Amid deliberations on aviation safety, a need to pay heed to past warnings

This is perhaps the piece one looks least forward to writing as a journalist who has covered or a columnist who has offered opinion on the aviation sector for over a quarter of a century. So as I put pen to paper (or in fact fingers to keyboard), I'll begin by borrowing a few words already uttered by the Tata chairman in the same context: this is definitely one of the worst subjects that I am forced to address, one I had hoped I would never be required to do.
Also Read: Air India flight's 2nd black box recovered; cockpit voice recorder to aid probe
Yet here we are. The tragic air crash on Thursday, June 12, has been all over the news and I need not elaborate on any of the details that have so far emerged. Timing wise, it was ironic occurring as it did a few days after we as a nation had finished patting ourselves on the back at the IATA summit held in the Capital, the global body expressing confidence in India's aviation safety practices.
Also Read: Teen who recorded viral Air India crash video 'very scared', records statement
A day after, in what the industry termed a knee-jerk reaction, the DGCA ordered an enhanced safety inspection on Air India's Boeing 787-8/9 fleet, which raised many questions including whether the authorities expected a similar accident to play out on another of the aircraft operated by Air India. A second high-level multi-disciplinary committee headed by the Union home secretary was also set up on June 13, which will act in parallel to the accident investigation committees to focus on formulating SOPs for preventing and handling such occurrences in the future.
Also Read: Air India plane crash: In first presser, Centre reveals what exactly happened on June 12
Ever since the accident took place, several rushed and half-baked theories by experts of all hues have been bandied about, based on the videos, visuals, the cockpit voice recorder and the testimony of the lone survivor. Conjectures on the possible causes of the crash have been put forth, dissolved and replaced by new possibilities as the hours post the crash have gone by, the value of which seems dimmer by the minute since the lives lost cannot be retrieved even if we all arrive at the root causes. Most of it amounts to nothing more than satisfying idle curiosity, a cruel human fallibility, in the face of an unimaginable and monumental tragedy.
As this piece went to press, of all the possibilities, it is a dual engine failure on which many are tending to lean to blame this catastrophe. If indeed the eventual cause is a dual engine failure, the odds of which happening are roughly one in a billion flying hours, the global aviation world — not just India — shall be investigating what might have caused something as drastic and dramatic as this in an aircraft known and recognised globally for its efficiency. This is the first hull loss for the Dreamliner since it went into commercial operations in 2011 although concerns about its safety have been raised by whistleblowers in the past.
Although television channels and several digital and news platforms have been quick to apportion blame for this - putting the cart before the horse as they often tend to - I shall refrain from holding anyone culpable till the exact cause is determined and before us. It is far too early and in lieu of the sheer magnitude of the occurrence a trifle futile to apportion blame for this. What may be the best way forward is to adopt an honest, proactive and committed approach to try and prevent recurrence, a far greater task than setting up a high-level committee or two.
Facing the facts is not an Indian forte but situations such as we find ourselves in today demand it. And with this in mind, I will highlight some red flags that have consistently been raised by senior commanders, directors, experts, analysts, company insiders and the entire aviation community over the last several years, both when the airline was under government control and during the last three years and a few months under Tata management. This newspaper has been consistently highlighting many of these in both news articles and edit page pieces, so readers might find some of this repetitive.
All Indian aviation fatalities on govt flights
A letter by a whistleblower sent to the Tata chairman in 2022 had pointed out a very important fact. If one takes a closer look at fatalities in India's aviation sector, it is worth noting that all deaths that have occurred have been on Air India and other government owned carriers. Since the late 1980s, a total of 586 lives (not including the latest crash) have been lost on account of government owned and run airlines. 133 lives were lost in 1988 when an Indian Airlines aircraft crashed in Ahmedabad, followed by 92 fatalities in an Indian Airlines crash in Bengaluru in 1990, the 1991 Indian Airlines Imphal crash with 69, Aurangabad Indian Airlines with 55 fatalities, Alliance Air Patna crash with 60, Air India Express Mangalore crash with 158 and Air India Express crash in Calicut with 18 deaths. This latest accident, albeit the first one for Air India per se, takes the total toll to 860 or so. Compare this with Jet Airways with a 25-year history but no fatalities to its account or IndiGo's 18 year fatality free run. The facts speak for themselves. Had the airlines peppered with fatalities on their flying record been private entities, would they continue to be in business today is a question worth pondering.
A July 2021 safety and quality report prepared for private use by Talace Private Limited as part of the Tata's due diligence before buying Air India also raised many red flags and concerns. To summarise a 87-page report in this column is almost impossible but suffice to say that the report has four key findings that the Tata run management is already seized of: that safety and quality function in Air India and Air India Express is 'perfunctory and its contribution to the organisation is minimal', that recommendations of courts of inquiry into past accidents have been 'systematically ignored' and pointing out that had these been followed subsequent incidents and accidents could have been avoided, that quality assurance audits take place when not needed and do not take place when needed and asserts that flight data monitoring is inadequate and unable to ensure a change in operations to prevent incidents from recurring. Despite this not-so-happy situation, the Tata group went ahead and bought the airline. The question that arises is what did the new management do about all the issues raised by this report. Have past court of inquiry recommendations been implemented as they ought to or has the sheer complexity of what is required (a Pandora's box) forced a gloss-over? The question becomes pertinent in the face of the June 12 disaster.
But if reports tend to be ignored, gathering dust, almost as soon as they are written, the Tata chairman, the board of Air India, DGCA, MOCA and several top government officials cannot deny that they have faced a barrage of complaints, warnings and advice through letters and emails from mostly anonymous senior commanders of the airline acting as whistleblowers ever since Campbell Wilson and his new team have taken charge. Virtually no week has gone by in the past three years where someone has not raised safety and violation of training procedures related concerns through all routes available to them, often dismissed by senior management as rantings of disgruntled staff. Some of these have forced DGCA to goad the management into on-the-surface action : the recent dismissal of a simulator trainer instructor (https://www.hindustantimes.com/opinion/what-air-india-is-getting-right-and-where-it-is-losing-the-plot-101747317028025.html) was a case in point. Has the management delved deeper into the matter and fixed responsibility as it should ? We don't know. This is just one of innumerable instances the airline has been afflicted by in the last three years.
Let me end by saying that almost no article would have appeared on Air India in this newspaper which did not ad-nauseum highlight and express safety or training standard related concerns and violations in the last year or so (readers interested enough can Google and read articles written by this writer in Fortune magazine as well). Several concerns of DGCA and its present functioning have also been raised from time to time including a suggestion to abolish the DGCA in its existing avatar (https://www.hindustantimes.com/opinion/dgca-grounded-by-graft-incompetence-101723737422382.html) and replace it with two brand new regulators.
I'd like to add here that senior commanders who constitute the 'we-told-you-so' gang have also fallen silent, refraining with dignity from any gloating, post the accident as many of them put themselves in the shoes of their two peers, who perished while trying to save theirs and the 240-odd lives entrusted to them. The magnitude of the disaster and the replaying of those 33 seconds (for which the airplane was in the air) in many minds has been humbling for the sector as a collective.
While the two troubling aspects (Air India practices or DGCA inefficiencies) highlighted above may or may not be directly linked to what has led to this recent crash, these are worth repeating in the interest of the SOPs the latest high level committee formed post the accident hopes to put in place to prevent future similar catastrophes. The time to act is now.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Indian Express

