‘Catastrophic' Air India plane crash near Ahmedabad: What we know
An Air India Boeing 787 Dreamliner plane has crashed close to an airport on the edge of India's western city of Ahmedabad with at least 242 people on board.
According to Reuters, rescue workers said between 30 and 35 bodies had been recovered from the crash site in a densely populated area of the city. So far, no survivors have been reported.
Flight AI171 was headed to London Gatwick Airport on Thursday where it was due to land at 6:25pm local time (17:25 GMT).
'Of these [on board], 169 are Indian nationals, 53 are British nationals, 1 Canadian national and 7 Portuguese nationals,' Air India said in a statement. The airline described the incident as 'a tragic accident'.
'Many people' have died in the crash, the country's health minister Jagat Prakash Nadda wrote in a post on X.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi wrote on X: 'The tragedy in Ahmedabad has stunned and saddened us. It is heartbreaking beyond words. In this sad hour, my thoughts are with everyone affected by it.
'Have been in touch with ministers and authorities who are working to assist those affected.'
This incident is the latest in a series of serious and fatal events in the civil aviation industry this year, including a midair collision in Washington in January between a military helicopter and an aircraft.The plane crashed in a residential area called Meghani Nagar, Faiz Ahmed Kidwai, head of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation, told The Associated Press.
The city of 7-8 million people is in President Modi's home state of Gujarat. Modi has directed the Ministry of Civil Aviation to take 'all possible action' to assist at the crash site.
There is a large Gujarat population in Great Britain, and the Ahmedabad-London route is a popular one.
According to flight tracking website Flightradar24, the plane's final signal was received just seconds after takeoff at 1:38pm local time (08:08 GMT). It had reached an altitude of 625 feet (190 metres) before crashing back to the ground outside the airport, close to densely populated residential areas on the outskirts of the city.
The plane issued a mayday alert to air traffic control before all communications from the aircraft ceased.
Ahmedabad airport has been closed and all flight operations have been suspended until further notice.
Footage shared on social media of the crash site showed debris on fire, with huge plumes of thick, black smoke rising into the sky near the airport.
They also showed people being moved in stretchers and being taken away in ambulances.
India's CNN News-18 TV channels said the plane crashed on top of the dining area of state-run B.J. Medical College hostel, killing many medical students as well. It showed a visual of a portion of the aircraft perched atop the building.
'The building on which it has crashed is a doctors' hostel…We have cleared almost 70 percent to 80 percent of the area and will clear the rest soon,' a senior police officer also told reporters.
Local journalist Sunil Vaidya told Al Jazeera: 'The crash site is very close to a civil hospital where there is a medical college,' he said. 'It is quite possible that students studying there are staying in a hostel nearby.'
This could be a very serious crash, experts say. Alex Macheras, an independent aviation analyst, told Al Jazeera that the Boeing 787 is a long-haul craft, which means it has capacity for a large number of passengers.
'This is probably going to be one of the worst aviation incidents for Indian aviation history in recent decades,' Macheras said.
However, he added that the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, of which there are 1,100 in operation around the world, has a very good track record for safety.
'There has never been a fatal crash involving a 787 Dreamliner before this,' Macheras said. He said the incident would raise serious questions about what could have gone wrong with this flight and why the aircraft was 'struggling to gain altitude' after takeoff.
'The 787 has been in service for 15 years – this is a mid to long-haul passenger aircraft, one of the latest from Boeing in terms of the development and the introduction of carbon-fibre aircraft,' Macheras told Al Jazeera.
'It provides airlines with immense efficiency but also with the promise of stellar safety record that the 787 has. In fact, in its 15 years of commercial service globally, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner has never been involved in a crash or a whole loss or a fatal accident,' Macheras said.
'So combined, it's an aircraft that the industry knows is of the highest standards in terms of meeting safety regulations globally, across different markets but also one that is trusted and essentially a workhorse of the skies when it comes to long-haul travel'.
