Air India flight bound for London crashes at India's Ahmedabad airport

LONDON − A London-bound Air India passenger plane with more than 200 people on board crashed shortly after taking off from an airport in India's western city of Ahmedabad, the airline and police officials said June 12.
City police chief G.S. Malik told Reuters that 204 bodies had been recovered from the crash site. The BBC reported that at least one passenger, a British national identified as Vishwash Kumar Ramesh on the flight manifest, survived the crash and was undergoing treatment at a local hospital.
Malik said the bodies recovered could include both passengers and people killed on the ground.Relatives had been asked to give DNA samples to identify the dead, state health secretary Dhananjay Dwivedi said.
Authorities have yet to release any information about what may have caused the crash.
The plane was headed to London's Gatwick airport, Air India said. A police statement said it crashed in a civilian area near the airport. Early reports suggested the plane may have come down on a hostel housing doctors. "We are ascertaining the details and will share further updates," Air India said in a statement.
Air India plane crash: What we know so far about passengers, where they were going
According to local media, the crash occurred as the aircraft was taking off from Ahmedabad airport, which is about 600 miles southwest of India's capital, New Delhi. TV visuals showed people being moved in stretchers and taken away in ambulances. Thick black smoke rose into the sky near the airport.
The Boeing 787-8 aircraft was carrying 242 passengers and crew members. Air India said of these, 169 were Indian nationals; 53 were British; 7 were Portuguese; and one was Canadian.
No Americans were reported on board.
"I was in my office when the plane crashed and there was a loud thud," Darshna Vaghela, a local politician, told reporters at the scene, according to the BBC. "We rescued many doctors from their flats."India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi said he was "stunned and saddened" by the crash. Britain's King Charles and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer released statements saying they were being updated.
Air India flight 171 was operated by an 11.5-year-old Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, according to airfleets.net, an industry website. The plane had been in Air India's fleet since it left the production line.
The flight was helmed by Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, who reportedly had over 8,000 hours of flying experience. The co-pilot had over 1,100 hours logged flying time, according to CNN.
This is the first-ever hull loss involving a Boeing 787 since its entry into service in 2011.
Boeing posted a statement on X, saying: "We are in contact with Air India regarding Flight 171 and stand ready to support them. Our thoughts are with the passengers, crew, first responders and all affected."
Flightradar24 data shows the aircraft, identified as VT-ANB, had flown from New Delhi to Ahmedabad earlier in the day. The plane last sent a signal to airport authorities when it was at 625 feet in the air.
(This story was updated to add new information.)
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Air India plane crashes at India's Ahmedabad airport

