'... when the process isn't transparent, people will naturally raise questions.'
'The AAIB's own press release says they had the black boxes by June 16. Why wasn't decoding initiated until the 24th?'
'What were they waiting for?'
In the first part of a two-part interview with Prasanna D Zore/Rediff, a senior aviation expert -- who wishes to remain anonymous for personal reasons -- tears into the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau's handling of the Air India 171 crash probe.
Why did it take over 10 days to begin decoding the front black box? Why was there no official government order constituting the investigation team? Where are the Boeing 787 experts on the panel?
He argues that India's technical expertise is being sidelined in favour of the US NTSB (external link; National Transportation Safety Board which investigates major US transport accidents, identifies causes, and issues safety recommendations to prevent future incidents across all transportation modes) and that the AAIB's (India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau, under the civil aviation ministry, investigates air accidents to meet international obligations under ICAO's Annex 13 convention; external link) press release reflects deep confusion and structural flaws.
"There's no transparency," he warns. "If the DG (Director General) AAIB (Group Captain Godaba Venkata Gouri Yugandhar) is leading the probe, why isn't the media being briefed?"
This section of the interview raises core concerns about the integrity, jurisdiction, and urgency of the crash investigation -- and whether India's aviation safety framework is being compromised at its highest levels.
Why did it take more than 10 days to begin decoding data from the front black box? Doesn't this go against global best practices?
No one really knows. As per ICAO Annex 13 and Doc 9756 -- the global standard for accident investigations -- once the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau team is constituted, it should immediately take custody of all evidence. But that hasn't happened here (in the AI 171 crash probe).
The AAIB seems to have multiple teams, including a so-called 'go team' that collects evidence and brings it to Delhi. That's not how this process is supposed to work. This is not how a crash probe should work.
The team conducting the investigation should be the custodian of every piece of evidence -- whether it's the CVR or anything else.
I've always supported the AAIB, but their recent press release shows serious issues, particularly in how they describe the investigation's structure.
The release says the director general AAIB is heading the probe. He's a retired Indian Air Force aeronautical engineer, but what are his specific qualifications on a complex commercial aircraft like the Boeing 787?
Where is the aircraft-specific engineer? Where is the type-rated pilot? If such people have been included, why not disclose it? Why this opacity?
Also, the DG says the NTSB is 'part of the investigation,' but as per protocol, they are supposed to be observers, offering technical expertise if required -- not leading or managing the probe.
Why is the NTSB being treated as a technical lead? Don't we have our own type-rated experts?
Exactly. India has engineers and pilots qualified on the 787. If their expertise is exhausted or if something unusual arises, then the NTSB can step in. But to say that we need them from day one? That undermines our own technical ecosystem.
Isn't this entire approach by the AAIB fundamentally flawed?
Absolutely. There are no clearly defined timelines, no official order listing the investigation team.
ICAO guidelines and India's own DGCA manual (Section 5, Series C, Part 1; external link) mandate that the investigation begin immediately, submit a preliminary report within 30 days, and eventually a final report.
All of this should be documented in a formal government order. Where is it?
So, in your view, is this negligence or intentional?
I don't want to speculate on motives. But when the process isn't transparent, people will naturally raise questions.
For instance, the AAIB's own press release says they had the black boxes by June 16. Why wasn't decoding initiated until the 24th? What were they waiting for?
Could it be that they didn't have the equipment in place to decode the data?
That's the only explanation I can think of. Maybe they had to bring in equipment from the NTSB. Otherwise, even as an aviation professional this delay makes no sense to me.
Given the gravity of this crash and its implications for Indian aviation, one would expect a much swifter, more professional response.
In previous accidents, how long did AAIB typically take to decode black boxes? Is this delay unprecedented?
Until recently, we didn't have in-country capabilities. The black boxes were usually sent to the aircraft manufacturer -- Boeing -- accompanied by AAIB staff. That process could take over a month. But now that we have a lab, we should be acting faster.
That said, AAIB has historically not filed preliminary reports in a timely fashion. You can check their Web site -- very few reports are uploaded within the mandated 30 days. Unfortunately, this isn't a new problem.
It's been over two weeks, and reports suggest the lead investigator hasn't been officially appointed. Is that correct?
The press release says the DG AAIB (G V G Yugandhar) himself is heading the investigation. If that's the case, then he should be the one briefing the media, issuing status updates, and outlining the plan. Why hasn't he done that?
Also, to repeat a key point: is the DG (AAIB) type-rated on the Boeing 787? No. Then where are the type-qualified (same as type-rated) experts? Where is the engineer who understands this aircraft inside-out? None of them seem to be on the team.
(
Note: 'Type-rated' means that a pilot or engineer is officially certified -- after undergoing specific training and exams -- to operate or work on a particular type of aircraft.)
(In aviation, each major aircraft model (like the Boeing 787, Airbus A320, etc) requires its own type rating because of the significant differences in systems, handling, avionics, and emergency procedures. This certification is in addition to a basic pilot license or engineering qualification.)
So, is the DG of the AAIB type-rated on the Boeing 787?
No. The Director General AAIB (G V G Yugandhar) is a retired Indian Air Force aeronautical engineer, not a commercial pilot or engineer trained specifically on the Boeing 787.
Therefore, he is not type-rated on the Boeing 787.
Photographs curated by Manisha Kotian/Rediff
- Part 2 of the Interview: 'Human Error Verdict Keeps Dreamliner's Reputation Intact'
© 2025