Macheras added that he is hearing from executives within the aviation industry who are 'utterly shocked' at the footage.
They 'can't quite believe that an aircraft with an impeccable safety record was involved in something that looks like is going to be so catastrophic', he said.
ANI news agency reported that at least 90 emergency response workers are currently deployed at the site of the crash.
India's Minister of Civil Aviation Ram Mohan Naidu Kinjarapu said he was 'shocked and devastated' by the plane crash.
'I am personally monitoring the situation and have directed all aviation and emergency response agencies to take swift and coordinated action. Rescue teams have been mobilised, and all efforts are being made to ensure medical aid and relief support are being rushed to the site.'
'My thoughts and prayers are with all those on board and their families,' he added.
Elsewhere, Air India's chairman, Natarajan Chandrasekaran said that 'further updates will be shared as we receive more verified information. An emergency centre has been activated and support team have been set up for families seeking information.'
However, local people said little information was reaching those worried about loved ones on the flight or on the ground where it crashed. Vaidya told Al Jazeera: 'It is chaos. They have cordoned off the accident site and ambulances are rushing to hospitals. But the general public and relatives – they are not getting any information.'
Yes, but not for some time.
Air India's safety record is comparable with international carriers such as Turkish Airlines, American Airlines or Lufthansa. However, it is not as safe as 'top-tier' carriers like Singapore Airlines or Emirates (which have had zero, or near-zero, fatal crashes in recent decades).
Previous instances of fatal Air India crashes include:
The unprofitable carrier was acquired by the Tata Group from the Indian government in 2021.
Air India is currently in the middle of a strategic turnaround, including making a large aircraft order as it seeks to tap growing demand from India's expanding middle class.
Yes.
Boeing, which leads the global aircraft market alongside Europe's Airbus, has come under intense scrutiny over its safety record since two fatal crashes involving the Boeing 737 Max in 2018 and 2019.
The 737 Max jets were grounded worldwide for almost two years after a crash killed 189 people in Indonesia in October 2018 and another killed 157 people in Ethiopia five months later.
It was found that the crashes had occurred due to defects in the automated flight control software, which activated erroneously.
The software was improved and the Boeing 737s were revamped and cleared to fly again.
Then, in January 2024, the door plug of a Boeing 737 Max 9 flew off midair during an Alaska Airlines flight.
The Alaska Airlines incident was found to have been caused by a defect in the manufacturing process, with loose hardware on the aircraft.
In March 2024, John Barnett, 62, who reported safety problems at Boeing, died from an apparent 'self-inflicted' injury during the time he was giving evidence in a whistleblower lawsuit against the company.
Barnett worked as a quality manager for the US aircraft giant for more than three decades until he retired in 2017.
In 2019, Barnett alleged the aircraft maker, based just outside Washington, DC, had deliberately fitted planes with faulty parts and passengers on its 787 Dreamliner could be left without oxygen in the event of a sudden decompression.
