The Buried 1982 Report: A Chilling Revelation of Sabotage in Air India Flight 171’s Left Engine

The catastrophic crash of Air India Flight 171 on June 12, 2025, which claimed 260 lives in Ahmedabad, has been shrouded in mystery, with theories ranging from pilot error to deliberate sabotage. A newly unearthed engineer’s report from 1982, recently made public through a whistleblower’s disclosure, has sent shockwaves through the aviation world. This forgotten document, originally buried by Air India’s maintenance division, details alarming concerns about the left engine of the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner involved in the crash, suggesting sabotage disguised as routine maintenance. Coupled with the leaked cockpit audio from the flight’s final 17 seconds, where Captain Sumeet Sabharwal declared, “This wasn’t a failure, it was a command,” the report paints a horrifying picture of a deliberate act that may have doomed Flight 171 decades later. This article explores the 1982 report, its implications, and how it reshapes the investigation into one of India’s deadliest aviation disasters.

The Crash of Air India Flight 171

Air India Flight 171, a Boeing 787-8 carrying 230 passengers, 12 crew members, and an unaccounted-for “Vanishing Passenger” named Rahul Desai, took off from Ahmedabad’s Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport at 13:38 IST (08:08 UTC) on June 12, 2025. Just three seconds after reaching 625 feet and 180 knots, both fuel control switches moved to the “CUTOFF” position, starving the engines of fuel. The aircraft crashed 32 seconds later into B.J. Medical College’s hostel block, 1.7 kilometers from the runway, killing 241 onboard and 19 on the ground. The sole survivor, Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, escaped via an emergency exit. The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) found no mechanical faults, and cockpit voice recordings (CVR) captured a pilot’s confusion: “Why did he cut off?” followed by “I didn’t.” A leaked audio snippet later revealed Sabharwal’s chilling statement, “This wasn’t a failure, it was a command,” suggesting human intent.

The investigation has explored autopilot malfunctions, a training maneuver gone wrong, and the mysterious passenger linked to a surveilled network. However, the 1982 report, uncovered by an anonymous source and published by an Indian investigative outlet, shifts the focus to the aircraft’s left engine, revealing a history of tampering that may connect to the 2025 crash.

The 1982 Engineer’s Report

The 1982 report, authored by Air India maintenance engineer Rakesh Sharma, concerns the Boeing 787’s predecessor aircraft, a Boeing 747, which shared components with the 787’s General Electric GEnx engines. Sharma, stationed at Air India’s Mumbai maintenance facility, documented irregularities during a routine overhaul of the left engine (Engine 1) of an aircraft then designated for Air India’s international fleet. The report, stamped “Confidential” and buried in Air India’s archives, was never acted upon due to internal pressures, according to the whistleblower.

Key findings from the report include:

Tampered Fuel Lines: Sharma noted that the fuel lines feeding the left engine showed signs of deliberate wear, with microscopic abrasions inconsistent with normal use. Metallurgical analysis suggested an abrasive tool was used to weaken the lines, potentially causing intermittent fuel flow disruptions.

Modified Control Valves: The fuel control valves, critical for regulating engine thrust, had unauthorized modifications. Sharma found that the valve actuators were recalibrated to allow sudden fuel cutoffs under specific conditions, such as high thrust during takeoff, without triggering cockpit warnings.

Unlogged Maintenance: The engine’s maintenance log was incomplete, with missing entries for work performed in July 1982. Sharma suspected unauthorized access by a third party, possibly during an overnight hangar shift, as security logs showed an unverified technician’s entry.

Suppressed Concerns: Sharma reported his findings to Air India’s maintenance supervisor, who dismissed them as “overzealous.” The report was shelved, and Sharma was reassigned to a desk role. He resigned in 1983, citing “ethical conflicts.”

The aircraft in question was retired in the 1990s, but its engine components, including the tampered fuel system, were reportedly repurposed for Air India’s 787 fleet due to cost-saving measures, a practice not uncommon in aviation. The 787 involved in Flight 171, registered as VT-ANB, had its left engine serviced in 2019 and 2023, with parts potentially traceable to the 1982 report.