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Chicago Tribune

30 minutes ago

• Chicago Tribune

Nations react to US strikes on Iran with many calling for diplomacy

Several close U.S. allies urged a return to the negotiating table in the wake of American strikes on Iran that fueled fears of a wider conflict, while noting the threat posed by Tehran's nuclear program. Some countries and groups in the region, including those that support Iran, condemned the move while also urging de-escalation. U.S. President Donald Trump had said Thursday that he would decide within two weeks whether to get involved in Israel's war with Tehran. In the end, it took just days. Washington hit three Iranian nuclear sites early Sunday. US strikes 3 Iranian nuclear sites, inserting itself into Israel's war with IranWhile the amount of damage remained unclear, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the U.S. had 'crossed a very big red line,' the time for diplomacy was over and Iran had the right to defend itself. Some have questioned whether a weakened Iran would capitulate or remain defiant and begin striking with allies at U.S. targets scattered across the Gulf region. Here is a look at reactions from governments and officials around the world. U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres said he was 'gravely alarmed' by the use of force by the United States. 'There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control — with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world,' he said in a statement on the social media platform X. 'I call on Member States to de-escalate.' 'There is no military solution. The only path forward is diplomacy.' British Prime Minister Keir Starmer called for Iran to return to the negotiating table to diplomatically end the crisis, saying stability was the priority in the volatile region. The U.K., along with the European Union, France and Germany, tried unsuccessfully to broker a diplomatic solution in Geneva last week with Iran. Starmer said Iran's nuclear program posed a grave threat to global security. 'Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the U.S. has taken action to alleviate that threat,' Starmer said. Dmitry Medvedev, who serves as deputy head of President Vladimir Putin's Security Council, said several countries were prepared to supply Tehran with nuclear weapons. He didn't specify which countries, but said the U.S. attack caused minimal damage and would not stop Tehran from pursuing nuclear weapons. Russia's Foreign Ministry said it 'strongly condemned' the airstrikes and called them a 'a gross violation of international law, the U.N. Charter, and U.N. Security Council resolutions.' The Iraqi government condemned the U.S. strikes, saying the military escalation created a grave threat to peace and security in the Middle East. It said it poses serious risks to regional stability and called for diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the crisis. 'The continuation of such attacks risks dangerous escalation with consequences that extend beyond the borders of any single state, threatening the security of the entire region and the world,' government spokesman Bassem al-Awadi said in the statement. Saudi Arabia expressed 'deep concern' about the U.S. airstrikes, but stopped short of condemning them. 'The Kingdom underscores the need to exert all possible efforts to exercise restraint, de-escalate tensions, and avoid further escalation,' the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. Saudi Arabia had earlier condemned Israel's strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and military leaders. Qatar, which is home to the largest U.S. military base in the Middle East, said it 'regrets' escalating tensions in the Israel-Iran war. Its Foreign Ministry in a statement urged all parties to show restraint and 'avoid escalation, which the peoples of the region, burdened by conflicts and their tragic humanitarian repercussions, cannot tolerate.' Qatar has served as a key mediator in the Israel-Hamas war. Both the Houthi rebels in Yemen and Hamas have condemned the U.S. strikes. In a statement on Sunday, the Houthi political bureau called on Muslim nations to join 'the Jihad and resistance option as one front against the Zionist-American arrogance.' Hamas and the Houthis are part of Iran's so-called Axis of Resistance, a collection of pro-Iranian proxies stretching from Yemen to Lebanon that for years gave the Islamic Republic considerable power across the region. Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said the U.S. bombing could lead to a regional conflict that no country could bear and called for negotiations. 'Lebanon, its leadership, parties, and people, are aware today, more than ever before, that it has paid a heavy price for the wars that erupted on its land and in the region,' Aoun said in a statement on X. 'It is unwilling to pay more.' Pakistan blasted the U.S. strikes as a 'deeply disturbing' escalation just days after it nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize for his diplomatic intervention with the India-Pakistan crisis. 'These attacks violate all norms of international law,' the government said in a statement. 'Iran has the legitimate right to defend itself under the U.N. Charter.' China condemned U.S. strikes on Iran, calling them a serious violation of international law that further inflamed tensions in the Middle East. In a statement, the Chinese Foreign Ministry urged all parties — especially Israel — to implement a cease-fire and begin dialogue. 'China is willing to work with the international community to pool efforts together and uphold justice, and contribute to the work for restoring peace and stability in the Middle East,' the ministry said. The European Union's top diplomat said Iran must not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon, but she urged those involved in the conflict to show restraint. 'I urge all sides to step back, return to the negotiating table and prevent further escalation,' EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said in a post on social media. Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said Iran's nuclear facilities 'represented a danger for the entire area' but hoped the action could lead to de-escalation in the conflict and negotiations. President Antonio Costa said he was 'deeply alarmed' by the bombings and called on all parties to 'show restraint and respect for international law and nuclear safety.' 'Too many civilians will once again be the victims of a further escalation,' Costa added. 'The EU will continue engaging with the parties and our partners to find a peaceful solution at the negotiating table.' Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp, whose country is hosting a summit of NATO leaders including Trump on Tuesday and Wednesday, said the government's national security council would meet later to discuss the issue. He said said the U.S. attacks amounted to 'a further escalation of a worrying situation in the Middle East.' Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba told reporters Sunday that it was crucial to calm the situation as soon as possible, adding that the Iranian nuclear weapons development also must be prevented. Ishiba, asked if he supports the U.S. attacks on Iran, declined to comment. Pope Leo XIV made a strong appeal for peace during his Sunday Angelus prayer in St. Peter's square, calling for international diplomacy to 'silence the weapons.' After an open reference to the 'alarming' situation in Iran, the first American pontiff stressed that 'today more than ever, humanity cries out and invokes peace and it is a cry that demands reason and must not be stifled.' Pope Leo urged every member of the international community to take up their moral responsibility to 'stop the tragedy of war before it becomes an irreparable abyss.'

The Hill

41 minutes ago

• The Hill

Good news: We've already been king-free for 810 years. But there's also bad news.

