The AAIB's report indicates that shortly after takeoff, both engine fuel control switches were moved from “RUN” to “CUTOFF,” shutting down thrust and leading to the aircraft’s descent and eventual crash, which claimed 260 lives including ground fatalities. Cockpit voice recorder captures reflect confusion: one pilot asks why fuel was cut off, and the other responds “I didn't do it,” though identities remain unclear.
Pilots from the Airline Pilots’ Association of India and other industry voices highlight inconsistencies in the report’s timeline. Capt Amit Singh notes confusion over when the ram air turbine deployed and when thrust was actually lost, questioning whether the swap in switch positions coincided precisely with engine failure. Capt Sam Thomas, ALPA‑I president, points out procedural omissions, including the disabled emergency locator transmitter and why operational pilots were excluded from investigative teams.
Distinguished industry insiders draw attention to the mechanical design of the switches. Aviation consultant Neil Hansford states these lift‑guarded controls resist accidental movement and imply deliberate activation. Echoing this, a Boeing source underscores that absence of a global advisory does not ensure safety, referencing past precedents like the Lion Air 737 MAX crash.
Technical commentators on platforms such as Leeham News stress gaps in pilot communication data: the preliminary report lacks clarity on who performed each switch movement, why there was a ten‑second delay in re‑engaging each engine, and why cockpit audio remains unverified down to identity and language.
Experts reiterate sought steps ahead. ALPA‑I demands transparent inclusion of operational pilots in the process, alongside independent oversight, to determine whether human error, mechanical fault or external interference is to blame. Civil aviation authorities in India, Boeing, the FAA, GE Aerospace and the NTSB are contributing to the in‑depth phase, expected to extend over a year.