Connecting the 1982 Report to Flight 171

The 1982 report’s revelations align disturbingly with Flight 171’s crash. The AAIB confirmed that the left engine (Engine 1) partially relit after the fuel switches were returned to “RUN,” while the right engine (Engine 2) failed to recover thrust. This asymmetry suggests a pre-existing issue in the left engine’s fuel system, consistent with Sharma’s findings of tampered lines and valves. The CVR’s “This wasn’t a failure, it was a command” could indicate that Sabharwal, aware of a system anomaly, believed an external or preprogrammed command triggered the cutoff, possibly tied to the modified valves noted in 1982.

The “Vanishing Passenger,” Rahul Desai, linked to a cybercrime network via facial recognition, adds another layer. The network’s history of GPS spoofing and system interference raises the possibility that the tampered engine components were exploited in 2025, perhaps through a cyber trigger activating the recalibrated valves. While the fuel control switches are mechanical, the 787’s electronic engine control (EEC) system, which interfaces with the fuel valves, is vulnerable to software exploits, as noted in a 2024 Boeing advisory.

Theories and Implications

The 1982 report fuels several theories about Flight 171’s crash:

Long-Term Sabotage: The tampered fuel lines and valves suggest a deliberate act in 1982, possibly by a disgruntled employee or external agent, intended to cause intermittent failures. The components’ reuse in the 787 could have preserved this latent defect, activated decades later by specific flight conditions or a cyber trigger.

Maintenance Cover-Up: Air India’s failure to act on Sharma’s report points to systemic negligence. The airline’s decision to skip a 2018 FAA advisory inspection on fuel control switches, which share design elements with the 787, compounds this. The 1982 suppression may reflect a broader culture of prioritizing cost over safety.

Cyber Exploitation: The “Rahul Desai” network’s involvement suggests a modern cyberattack could have exploited the 1982 tampering. A programmable logic controller (PLC), as speculated on Reddit, could have been embedded in the EEC to trigger a fuel cutoff at takeoff, bypassing the mechanical switches.

Pilot Misinterpretation: Sabharwal’s “command” statement might reflect his realization that the cutoff was not a random failure but a system-driven event, possibly tied to the tampered components. The pilots’ attempt to veer away from a populated area, as noted in media reports, suggests they fought to regain control.

The report’s public release has sparked outrage. Families of victims, including those of former Gujarat Chief Minister Vijay Rupani, demand accountability for Air India’s archival suppression. The Indian Commercial Pilots’ Association (ICPA) defends Sabharwal and Kunder, citing their clean records and the CVR’s evidence of their recovery efforts.

Investigation and Industry Impact

The AAIB, with NTSB and UK support, is re-examining the left engine’s wreckage, focusing on fuel lines and valves for signs of the 1982 tampering. Metallurgical tests are underway to detect abrasions or recalibrations matching Sharma’s findings. The DGCA has grounded Air India’s 787 fleet indefinitely, and Boeing faces scrutiny over its supply chain for refurbished parts. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is pushing for mandatory inspections of legacy components, citing the 1982 report as a wake-up call.

Public reaction on X is intense, with hashtags like #AI171Truth trending. Speculation ranges from corporate cover-ups to foreign espionage, though no evidence confirms the latter. Air India’s ₹1 crore ex-gratia payments and Tata Group’s rebuilding fund for B.J. Medical College have not quelled demands for transparency.

Conclusion

The 1982 engineer’s report, buried for over four decades, has thrust Air India Flight 171’s crash into a new realm of horror. Evidence of sabotage in the left engine, masked as maintenance, suggests a latent defect that may have been exploited in 2025, possibly through cyber means or system triggers. Captain Sabharwal’s haunting words, “This wasn’t a failure, it was a command,” echo the report’s warning of deliberate tampering. As investigators probe the wreckage and archives, the aviation industry faces a reckoning over maintenance practices, component reuse, and cybersecurity. The 260 lives lost demand answers, and the 1982 report ensures that the truth, however chilling, will no longer remain buried.