At 1:39 pm. local time on June 12, Air India flight AI171 from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick – a Boeing 787‑8 Dreamliner registered VT‑ANB — failed to gain altitude on departure from Runway 23 at Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport.
After a brief, steep climb to roughly 625 feet, the aircraft issued a mayday, lost radio contact seconds later, and came down in the densely populated Meghani Nagar district just outside the perimeter fence. A post‑impact fuel fire produced a towering column of black smoke visible across the city.
Air India Dreamliner crash flight AI171
A sad day for aviation @AirNavRadar
— Flight Emergency (@FlightEmergency) June 12, 2025
The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) lists 242 persons on board: 230 passengers and 12 crew (2 pilots, 10 cabin crew). Among passengers was former Gujarat chief minister Vijay Rupani. Here are the passenger manifests which have been circulating in social media.
- The plane had a 1:10 p.m. scheduled departure time
- 1:38 p.m. wheels up
- 1:39 p.m. Mayday call as the plane’s climb stops at around 625 feet
- 1:40 p.m. Transponder signal lost
- 1:43 p.m. Impact as large fire breaks out
Air India AI171, a 787-8 Dreamliner, with around 242 passengers on board has reportedly crashed near Ahmedabad airport during take off. More details to follow. pic.twitter.com/k4HBIRHlQg
— Breaking Aviation News & Videos (@aviationbrk) June 12, 2025
Horrifying videos from the #AI171 crash scene. pic.twitter.com/vkgP2y0LE9
— Turbine Traveller (@Turbinetraveler) June 12, 2025
Reporters on‑site noted multiple stretchers leaving the area, and there is not yet a confirmed casualty count.
It’s too early to know the cause of the disaster. The mayday call suggests situational awareness and recovery of the cockpit voice and flight data recorder will tell us far more. There will likely be a focus on a severe power‑plant anomaly or flight‑control disconnection.
This is the first hull loss involving a Boeing 787 aircraft. It is not the first crash shortly after takeoff for an Air India flight number 171.
The photos released so far look grim.
Horrific video…..ufff
https://x.com/upuknews1/status/1933089890654461973?s=46&t=EcFTqaB9iFzlSxC2Hd-pxA
Very sad news.thoughts and prayers to crew, passengers and those on the ground in this terrible incident.
Just awful. Could have been any of us. I feel for the victims and their families. We must investigate and learn what we can to hopefully prevent future accidents. Rules are written in blood. Let’s try our best not to politicize tragedies or denigrate on the basis of origin, ethnicity, religion, or otherwise. Take care, everyone.
Given that it’s air India it’s 100% certain human error.
Maybe it’s superstition, but flying any flight number 1X1 seems scary. Also, UA 232 fits this as well.
Very sad day – praying for the families of all involved.
Ah, there it is. Unnecessary animus. If only @Walter Barry could have been there… not because you’d have changed any outcome, but, more so, because there’d be a little less hate in the world… thereafter. Your comment above is disgraceful. Again, this could happen to anyone. We all fly regularly. Many of us on 787s. Some of us to London. Be more kind, folks.
The landing gear was down and it appears the flaps were up. Like Lion Air and Ethiopian, add Air India to the list of airlines I will not fly.
Looking at the video posted of the crash, it appears to me that they took off with the flaps retracted. That will cause any airliner (probably any plane) to stall upon takeoff. I can’t understand how this could happen, because the Boeing 787 has a Takeoff Configuration Warning System that would trigger an alarm if the pilot attempted to take off with flaps retracted or not set correctly for takeoff. This system monitors critical settings, including flap position, and alerts the crew with aural and visual warnings (e.g., a loud “CONFIG FLAPS” warning and EICAS messages) if the configuration is unsafe when thrust is applied or during the takeoff roll. The exact flap setting required depends on the runway, weight, and conditions, but the system ensures flaps are extended to a valid takeoff position. Perhaps the pilots were stressed and ignored the warning? Perhaps the TCWS malfunctioned? Perhaps it was disabled in maintenance and never fixed? The fact that the transponder stoped transmitting before the crash, and that the wheels were still up may point to some kind of massive electrical system issue that the pilots were dealing with that may have contributed to the crash. It may not be Boeing’s fault, it may be.
If it a maintenance issue, it there could be any number of companies at fault. Air India primarily handles the maintenance of its Boeing 787 fleet through its subsidiary, Air India Engineering Services Limited (AIESL), which is responsible for the maintenance, repair, and overhaul of Air India’s aircraft, including the Boeing 787s. However, some heavy maintenance tasks for Air India’s Boeing 787s and 777s have been outsourced to third-party providers, such as Turkish Technic, as part of specific agreements. For example, a February 2025 deal with Turkish Technic was noted for the maintenance of Air India’s wide-body fleet, though this was under review due to geopolitical tensions. Additionally, Collins Aerospace (formerly Rockwell Collins) typically manages maintenance and diagnostics for specific systems like the Common Core System (CCS) on the 787s, as they are the original equipment manufacturer for these components. While Boeing does not directly perform maintenance, it provides technical support and guidance to airlines like Air India as needed, particularly in response to incidents or for specific safety and quality programs
It’s hard to tell from the video, but is it me or the flaps seem at the very least in the wrong setting?
