Shocking and gut-wrenching has been the recent AI171 crash. Probably the worst air disaster the country has ever seen. 241 dead in the air, 28 plus on the ground and many seriously injured. Standing out however is God’s miracle in the form of one gentleman who survived the ‘impossible to survive’ accident.
Humanity has come together to offer its condolences to the bereaved families. For some reason, the loss seems so very personal. Everyone that I know of, has been impacted in a very inexplicable way.
Maybe, because commercial flying is no more the preserve of the rich and well-off. Most of us fly regularly and so do our kith and kin. It is but a natural subconscious response to ensure that we would not be venturing into anything, which could be even remotely called unsafe. When we condole, it is our heartfelt empathy and inner insecurities which are coming to the fore.
We don’t want a similar fate to anyone ever, more so our dear ones. We want them out of harm’s way for whatever it costs. It is but natural to feel inquisitive and want to know as to what happened? After all, no one likes an ‘out of turn allotment’. Feeding on this inquisitorial desire are the multitude of TV channels and social media experts who have suddenly cropped up, out of nowhere.
There are more aviation experts airing their speculations out there than aircraft in the sky. There is a constant vacillation going on between possibilities and probabilities in the never-ending debates. Based on evaluation of piecemeal external videos, we have conclusive board of inquiries already on the table. Simply ignoring the fact, that just because one flew an aircraft once upon a time, does not make one a professional aviation accident investigator.
The fact of the matter is what even a five-year-old kid knows when he says, “Papa, look at that aeroplane. It is not going up, its coming down.” In other words, the aircraft appears to have lost lift and virtually stalled into the ground, as an intentional controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) sounds ridiculous (but not impossible). The causal factors could therefore be either thrust related or aerodynamic.
Loss of thrust means an engine issue with one or both engines. Engines can fail because of internal or external factors. A bird hit is the most obvious external cause although a double-engine ingestion is a rarity. Internal factors could be related to either fuel systems, oil systems, electricals, electronics, hydraulic, software or maybe a rare combination of one or more factors.
Modern aircraft have multiple external aerodynamic devices. Out of these, the flaps, slats and the undercarriage come into play extensively during take-off and landings. These are the two most critical phases of flight due to proximity to ground. A system malfunction or an error in operation of any of these could lead to excessive drag.
As everyone can see in the videos, the wheels have not gone up. So, the aircraft is at that time in a high drag configuration. But the question remains, whether it was not selected up or it did not go up? Similarly, whether the flaps were operated prematurely or not? No firm evidence here as well.
Even engine related mechanical failures linked to blades or controls can’t be ruled out although the probability is low given the current state of technical development. So also, is the case of maintenance practices. Is there a case to suspect them? I can’t say but it is always there on an investigator’s agenda. Besides, sabotage or wilful damage must be conclusively ruled out as conspiracy theories tend to gain traction in a volatile world.
We should not be forgetting the pilots, technicians and other humans in the loop. Depending on the emergent situation, the human is the weakest and sometimes the strongest link in the chain. Was pilot error or some other kind of human error a contributory cause?
Was the apparent error induced by a system failure at a critical time and impacted the ‘spare mental capacity’ of the aircrew? Was there a health issue with any aircrew? We don’t know and any ascription to the same without evidence would be very unfair.
I am sure that from the above discussion, one is getting a feel of the numerous possibilities that could have led to this horrific tragedy. These are however just a few to drive the point home.
Only a thorough investigation involving the Flight data recorder, the cockpit voice recorder, the video recording system, the ADS-B transmissions, the external videos, the visual/ aural inputs from eyewitnesses, the lone survivor’s statements, the maintenance records and the training records will lead us to determine what exactly happened.
The next step would be to address the why part of it. That would take the investigation to a deeper level. Was there a fundamental design or manufacturing issue? Is there a shortfall in the OEM’s recommended maintenance procedures?
Has the operator deviated from recommended procedures? Are the training practices adequate? Were there any cockpit seniority gradient or crew resource management (CRM) issues? Was the operating environment conducive to safe operations including health and flight duty timing concerns as well? Were there any other factors which do not meet the eye?
Accident investigation is a science, a lateral thinking experience and an exercise in opening our minds to the implausible. Every hole in the fatal Swiss-cheese piece needs to be identified to prevent recurrence. It is indeed a compulsion to restore the confidence of the public which rightfully takes safety of flight for granted. An absolute given, as they say.
My learned friend who has led plenty of investigations says, “It’s okay to feel jumpy but let’s not jump to conclusions. Let’s give the guys out there, sifting through the ashes for evidences a fair chance.”
Hypothetical and ill-informed speculations galore but meanwhile the wiser notion would be to hold our proverbial horses. The deceased deserve a truthful and honourable closure, having made an unfortunate contribution to safer skies tomorrow.
