The AIR India AI171 flight disaster of 12 June 2025 would have been caused by the commander Sumet Sabharwal, Which would have interrupted on purpose the fuel flow before the 1 motor (the left one) and then of the 2 motor (the right one), causing the death of 241 of the 242 people on board. The news, we all read it, was revealed by Wall Street Journalwho mentioned US officials aware of the content of the audio files of the black box. It is precisely the black box that does not leave doubts: the shutdown of the engines, It was not a mistake or a technical malfunction, but a voluntary gestureprobably linked to a strong depression of which the commander suffered, even if this hypothesis has not yet been confirmed by the authorities.
At this point, it is spontaneous to ask how it is possible that a pilot, a commander, can turn off the engines in flight if There is no emergency? Shouldn’t it be impossible to turn off the engines of a plane just 3 seconds after take -off, without a real motivation? In short, this is one of the rare cases in which public opinion is questioning about thereliability of the man compared to the machine and not vice versaas often happens. Moreover, the relationship between man and machine is now at the center of our daily lives, also because there is no technological innovation without the human being.
THE‘artificial intelligence The world in which we live, but this change is not always perceived in a positive way: on the contrary, the fears are multiplying on how much and how the machines will replace human work in the future and, above all, if you can trust.
In the case of the tragic flight accident Air India, however, the machine it would have proved to be more reliable than man, which by definition is a fragile being, especially if subjected to great pressure and responsibilities How can an aerial pilot be. Precisely for this reason it is possible that, in the future, airlines and large producers like Boeing will make impossible for pilots voluntary shutdown of the engines, unless emergency situations or real anomalies.
What does all this mean? It means that, in the future, the aviation will be likely to rely more on theautomation And that, paradoxically, flying could become even safer than today. In short, the debate is more open than ever: in extreme cases like this, is it right that the machine intervene to block the pilot’s will?