Boeing has denied these allegations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
2 days ago
- Al Jazeera
‘Catastrophic' Air India plane crash near Ahmedabad: What we know
An Air India Boeing 787 Dreamliner plane has crashed close to an airport on the edge of India's western city of Ahmedabad with at least 242 people on board. According to Reuters, rescue workers said between 30 and 35 bodies had been recovered from the crash site in a densely populated area of the city. So far, no survivors have been reported. Flight AI171 was headed to London Gatwick Airport on Thursday where it was due to land at 6:25pm local time (17:25 GMT). 'Of these [on board], 169 are Indian nationals, 53 are British nationals, 1 Canadian national and 7 Portuguese nationals,' Air India said in a statement. The airline described the incident as 'a tragic accident'. 'Many people' have died in the crash, the country's health minister Jagat Prakash Nadda wrote in a post on X. Prime Minister Narendra Modi wrote on X: 'The tragedy in Ahmedabad has stunned and saddened us. It is heartbreaking beyond words. In this sad hour, my thoughts are with everyone affected by it. 'Have been in touch with ministers and authorities who are working to assist those affected.' This incident is the latest in a series of serious and fatal events in the civil aviation industry this year, including a midair collision in Washington in January between a military helicopter and an plane crashed in a residential area called Meghani Nagar, Faiz Ahmed Kidwai, head of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation, told The Associated Press. The city of 7-8 million people is in President Modi's home state of Gujarat. Modi has directed the Ministry of Civil Aviation to take 'all possible action' to assist at the crash site. There is a large Gujarat population in Great Britain, and the Ahmedabad-London route is a popular one. According to flight tracking website Flightradar24, the plane's final signal was received just seconds after takeoff at 1:38pm local time (08:08 GMT). It had reached an altitude of 625 feet (190 metres) before crashing back to the ground outside the airport, close to densely populated residential areas on the outskirts of the city. The plane issued a mayday alert to air traffic control before all communications from the aircraft ceased. Ahmedabad airport has been closed and all flight operations have been suspended until further notice. Footage shared on social media of the crash site showed debris on fire, with huge plumes of thick, black smoke rising into the sky near the airport. They also showed people being moved in stretchers and being taken away in ambulances. India's CNN News-18 TV channels said the plane crashed on top of the dining area of state-run B.J. Medical College hostel, killing many medical students as well. It showed a visual of a portion of the aircraft perched atop the building. 'The building on which it has crashed is a doctors' hostel…We have cleared almost 70 percent to 80 percent of the area and will clear the rest soon,' a senior police officer also told reporters. Local journalist Sunil Vaidya told Al Jazeera: 'The crash site is very close to a civil hospital where there is a medical college,' he said. 'It is quite possible that students studying there are staying in a hostel nearby.' This could be a very serious crash, experts say. Alex Macheras, an independent aviation analyst, told Al Jazeera that the Boeing 787 is a long-haul craft, which means it has capacity for a large number of passengers. 'This is probably going to be one of the worst aviation incidents for Indian aviation history in recent decades,' Macheras said. However, he added that the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, of which there are 1,100 in operation around the world, has a very good track record for safety. 'There has never been a fatal crash involving a 787 Dreamliner before this,' Macheras said. He said the incident would raise serious questions about what could have gone wrong with this flight and why the aircraft was 'struggling to gain altitude' after takeoff. 'The 787 has been in service for 15 years – this is a mid to long-haul passenger aircraft, one of the latest from Boeing in terms of the development and the introduction of carbon-fibre aircraft,' Macheras told Al Jazeera. 'It provides airlines with immense efficiency but also with the promise of stellar safety record that the 787 has. In fact, in its 15 years of commercial service globally, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner has never been involved in a crash or a whole loss or a fatal accident,' Macheras said. 'So combined, it's an aircraft that the industry knows is of the highest standards in terms of meeting safety regulations globally, across different markets but also one that is trusted and essentially a workhorse of the skies when it comes to long-haul travel'. Macheras added that he is hearing from executives within the aviation industry who are 'utterly shocked' at the footage. They 'can't quite believe that an aircraft with an impeccable safety record was involved in something that looks like is going to be so catastrophic', he said. ANI news agency reported that at least 90 emergency response workers are currently deployed at the site of the crash. India's Minister of Civil Aviation Ram Mohan Naidu Kinjarapu said he was 'shocked and devastated' by the plane crash. 