Families sue Boeing and Honeywell over Air India crash that killed 260 people
- Air India Flight 171 crashed on June 12 shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad towards London, killing 260 people.
- Families of the victims have filed a lawsuit in the U.S., alleging that faulty fuel switches made by Boeing and Honeywell were responsible for the crash.
- The pilots maintained that they did not disable the fuel supply, suggesting the possibility of mechanical failure rather than pilot error.
In India, Air India Flight 171, a Boeing 787, tragically crashed shortly after taking off from Ahmedabad towards London on June 12, leading to the deaths of 260 people on board. The preliminary investigation by India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) revealed that both engine fuel cutoff switches were moved from 'run' to 'cutoff' position mere seconds after takeoff, resulting in a dual-engine flameout and subsequent crash. This catastrophic event prompted a dire need for accountability and scrutiny regarding the aircraft's design and maintenance protocols. In a significant development, the families of four victims from this devastating incident have initiated a lawsuit in Delaware, United States. They are targeting Boeing, the aircraft manufacturer, and Honeywell, the manufacturer of the faulty fuel switches, asserting that their negligence contributed to the tragedy. The complaint cites the FAA's 2018 advisory on the risk of faulty fuel switches and claims that Air India failed to conduct the recommended inspections or alterations to prevent such accidents. The families allege that the design and placement of the switches made them vulnerable to inadvertent activation during normal cockpit operations, a scenario that contributed to the mishap. The lawsuit underscores a growing concern about product safety within the aviation industry and the accountability of manufacturers in ensuring that their designs mitigate possible operational errors. Despite the preliminary findings indicating a possible pilot error based on cockpit recordings, the families maintain that the potential flaws in the fuel switch design could have played a pivotal role in the pilot's actions, thus warranting a comprehensive examination of accountability for all parties involved. Aviation safety experts express mixed opinions on the allegations, noting that while the position of the switches may make them prone to accidental contact, systematic procedures in the cockpit generally protect against such autopilot error. As investigations continue, the families seek a public inquiry to clear their loved ones from accusations of intentional actions and ensure that similar tragedies are prevented in the future through more rigorous safety protocols.