@1990, be more kind…except when it comes to your constant political attacks, right?
You’re just as pathetic as Tim Dunn on these forums! Just another hypocrite who wants everyone’s attention.
@Coffee Please — Actually, what ties all three incidents together is Boeing, not the airlines that you mentioned.
With the 737, those issues with the Max (MCAS) were less about the pilots and more about corporate greed (you know, quick fix, maximize profits, not properly prepare crews, etc.) Yet, the current administration has let Boeing off the hook, even after they plead guilty. That’s a tragedy on its own, and an insult to the families of those several hundred victims before.
However, for this 787, it’s too soon. We don’t know what caused this Air India accident. So, we really should just allow them to investigate and share their findings. It could be years, though.
@1990 – Let’s hope this wasn’t due to a catastrophic failure of composite materials, similar to the 2001 AA crash where a composite rudder sheared off after takeoff.
@1990
Exactly, we don’t know what caused this specific disaster.
And yes, we all know that the fingers point to Boeing on the other two incidents.
@1990. Lots of pilot error on both Lion and Ethiopian. I bet we will see the same with Air India. From the video it appears the landing gear was down while the flaps were up. Did the non flying pilot raise the flaps rather than the gear when called for?
The first to decry animus is the first to bring it on. 1990 as usual.
Looking at the airport diagram it looks like they took off from an intersection leaving nearly half the runway behind them. If that’s the case it will be a short investigation.
Engines: It’s hard to tell from the video if the engines were producing enough thrust since modern engines don’t smoke much. Video of the final seconds seems to have engine noise, so at least one engine was functional and at least to some extent.
Flaps: It doesn’t look like the flaps are extended, but I’m not very familiar with the appearance of takeoff setting of flaps on a 787. They definitely were not fully extended.
Gear: Down. Depending on the time between liftoff and the video, the gear might have been able to retract and then deploy.
Flight Control: Seems there is at least some control as the plane is flying straight and flairs as it nears the end of the video.
Comms: It is reported that the plane issued a “Mayday” and then nothing more. I don’t think that necessarily means complete electrical failure. I’m betting the pilots were busy with the Aviate step of the Aviate, Navigate, Communicate.
Theories:
1) As @Coffee Please said, the flaps could have been raised in error rather than the gear. Assuming both engines were fully functional and at 100% thrust, is it possible that the fully loaded and fueled plane could gain altitude and speed if the flaps were retracted at initial +15 seconds takeoff speed?
2) Flight takes off and retracts flaps. Immediately after, one engine fails. Crew makes a mistake under stress and shuts down the wrong engine. The malfunctioning engine is still running, is heard in the video, but it’s not providing enough thrust. Maybe redeploying flaps could have helped. Restart of the good engine isn’t able to be accomplished in time.
3) Flight takes off and retracts flaps. Immediately after, one engine fails. Again, not sure about the flight parameters necessary to sustain flight, but maybe one engine isn’t enough to keep a fully loaded 787 aloft without flaps at that stage in the departure. Crew doesn’t recognize the misconfiguration of flight controls. Plane descends into terrain.
Then again, based on a video from the airport, maybe the flaps were not set correctly (extended) for takeoff.
The gear was never retracted.
Plus, there is possibly a survivor that reports there was a ‘boom’ and the plane started descending shortly after takeoff.
From liftoff to impact was short. Very short.
Theories:
4) Flaps never set correctly and then an engine failed. Not enough time to realize configuration error and/or take corrective action before impact.
There’s CCTV out now of the takeoff. They didn’t seem to get ‘lift’ until very end of runway. A bit of dust at the end. Loss of ‘lift’ within mere seconds of takeoff. Engines? Electrical? Overloaded? Yeah, all speculation.
There was also some confusion over the data from Flightradar24. Some were wrongly suggesting that AI171 didn’t use the full runway; however, ‘additional processing of receiver sources, which confirmed the aircraft backtracked to the end of the runway before beginning its takeoff roll.’ Apparently, they did do a ‘backtrack,’ and used full runway length of 11,499 feet.
@Denver Refugee — Doesn’t seem to be the case here. I’m sure it’ll be studied though.
@Coffee Please — It would be easier to just blame pilots for every crash (and doctors for every death, I know, a strawman…), but main cause in both of those earlier incidents was found to be the same flawed flight control system.