'I am personally monitoring the situation and have directed all aviation and emergency response agencies to take swift and coordinated action. Rescue teams have been mobilised, and all efforts are being made to ensure medical aid and relief support are being rushed to the site.' 'My thoughts and prayers are with all those on board and their families,' he added. Elsewhere, Air India's chairman, Natarajan Chandrasekaran said that 'further updates will be shared as we receive more verified information. An emergency centre has been activated and support team have been set up for families seeking information.' However, local people said little information was reaching those worried about loved ones on the flight or on the ground where it crashed. Vaidya told Al Jazeera: 'It is chaos. They have cordoned off the accident site and ambulances are rushing to hospitals. But the general public and relatives – they are not getting any information.' Yes, but not for some time. Air India's safety record is comparable with international carriers such as Turkish Airlines, American Airlines or Lufthansa. However, it is not as safe as 'top-tier' carriers like Singapore Airlines or Emirates (which have had zero, or near-zero, fatal crashes in recent decades). Previous instances of fatal Air India crashes include: The unprofitable carrier was acquired by the Tata Group from the Indian government in 2021. Air India is currently in the middle of a strategic turnaround, including making a large aircraft order as it seeks to tap growing demand from India's expanding middle class. Yes. Boeing, which leads the global aircraft market alongside Europe's Airbus, has come under intense scrutiny over its safety record since two fatal crashes involving the Boeing 737 Max in 2018 and 2019. The 737 Max jets were grounded worldwide for almost two years after a crash killed 189 people in Indonesia in October 2018 and another killed 157 people in Ethiopia five months later. It was found that the crashes had occurred due to defects in the automated flight control software, which activated erroneously. The software was improved and the Boeing 737s were revamped and cleared to fly again. Then, in January 2024, the door plug of a Boeing 737 Max 9 flew off midair during an Alaska Airlines flight. The Alaska Airlines incident was found to have been caused by a defect in the manufacturing process, with loose hardware on the aircraft. In March 2024, John Barnett, 62, who reported safety problems at Boeing, died from an apparent 'self-inflicted' injury during the time he was giving evidence in a whistleblower lawsuit against the company. Barnett worked as a quality manager for the US aircraft giant for more than three decades until he retired in 2017. In 2019, Barnett alleged the aircraft maker, based just outside Washington, DC, had deliberately fitted planes with faulty parts and passengers on its 787 Dreamliner could be left without oxygen in the event of a sudden decompression. Boeing has denied these allegations.
Al Jazeera
3 days ago
- Al Jazeera
In India, war came dressed in feminist camouflage
When two female officers of the Indian armed forces – one Hindu, one Muslim – took centre stage to announce Operation Sindoor, the government celebrated it as a landmark moment for gender inclusion. The image of uniformed women addressing the media from the front lines, avenging the deaths of 26 civilians, all men, and symbolically restoring the sindoor (vermilion) of widowhood, was widely praised as feminist iconography in service of the nation. The moment echoed a historical parallel: during the 1971 Indo-Pak War, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was famously likened to the Hindu warrior Goddess Durga, a symbol of feminine power and nationalist resolve, in recognition of her decisive role in the creation of Bangladesh. That invocation of Durga underscored how Indian political power is often framed through a gendered and mythologised lens, blending statecraft with religious symbolism. But can women leading war be inherently feminist? Nation-building, as feminist scholars have long warned, is not a gender-neutral project. It reconfigures women into roles that serve its ends: sacrificial mothers, grieving widows, or militant daughters of the nation. Scholars like Nira Yuval-Davis argue that women are positioned as symbolic bearers of the nation's honour and cultural authenticity but rarely as its political agents. In the Indian context, scholars like Samita Sen and Maitrayee Chaudhuri remind us that women's public roles have historically been framed not in terms of autonomy, but duty to patriarchal structures. Therefore, the mere presence of women in public or political spheres does not automatically equate to gender justice. Representation must also be interrogated for its objectifying function. Today's military feminism, in which women gain visibility in war zones, follows this same path: celebrating women's ability to 'be like men' while leaving untouched the masculine and patriarchal foundations of militarism itself. This can be observed in Operation Sindoor, which projects the spectacle of two women in uniform as feminist