Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why the RAT Changes Everything – Air India 171 Update
YouTube ^ | 06/14/2025 | Captain Steeeve

Posted on 06/15/2025 3:39:57 PM PDT by TexasKamaAina

In this update to our original video on Air India Flight 171, Captain Steeeve revisits his initial theory—and sets the record straight.

Previously, Steeeve leaned heavily into the possibility that the pilot may have accidentally retracted the flaps instead of the landing gear during the takeoff roll, resulting in a critical loss of lift. But new, higher-quality footage tells a different story.

In this video, we clearly see the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) deployed—something that only happens in the event of significant power loss. This changes everything. Steeeve breaks down what the RAT deployment means, walks through the new evidence frame by frame, and explores the very real possibility that this was a dual engine failure scenario.

It’s important to get these stories right. Aviation is a world of learning—and when new information comes to light, good pilots update their understanding.

If you watched the original video, don’t miss this one.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: airindia; auxiliarypower
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

1 posted on 06/15/2025 3:39:57 PM PDT by TexasKamaAina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina

Bkmk


2 posted on 06/15/2025 3:52:05 PM PDT by sauropod (Make sure Satan has to climb over a lot of Scripture to get to you. John MacArthur Ne supra crepidam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina

The plane appeared to still be nose up as it stalled in like he was trying to power for altitude. One would think if he had no thrust, he’d at least try to bring the nose to level or slightly down to try to establish a glide away from folks on the ground. I don’t think he could have gotten to open ground where there doesn’t appear to be enough room to try to put down the plane with any chance of success, but he could have tried to avoid the buildings, or to the river, but it doesn’t appear that he even tried to turn in that direction (to the right for either).


3 posted on 06/15/2025 3:52:09 PM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

At 500 feet altitude I don’t believe the pilot had time to do much of anything other than try to keep the plane in the air.


4 posted on 06/15/2025 3:58:34 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Democrats are the Party of anger, hate and violence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina
the pilot may have accidentally retracted the flaps instead of the landing gear during the takeoff roll, resulting in a critical loss of lift.

That's what I've heard.

5 posted on 06/15/2025 3:59:28 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina

Very interesting - thanks for posting! Makes sense.


6 posted on 06/15/2025 4:02:30 PM PDT by Thank You Rush ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina

Deployment of the RAT ( unseen in published pic, videos) is the game changer. Back in the day when I worked on ETOPS aircraft, it was an unwanted job to have to deploy and test them.

Fully agree on his theory.


7 posted on 06/15/2025 4:07:27 PM PDT by delta7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina

The flap activation leveris on the central console, the gear actuation lever is on the panel and is in the shape of a wheel, gray in color and about three inches in diameter. The spacing is due to inadvertently actuating gear vs flaps. The F/O controls both levers.


8 posted on 06/15/2025 4:12:29 PM PDT by SkyDancer ( ~ Am Yisrael Chai ~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina

Anybody know anything about the gear lifting hydraulics on this plane? A guy yesterday came out with the same idea steeeve is now expressing but he added something Steeeve hasn’t mentioned. The position of the wheels carriage as the plane went down. Usually prior to lifting the gear the wheels are back wheel low front wheel high. As the gear retracts however the carriage goes forward with front wheel lower rear higher in order to clear the bay. In the vid based on the seeming position of the carriage it looks like they may have tried to raise the gear . Was there a coincidental dual engine failure or could some blowout in the hydraulics have interfered with the engines running? If the latter it’ll probably take forever to figure out


9 posted on 06/15/2025 4:16:11 PM PDT by TalBlack (Their god is government. Prepare for a religious war.https://freerepublic.com/perl/post?id=4322961%2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
At 500 feet altitude I don’t believe the pilot had time to do much of anything other than try to keep the plane in the air.

Agreed. And during the time that was available to fly the plane and analyze the WTF unbelievable, subtract any conversations he had on the radio with the mayday transmission. Tough spot to be in real-time, even if one is fully trained.

10 posted on 06/15/2025 4:17:41 PM PDT by frog in a pot (Can a free society be crushed by human predators? Yes, "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina

No discussion of engine noise or lack of.


11 posted on 06/15/2025 4:23:54 PM PDT by TexasGator ("'1'1.//1-1.'I'11-.1.'1'11\1I11111111111.1'11.'11/'~~'111./.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina
I read the headline and immediately thought of this -

https://outpostmagazine.com/rat-temple-india/#:~:text=The%20rats%2C%20in%20fact%2C%20are,of%20the%20mother%20goddess%2C%20Durga.

12 posted on 06/15/2025 4:27:38 PM PDT by 1FreeAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina

The sole survivor said he heard a bang right after takeoff. Perhaps the RAT started because of dual engine failure.


13 posted on 06/15/2025 4:38:27 PM PDT by DFG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TalBlack

I believe the RAT has enough power to *lower* the landing gear and operate the flaps and control surfaces, but it does not have the power to *raise* the gear from a lowered and locked position.

A total hydraulic systems loss that isn’t in the engine nacelle has zero chance of killing the engine, let alone both. One that’s in the engine nacelle could only kill that one engine, not both.


14 posted on 06/15/2025 4:47:21 PM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

That was what I thought, but the rat sort of destroys that theory. I’d never heard of the rat before, but from what I’m hearing, the reason for its deployment - along with the angle of the tires, strongly suggests both engines died.

It suggests ground crew put some “bad gas” in the tank.


15 posted on 06/15/2025 4:47:39 PM PDT by cuban leaf (2024 is going to be one for the history books, like 1939. And 2025 will be more so, like 1940-1945.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DFG

Perhaps the RAT started because of dual engine failure.


Not just “perhaps”. That’s the most probable reason for it. It may have had bad fuel.


16 posted on 06/15/2025 4:48:31 PM PDT by cuban leaf (2024 is going to be one for the history books, like 1939. And 2025 will be more so, like 1940-1945.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

“may have accidentally retracted the flaps instead of the landing gear during the takeoff roll, resulting in a critical loss of lift.”

Would that have deployed the RAT?


17 posted on 06/15/2025 4:49:46 PM PDT by Justa (Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

I think he was trying to hold altitude and glide as far as he could. The 787, like a lot of post-WW2 large aircraft, has a significant wing angle of incidence or angle of attack. A 787 that’s flying level will actually be about 5 or so degrees nose up angle.

The B-52 having an opposite angle of attack is why those things look like they’re nose down when they’re flying level.


18 posted on 06/15/2025 4:53:53 PM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina

I saw a video of the undercarriage of the aircraft while it was taking off. Was the RAT / RAM deployed just before the crash?


19 posted on 06/15/2025 4:53:54 PM PDT by NY Attitude (Make love not war but be prepared for either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

But it got across the tarmac, down the runway and airborne on ‘bad gas’. Maybe the fuel filters clogged up from tank contamination and eventually stopped fuel flow? Happens on boats with water in fuel tanks. When the fuel filters go the engines go. Ship goes stern to the sea and, if rough weather eventually ...sinks.


20 posted on 06/15/2025 4:54:14 PM PDT by Justa (Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson