Any service bulletins or airworthiness
directives issued by GE or regulatory authorities related to this engine type should
be meticulously reviewed and implemented across the fleet.

2. Flight Control System Diagnostics: The investigation must thoroughly examine

the flight control system, including sensors (e.g., angle of attack sensors),
actuators, and control computers. The possibility of an uncommanded trim event
or other control surface malfunction needs to be definitively ruled out or
confirmed. Enhanced diagnostic capabilities for these systems could be considered
for future aircraft designs or retrofits.

3. Black Box Data Analysis and Transparency: The data from the recovered flight
data recorder (FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR) will be invaluable. A
transparent and timely release of the factual findings from this data (while
respecting privacy and investigative protocols) will be crucial for restoring public
confidence and for the global aviation industry to learn from this incident. The
 analysis should focus on engine parameters, flight control inputs, system warnings,
and crew communications leading up to the crash.

4. Enhanced Takeoff Performance Monitoring: Consideration should be given to

enhancing real-time takeoff performance monitoring systems. These systems could
provide earlier warnings to the crew if the aircraft is not achieving the expected
climb profile or if there is a significant thrust deficit. This could involve more
sophisticated algorithms that compare actual performance against predicted
performance based on aircraft weight, runway conditions, and environmental
factors.

5. Review of Maintenance Procedures and Training: A thorough review of Air India's

maintenance procedures for the Boeing 787 fleet, and specifically for the incident
aircraft, is necessary. This includes adherence to manufacturer recommendations,
service bulletins, and regulatory requirements. Additionally, pilot training for
emergency scenarios involving rapid loss of thrust or critical flight control
malfunctions shortly after takeoff should be reviewed and, if necessary, enhanced.
Simulator training should accurately replicate such challenging scenarios.

6. Material Fatigue and Structural Integrity Programs: While the aircraft was not
exceptionally old, the accumulated flight hours and cycles warrant a review of the
structural integrity programs for the Boeing 787. This includes inspections for
fatigue cracking, corrosion, and other forms of material degradation, particularly in
critical structural components and engine mounts.

7. Runway and Airport Environment Safety: Although initial reports suggest no

external factors like bird strikes, a review of the airport environment at
Ahmedabad, including runway conditions and measures to prevent Foreign Object
Debris (FOD), should be part of the broader investigation to ensure all contributing
factors are considered.

8. International Collaboration and Information Sharing: The involvement of

multiple international bodies (NTSB, FAA, AAIB UK) is a positive step. Continued
and robust international collaboration in air crash investigations is essential for
sharing expertise, lessons learned, and implementing global safety improvements.

Disclaimer
This report is a preliminary analysis based on publicly available information as of June
13, 2025. The findings and conclusions of the official investigation by the AAIB and other
regulatory bodies may differ. This document is intended for informational and
educational purposes from a mechanical engineering perspective and should not be
considered a definitive statement on the cause of the accident.

Author: Manus AI Date: June 13, 2025