Inside The US-India Rift Slowing The Air India 171 Inquiry
A Bitter Rift Behind The AI171 Investigation
Next week marks six months since the crash of Air India Flight 171 in Ahmedabad. Despite the scale of the tragedy and intense global scrutiny of both Air India and Boeing, the investigation into what brought down the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner is mired in politics as much as in technical complexity.
Instead of a seamless joint probe, the inquiry has exposed a widening rift between India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) and the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), with mutual suspicion now threatening to overshadow the search for answers.
Tension Between Investigators From Day One
Frictions reportedly began almost as soon as US investigators arrived in India. NTSB black box specialists were originally due to travel with their Indian counterparts to examine the flight data and cockpit voice recorders at a remote facility.
That plan was abruptly changed. Acting on instructions from Washington, the NTSB team was intercepted on arrival and held in New Delhi, rather than joining the AAIB at the original examination site.
Indian officials eventually agreed to download the recorders’ data in New Delhi instead, insisting that they had the expertise and equipment to handle the process themselves. One senior AAIB official, Shri GVG Yugandhar, reportedly pushed back at any insinuation of inadequate capability, telling his American counterparts:
“We’re not a Third World country. We can do anything you all can do. We have the same capabilities.”
The compromise kept the investigation technically on track, but it also set the tone: every step forward would be shadowed by mistrust.
Suspicions Of Sabotage – And Of A Cover-Up
A preliminary report has already confirmed one key fact: both engines lost power shortly after takeoff when their fuel supply was cut off. What remains unresolved – at least publicly – is why the fuel cutoff occurred.
According to US media reports, some American investigators now suspect that the fuel cutoff switch was deliberately activated by the Captain, potentially as an attempt to intentionally crash the aircraft. They also reportedly see evidence that no effective nose-up input was made to recover the aircraft after the loss of thrust, which they view as consistent with a sabotage scenario.
Indian officials are said to reject this interpretation. There are fears in Washington that New Delhi may instead emphasize possible mechanical faults, thereby steering blame away from the flight deck. At the same time, Indian commentators have accused the US side of fixating on pilot blame while downplaying potential design or system vulnerabilities on a US-built aircraft.
To make matters worse, US investigators were reportedly not allowed to photograph the wreckage, reinforcing their perception that access is being tightly controlled. On the Indian side, there is equal frustration at what is seen as American heavy-handedness and distrust of local investigators.
The result is a poisonous mix: one side wary of a cover-up, the other convinced it is being treated as a junior partner in its own territory.
Political Shockwaves And Official Pushback
Unsurprisingly, the tensions have spilled into the political realm. Questions have been raised in India’s parliament and media about the integrity and independence of the investigation, and about how much influence foreign agencies should wield in a crash that occurred on Indian soil.
India’s Civil Aviation Ministry has publicly denied any manipulation of the probe, insisting that the AAIB is following international standards and that all parties are being given appropriate access. Officials have repeatedly stressed that no final conclusions about cause or intent have yet been reached, and that speculation – from either side – risks undermining public trust.
Nonetheless, the perception of a US–India tug-of-war over the narrative of AI171 is now firmly embedded in public discussion, especially as leaks and off-the-record briefings continue to surface.
The AI171 Disaster In Brief
Air India Flight AI171 was a scheduled passenger service from Ahmedabad’s Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport (AMD) to London Gatwick (LGW) operated by a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, registration VT-ANB.
On the afternoon of June 12, 2025, the aircraft departed AMD but lost altitude almost immediately after takeoff. Within moments, it crashed into an accommodation building at a nearby medical college, barely a mile from the runway.
The crash was catastrophic:
-
12 crew members and 229 of the 230 passengers were killed – only one passenger survived
-
19 people on the ground also lost their lives
-
A further 67 people on the ground were injured
It was the first fatal accident and hull loss involving the Boeing 787 family, and the deadliest crash of the 2020s so far.
Given the aircraft type involved, the scale of the loss of life, and the prominence of both Air India and Boeing, the AI171 probe was always going to be under intense global scrutiny. The diplomatic rift now layered on top of that only makes the stakes higher.
What Happens Next?
Formally, the AAIB remains the lead investigative authority, with the NTSB involved as the accredited representative of the state of manufacture and design. In theory, that structure should allow for robust cross-checking of evidence and conclusions.
In practice, the investigation is now being conducted in an atmosphere where:
-
Every procedural decision is viewed through a geopolitical lens
-
Each side suspects the other’s motives, whether it’s about protecting a national champion airline or a major aircraft manufacturer
-
Families of victims are left watching two governments argue over narrative and control instead of seeing visible progress toward answers
Until investigators can get past the mutual suspicion – or are forced to do so by political pressure, public outrage, or both – the risk is that the AI171 report becomes as much a diplomatic document as a technical one.
Bottom Line
Six months after the crash of Air India Flight 171, the search for truth is increasingly overshadowed by a US–India power struggle.
On one side, American investigators reportedly suspect deliberate action by the Captain and worry about a whitewash that shifts blame to the aircraft. On the other, Indian authorities bristle at what they see as patronizing oversight and insist they have both the tools and the mandate to run the investigation on their own terms.
Until that trust gap closes, the AI171 probe risks drifting further from its core mission: providing a clear, credible explanation of what happened, and ensuring that 260 lives were not lost in vain.