21 minutes ago

• Indian Express

Gaurav Taneja, aka Flying Beast, reveals ‘every flight has snags' but airlines have ‘habit' of ignoring safety issues

While dissecting the recent Air India Flight 171 crash, YouTuber Gaurav Taneja ruled out several theories that are being floated online. He had initially suggested that the only way a Boeing 787 could crash in the way that Flight 171 did is if it experienced a dual engine failure. In a recent video, he seemed to point in the direction of pilot error, as he suggested that one of the pilots might have killed the wrong engine after takeoff, assuming that one had already died on the runway. In the same video, he ruled out bad weather, stating the data that is publicly available about the conditions on the fateful day of June 12. Taneja also spoke about safety standards in Indian aviation. Some years ago, he blew the whistle on practices that he perceived to be unsafe at Air Asia, and was fired from his position. Taneja is a graduate of IIT Kharagpur, and worked as a commercial pilot for a decade before becoming a full-time YouTuber. In his new video about the Air India Flight 171 crash, which claimed 270 lives, he said, 'In the event of bad weather, the aircraft warns the pilots to either delay takeoff or abort takeoff… A 787 has two radars, one on the left and one on the right. For dispatch, it is necessary for at least one to be functional.' Also read – 'Pilots know something that public doesn't' about Air India 171 crash, says Gaurav Taneja, aka Flying Beast: 'They are refusing to fly' Taneja then explained the concept of Minimum Equipment List (MEL). 'If the aircraft has 100 pieces of equipment, the rulebook says that it can function even if 30 of them have failed. For instance, an aircraft can fly safely with even one functional weather radar. This is made to operationally assist the airline. Let's go with the theory than one engine failed on the ground and the other failed after takeoff… This theory makes a little sense. But this is extremely rare. I've been researching for so many days, and it still doesn't make full sense,' he said. Taneja then moved on to the MCAS, a system that was introduced by Boeing some years ago, and was discovered to be the cause behind two 737 Max aircraft crashing. Subsequently, the entire fleet was grounded. 'Boeing was in a close battle with Airbus, and Airbus took the lead after the launch of the A320. To compete with them, Boeing unveiled the 737 Max, and decided that pilots can safely fly the aircraft with just a two-hour iPad training. They neglected to inform pilots about the MCAS system, which automatically deployed if an aircraft's nose tilted up abnormally. But pilots didn't know, and their aircraft was automatically pointing downwards because of the MCAS. This resulted in two crashes. Perhaps a different software issue could have caused the Air India crash?' Moving on to safety standards, he said, 'A pilot told me that aircraft are in 'a pathetic state'. Remember I told you about the MELs, and that a plane can fly with even one working radar? These snags are quite common. Every flight has snags. But they have a habit of overlooking these snags. The on-ground engineer will tell you that they are giving a temporary okay, they know and the airline knows that the snag will appear during the flight. Every snag that happens, a live report goes to the company. The company knows everything. The company is okaying these snags despite knowing about them, and leaving it to the pilot to deal with these snags during the flight.' Read more – 'An act of sabotage is an act of terrorism against India': Gaurav Taneja says he'll 'lose his mind' if this Air India 171 theory is true Making it clear that he wants to avoid legal trouble and that he is purely presenting theories, he continued, 'It's a sad state of affairs… 90 MELs per sector are common. They get three-page-long MEL lists; most of them have to do with issues like seats not reclining, in-flight entertainment not working, someone's remote not working… It is the pilot's job to go through that three-page MEL list and figure out what the real issues could be… It is not possible for any pilot to go through all these pages.' He cited internal politics between the departments as one of the reasons why this responsibility is handed over to pilots… It's understandable if an airline wants to hide the truth about internal issues with an aircraft, but at least they package the outside really well. If an airline can't even conceal superficial faults, imagine what's happening on the inside.' Previously, Taneja had cited MELs as a major issue, and had praised pilots for standing up and refusing to fly allegedly unsafe aircraft in the aftermath of the crash. Several flights have been cancelled in the days since the crash. On Saturday, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) ordered immediate action against three senior Air India officials following 'serious and repeated violations,' the Hindustan Times reported.