Resistance to tyranny, suspicion of concentrated power, and a firm belief in the democratic ideals that birthed this republic. It's a noble struggle. But for all their passion and theatrical flair, the historical literacy behind the 'No Kings Since 1776' slogan leaves much to be desired. In fact, the protestors missed the mark by several centuries. Yes, the U.S. declared independence from the British Crown in 1776. But the kind of 'king' these protesters seem to fear had already ceased to exist in Britain long before that. By the time George III ascended the throne, British kings were largely figureheads, bound by constitutional limits and dependent on Parliament to govern. The Glorious Revolution of 1688 had already drastically curtailed the powers of the monarchy. And indeed, if you want to pinpoint when monarchs lost their teeth, you need to look even further back, to 1215, when rebellious English barons forced King John to sign the Magna Carta. That document didn't create democracy, but it did begin a centuries-long process of transferring power away from the crown and into the hands of parliaments and assemblies. So, by the time the American colonies revolted, they were not really rising up against a tyrannical king, but against an unresponsive and overreaching Parliament. The rallying cry of the American Revolution — 'No taxation without representation' — wasn't an anti-monarchist slogan. It was an anti-parliamentarian slogan. The colonists didn't object to authority per se — they objected to being taxed and ruled by a body in which they had no voice. And they weren't demanding the abolition of kingship. They were demanding accountability, proportionality, and representation. They were asking for a seat at the table. Fast-forward to today, and that slogan might resonate more than ever. We don't live under a king, but we do live under a political system that often behaves as if it's immune to public influence. Our Congress — designed to be the voice of the people and a check on executive power — is frequently in lockstep with the president, regardless of which party is in office. Whether through partisan loyalty or political cowardice, our legislators often abdicate their role as a balancing force. They don't deliberate. They defer. They don't question. They rubber-stamp. The real issue isn't kingship but representation. And in the absence of real legislative independence, the presidency has become more monarchical than anything George III ever imagined. And this didn't start in 2025 or even in 2017. Every American president in modern history has wielded powers the British monarch couldn't have dreamed of: Executive orders, foreign military interventions without Congressional approval, surveillance regimes, and massive influence over the national budget. If protesters truly want to challenge creeping authoritarianism, the more accurate message would be: 'No taxation without genuine representation.' That would strike at the heart of the issue. If Congress does not act independently, if it does not reflect the interests and concerns of the people, then we are not truly being represented. And if we are not being represented, then why are we funding the machine? Of course, no one is seriously proposing that Americans stop paying taxes overnight. Civil disobedience has its limits. But protest must have a point, and slogans must have meaning. A movement that aims to hold power accountable must aim at the right target. 'No Kings' is, at best, historically inaccurate, and at worst, a distraction from the deeply rooted, troubling democratic predicament in which we find ourselves. A government system that would have the Founding Fathers turning in their graves. Imagine if all that energy, creativity, and public spirit were channeled instead into a campaign to restore Congressional independence, to demand term limits, to break the iron grip of lobbyists, to push for electoral reform, or to hold legislators to account for every vote they cast. That would be a revolution worth marching for. So, to the protesters in the streets: your instincts are right. Power must be kept in check. But your history is off, and your slogan is weak. Don't fear a king who never ruled you. Fear a Congress that no longer represents you. Daniel Friedman is professor of political science at Touro University.

Yahoo

an hour ago

• Yahoo

Iran already carrying out ‘wholly unacceptable' actions in UK, Reynolds warns

The threat from Iran in the UK could increase as Tehran seeks to retaliate against the US, Israel and their allies, a Cabinet minister has suggested. Jonathan Reynolds said Iranian activity in the UK is already substantial and it would be 'naive' to think it will not escalate. The Business Secretary said 'not a week goes by' without Iran targeting cyber attacks on the UK's critical national infrastructure. Both MI5 and the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) have warned about Iran's activities. The head of MI5, Ken McCallum, said in October that authorities had stopped 20 state-backed plots hatched by Iran in the UK since 2022. He warned of an 'unprecedented pace and scale' of plots posing 'potentially lethal threats' to British citizens and UK residents. The NCSC has warned Iran 'is developing its cyber capabilities and is willing to target the UK to fulfil its disruptive and destructive objectives'. Mr Reynolds told Sky News the risk from Iran in the UK is 'not hypothetical'. He said: 'There is not a week goes by without some sort of Iranian cyber attack on a key part of the UK's critical national infrastructure. There is Iranian activity on the streets of the UK, which is wholly unacceptable. 'It's already at a significant level. I think it would be naive to say that that wouldn't potentially increase. The number of state threat investigations run by MI5 has jumped by 48% in the last year. Countries like Iran use proxies to carry out lethal plots on UK soil – we must act. Those carrying out activity for Iran in the UK must declare it or risk facing up to 5 years in prison. — Home Office (@ukhomeoffice) March 6, 2025 'But again, there's a choice here for Iran: Do they want to continue being an agent of instability in the region and the wider world? Where has that got them? Where has it got the Iranian people? 'There's a better course of action for Iran to take here, and I think they should consider that.' Iran was the first foreign power to be listed on the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme, aimed at protecting the UK from malign foreign influence. It means anyone who is directed by Iran to carry out activities in the UK must declare it or face five years in prison. The scheme is due to come into force in July. The Home Office will also introduce new laws that will allow the UK to proscribe state-based groups such as Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. In the latest sign of Iran's actions against the UK, it emerged on Saturday that authorities in Cyprus have arrested a Briton alleged to have been carrying out surveillance of the RAF Akrotiri base on the island.