“The crashes of Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, both involving Boeing 737 MAX aircraft, were primarily attributed to failures in Boeing’s design and certification of the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS). While pilot error did play a role in the Lion Air crash, the root cause was a faulty angle-of-attack (AoA) sensor and the MCAS system’s reliance on it. In the Ethiopian Airlines crash, the pilots did try to correct the issue, but were ultimately unable to recover due to the system’s continued influence, even after they attempted to disable it.”
@cairns — Nah, so far, @Walter Barry is first (and only, thankfully). And, his comments were obviously not ‘good faith,’ especially when compared to prior bigotry he (and others, including yourself) has expressed at VFTW before (and, we’re all fortunate that Gary still hosts everyone, even those who suggest ‘bad’ ideas). So, do not mistake reasonable skepticism with Boeing as ‘animus.’ After all, that company’s admitted wrongdoing cost hundreds of lives before.
@TXP — Consider that ‘gear was never retracted’ because it lost ‘lift’ 3 seconds after takeoff.
@1990
The Ethiopian pilots never reduced thrust after takeoff. Most pilots will disconnect the electric trim if it continues to put in inputs that weren’t asked for. Do you read Aviation Week?
@Coffee Please — Yes, I respect that source. As reported there, and as I was just saying in Gary’s other post (on the ‘lone survivor’), AI 171 was operated by an 11 years-old 788, VT-ANB, serial number 36279; it had GEnx-1B67 engines. Previously, the aircraft flew 39,450 hr. and close to 7,400 cycles. It had performed a 1-hour flight from Delhi to Ahmedabad (AI 423) earlier this morning, and before that had arrived from Paris around 1:30AM. So, what went wrong?
Of course, there’s still much to learn here, but I think there’s something there with the engines. I’m sure the AAIB recalls BA35, first 777 hull loss, which had a different issue that restricted fuel flow. If there was an electrical or engine failure at such a critical stage, that’d explain the ‘short’ flight.
RE: Engine issue?
I see no indication of a loss of a single engine (partial or complete) nor any bird strike in the CCTV video (showing the full takeoff to impact). If one had occurred, one would likely see:
– Some type of smoke / flame / exhaust anomaly out of the affected engine (often seen with compressor stalls or bird strikes). None appears to be visible.
– Some significant, reactive turning / banking / yawing as a result of the asymmetrical thrust. The plane appears to stay mostly wings level on the same heading to impact.
– Rudder deflection in response to the engine failure. Although the “takeoff” video quality is relatively poor, no rudder input appears to be visible. This is also the case on the first “looking from the house” video to come out – the rudder does not appear to be deflected in response to any asymmetrical thrust.
There is a screenshot from the “looking from the house” video on some websites, speculating if the RAT (Ram Air Turbine) is deployed – an automatic aircraft response to a complete power loss. It deploys from the right side of the lower fuselage, just aft of the wing root. I don’t see evidence of RAT deployment in the majority of the “view from the house” video. You would expect to see the actual deployment – I don’t.
What is seen for certain is a late aircraft rotation (note the dust), a partial climb (without a “positive rate, gear up” and gear retraction which usually happens within a few hundred feet of the ground), and a very small rolling movement with noticeable elevator pitch change after the descent begins. I believe this would be due to the crew turning on the autopilot – climbing out at 400′ (standard procedure for many airlines) – followed by turning it off and manually flying as the plane descended.
In my opinion, the most likely explanation is a combination of mistakes, most likely attributable to pilot error, to include:
1) Calculating takeoff from the full runway length, but departing from a significantly shorter intersection location.
2) Flaps either up (seems unlikely due to configuration warning) or maybe only at Flaps 1 (so they are too low for the available runway length). Hard to tell with the quality of the video, but either way the flaps appear to be too low to sustain flight.
3) Rotation at end of runway at too slow of speed as the end is reached (again, note the dust kicked up – this is not normal for a transport aircraft to rotate so late).
4) “Startle Effect” of the hurried rotation disrupts crew procedures – possible “gear up” call but other pilot (likely F/O) raises the flaps instead (if they were indeed at a low setting like Flaps 1).
5) Aircraft enters deep stall at too low an altitude for recovery.
The CVR/FDR will obviously tell a great deal of the story – but some type of systemic “787 problem” also seems unlikely, as this aircraft was originally delivered nearly 11 years ago.
@Dee Tales — We can only hope you’re right (as to this being a one-off, not systemic). Do you have thoughts on the possibility of a full or partial power loss? Some have suggested the ram air turbine (RAT) was deployed. At 600 feet, no time to remedy.
I saw in another forum a post by a 787 pilot who suggested that a common early training simulator error is for flaps to be retracted by mistake instead of the gear being put up upon the “positive rate, gear up” command. We won’t know for a while how this accident happened, but I thought that was kind of interesting.
Oh, all the armchair captains who’ve never flown a large transport airliner or much else. The CVR and FDR will soon show whats what.