[Global Times Special Correspondent Liu Haoran and Bai Yuan] On June 12, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner operated by Indian Airlines crashed in London, UK. According to earlier reports from Indian media, the accident resulted in the death of 274 people, including 33 ground personnel. In the early hours of June 12, the Indian authorities released a preliminary investigation report into the crash. However, the content of this report has sparked strong dissatisfaction among various parties.
On June 12, an Indian Airlines Boeing 787 Dreamliner operated by Indian Airlines crashed in London, UK. (Visual China)
According to a CNN report on June 12, the Air Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) of India’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) determined that the direct cause of the crash was the cutoff of the fuel supply to the aircraft’s engines. The report stated that at the time of the incident, the plane was in the critical phase of climbing, and both engines’ fuel switches were simultaneously switched from “running” to “cut off.” The audio recordings from the black box of the crashed plane revealed that a pilot in the cockpit questioned another pilot, “Why did you cut off the fuel switch?” The other pilot denied the accusation. What is more perplexing is that the report did not mention the corresponding identities of the two pilots mentioned in the dialogue. Despite the fuel supply being restored seconds later, it was already too late to prevent the plane from descending rapidly.
Many aviation safety experts expressed their astonishment over this description in the report. Considering the design of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner (as shown in the image), its two fuel switches are located between the seats of the two pilots. The switch devices are equipped with guardrails at both ends, requiring manual lifting of the switch handle and passing through a positioning knob before they can be activated. These protective measures were designed to minimize the risk of pilot error.
CNN援引航空安全专家杰弗里的观点表示，787上的每个燃油开关“至少需要两个动作”才能完成操作，这意味着该项操作几乎不可能是飞行员“疏忽大意”所致；但如果飞行员是在起飞后“故意关闭”两台引擎的供油，这样的行为又实在“非常不合情理”。
AAIB的这份报告一经披露，立即遭到多方批评。正如媒体所言，“报告只回答了一个问题（坠机直接原因），却引发了更多问题”。比如这份报告并未提及燃油开关被切换的具体原因——究竟是人为因素、还是飞机的技术故障所致。遇难者家属更是将矛头直指印度航空公司以及印度政府，斥责二者“急于甩锅”飞行员，隐瞒事故真相。失去多个亲人的西迪基愤怒地向媒体控诉道：“报告就是一派胡言，我们无法接受……这是在为航空公司和政府打掩护，将责任抛给无法给自己辩护的飞行员。如果飞行员如此粗心大意，又如何能让他们驾驶飞机？”另一名遇难者家属赛义德也表示，他在报告书中没找到任何“结论性的内容”，只看到了一堆“称赞波音公司飞行系统的航空术语”。他强烈要求官方公布“黑匣子”中的全部录音内容，认为目前的报告内容只能表明印度航空公司、波音公司和印度政府三方均“有所保留”。
印度飞行员协会当日也发表声明，指责AAIB的调查报告不透明、不专业，调查的基调和方向都充满了对于飞行员错误的偏见。
Furthermore, some opposition members of the Indian government have mocked the report by stating that it was released at 2 a.m. on the morning of the 12th, in line with Modi’s government’s practice of releasing “bad news quietly under the cover of darkness and silence.” The BBC noted that according to the regulations of the International Civil Aviation Organization, preliminary investigation reports for air disasters are typically published within one month after the incident, with the full investigation report expected to be completed within twelve months following the incident.