Mint

2 hours ago

• Mint

Air India door ‘shaking' mid-air, plugged with paper napkins: ‘Scary 15 minutes trauma' at AI-314 goes viral

About an hour into the flight, a door of an Air India plane — flying from Delhi to Hong Kong — reportedly started shaking and making noises. The incident happened on Air India flight AI-314 after it took off from Delhi on June 1. Taking swift action, Air India's flight attendants "used paper napkins to tighten the door" and pushed it to seal it. The flight continued to its destination and landed safely, the Times of India reported. The incident was first reported by a LinkedIn user, who shared details of the flight in a post 'as reported by the passenger' last week. He even attached a picture of the door plugged with paper napkins. "Please zoom and take a closer look at the image of the door, as shared by one of the passenger travelling by Air India flight AI 314 departed from New Delhi to Hongkong on 1st June 2025," the user's post read. It stated that after about an hour of take off, "door started shaking and making noise. It seemed the door seal came off due to air pressure." "Air hostesses jumped into action, holding and push the door back, used paper napkins to tighten the door. Thankfully flight landed safely in Hongkong, (sic)" the user said. He added that the "scary 15 minutes trauma" was reported by a passenger. The Air India flight AI-314 was a Boeing 787 aircraft. Air India said in a statement that an aircraft undergoes multiple engineering checks before it is cleared for flight operations, with top priority given to safety issues. The airline said the June 1 Delhi-Hong Kong flight also went through the process. 'A hissing sound started emanating from the decorative door panel mid-flight, and after assessing that there was no risk to safety, crew took action to alleviate the noise. After landing in Hong Kong airport, the aircraft underwent checks by the engineering team," Air India was quoted by the Times of India as saying. The statement added, 'All safety parameters were found to be in compliance and the aircraft was cleared for service. There was no such noise during the return flight AI315 from Hong Kong to Delhi. We would like to reiterate that the safety of our customers and crew remains top priority." The incident was reported days after Air India flight 171 crashed on June 12. The Al-171 Boeing Dreamliner 787-8 aircraft bound for London's Gatwick crashed shortly after it took off from the Ahmedabad International Airport. The airlines said only one out of the 242 people on board the aircraft survived the crash.

Hindustan Times

2 hours ago

• Hindustan Times

Emotional farewell for Air India crew member Irfan Shaikh who died in Ahmedabad

Jun 21, 2025 11:51 AM IST Relatives and friends gave an emotional farewell to Irfan Shaikh, a crew member of the ill-fated Air India that crashed in Ahmedabad last week, as his remains were laid to rest at Pimpri Chinchwad in Maharashtra on Saturday. The Shaikh family received 22-year-old Irfan's remains after a DNA match on Friday, and they were brought to Pune(Reuters) The Shaikh family received 22-year-old Irfan's remains after a DNA match on Friday, and they were brought to Pune in the early hours of the day. The final rites were held at a graveyard in Nehru Nagar in the presence of family, neighbours, friends, and leaders from across political parties. Irfan was on board the London-bound Air India flight, AI 171, that crashed into a building in a medical college complex moments after take-off from the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport in Ahmedabad on June 21. A total of 241 persons on board the Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft were killed in the crash, along with 29 others on the ground. "Irfan joined the aviation industry as a cabin crew member two years ago after completing a course. He initially worked with Vistara, and after the Air India-Vistara merger, he began flying on international routes," a relative said. The youngster had big dreams and was determined to excel in the field, but the crash shattered all those dreams, he added.