The deployment of a Ram Air Turbine (RAT) on an Air India Boeing 787 Dreamliner during a final approach to Birmingham could have been a sign of a looming disaster. Instead, it was a testament to the aircraft’s robust fail-safe mechanisms and the professionalism of its crew, who landed the plane without incident.
In a statement, AI said: “The operating crew of flight AI-117 from Amritsar to Birmingham on Oct 4, 2025, detected deployment of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) of the aircraft during its final approach. All electrical and hydraulic parameters were found normal, and the aircraft performed a safe landing at Birmingham. The aircraft has been grounded for further checks and consequently, AI114 from Birmingham to Delhi has been cancelled and alternative arrangements are being made to accommodate the guests. At Air India, the safety of passengers and crew remains top priority.”
The aircraft might be grounded for technical checks, but the event has a disturbing significance. It is the second time in a few months that this particular type of emergency system has activated without a clear reason on an Air India Dreamliner, echoing a similar event on flight AI-171 just before its catastrophic crashv.
The Ram Air Turbine, or RAT, is designed as a last-resort measure to generate emergency power in the event of a total electrical or hydraulic failure. Its unexpected deployment on the Birmingham flight, with all other systems reportedly functioning normally, suggests a deeper, more insidious problem. It points to a potential electrical system fault, a theory now being investigated by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) at the urging of the Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP). A fault in the Bus Power Control Unit (BPCU) has been identified by the aircraft’s health monitoring system as a possible cause for the RAT’s auto-deployment. This finding casts a long and worrisome shadow.
The shadow falls on the official narrative of the AI-171 crash, which claimed the lives of 260 people in June. Initial reports and a preliminary investigation by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) focused on the fact that the engine fuel control switches were cut off just seconds after takeoff. The cockpit voice recording captures a pilot asking the other, why did he cut off, to which the other responded that he did not do so. The possibility of a system malfunction was largely dismissed, and the focus seemed to be on pilot action or inaction. However, some aviation experts have been quick to point out that the RAT also deployed on the ill-fated AI-171 flight. This coincidence (two RAT deployments on the same model of aircraft within months, one leading to a crash and one that was narrowly avoided) is not easily dismissed as a mere fluke.
The Federation of Indian Pilots has rightly pointed out that the DGCA, following the AI-171 crash, inspected only the fuel control switches and not the broader electrical systems, and called for an urgent auditv. The latest RAT deployment on the Birmingham flight is a stark reminder that this oversight may have been critical.
It supports the growing belief that the AI-171 crash was not a simple case of pilot error but a symptom of a systemic electrical or software flaw in the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. The fact that the same aircraft model has a history of electrical-related incidentsv, as highlighted by the pilots’ body, further reinforces this suspicion. The narrative of pilot error feels increasingly like a convenient, albeit tragic, false flag, deflecting attention from a more complex and troubling truth about the aircraft’s design.
This latest incident demands a thorough and transparent investigation that goes beyond surface-level assumptions and delves into the heart of the Dreamliner’s electrical architecture, lest we are left looking back at what if’s when presented with another tragedy.