optics, while the script they perform remains deeply patriarchal, demanding women prove their worth through masculine-coded nationalism. Such feminist optics align neatly with the ideological framework of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Founded in 1925, the RSS is a Hindu nationalist organisation that serves as the ideological parent of India's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). It envisions India as a Hindu rashtra (nation), advocating cultural nationalism rooted in Hindu traditions and values. Scholars like Christophe Jaffrelot argue that the RSS fosters majoritarianism and undermines India's secular fabric. Its paramilitary structure and emphasis on discipline and nationalism reveal its aim of deepening the hierarchical and patriarchal structure of Indian society. The women's auxiliaries of the RSS – the Rashtra Sevika Samiti and Durga Vahini – reflect and reinforce this patriarchal vision. These groups have long trained women in martial arts and ideological devotion not for feminist liberation, but to protect the Hindu rashtra. The aesthetics of Operation Sindoor – its saffron undertones, warrior femininity, and choreographed resolve – mirror this legacy. As Bina D'Costa's work on gender and war in South Asia underscores, women's bodies often become vehicles of nationalist redemption. The inclusion of a Muslim officer in this tableau may appear to signal secular pluralism. But as D'Costa warns, such inclusions often serve to legitimise exclusionary frameworks. Her presence sanitises a majoritarian script by casting minority visibility as proof of national unity, even as Islamophobic currents persist in broader public discourse. Sindoor – the red vermilion powder traditionally applied by Hindu wives on their head – symbolises marital status, wifely devotion, and the ideal of the 'good' woman. It also invokes Goddess Durga. In Hindu Wife, Hindu Nation, historian Tanika Sarkar explores how nationalist discourse fuses the sanctity of the wife with that of the motherland. The very name Operation Sindoor weaponises this metaphor: it promises to avenge broken marital bonds through military strikes on Pakistan, thereby 'restoring' the honour of Hindu widows. Yet this operation also constructs a tableau of women rendered widowed – stripped of their sindoor – whose grief is appropriated as nationalist fuel. As feminist historian Urvashi Butalia reminds us, women's bodies and symbols become 'testimonies of war.' In this context, sindoor represents not what widows possess, but what they have lost: honour, status, and social security. In the imagined redemptive arc of the nation, sindoor is not merely restored – it becomes a badge of nationalist virtue. The two women officers are cast not as autonomous agents, but as foot soldiers of a mythical motherland – extensions of the same patriarchal script that has long confined Indian women to domestic altars. What is celebrated here is not women's liberation, but their assimilation into a militant masculine narrative. Militarised femininity is constructed to legitimise state violence, not resist it. It is crucial to debunk symbols and interrogate the hierarchies they represent. What exactly is being applauded when female officers lead a war? Is it the war itself, or the fact that women are participating in it, that is considered 'feminist'? The gender metaphor in this spectacle casts women into patriarchal frameworks where they must emulate men to legitimise their agency. By celebrating these officers, the state co-opts women's leadership to validate militarism while leaving intact the structures that perpetuate gendered violence. Feminist agency demands that women define the terms of their engagement. Here, those terms are dictated by the patriarchal nationalism of the RSS ideology. The two officers did not challenge gender norms; they stepped into a pre-written script that equates womanhood with wifely duty to the nation. Their exalted martial roles serve to naturalise militarism, even as they are packaged as gender progress. The inclusion of a Muslim officer is not incidental. In the ideological universe of Durga Vahini, non-Hindu women can be co-opted, so long as they defend the Hindu 'family'. This token inclusion supports an illusion of pluralism, while systemic marginalisation of Muslim citizens continues unabated. Feminist movements have historically challenged the logic of war itself, not simply who wages it. If we accept that nation-building is inherently patriarchal, the solution cannot lie in merely enlisting more women into patriarchal institutions. Instead, we must interrogate the very optics of national honour that equate women's value with wifely symbols and martial sacrifice. Feminist politics in war must decentre militarism, prioritise civilian protection, and insist that women's leadership be recognised in peacebuilding, rehabilitation, and policymaking — arenas where the absence of sindoor cannot be remedied by bombs or bravado. True gender justice in national security would uplift dissenting women leaders who refuse to be conscripted into patriarchal metaphors, provide material support to widows, and reject marital symbolism as a proxy for state virtue. Operation Sindoor may make for powerful headlines. But behind the illusion of feminist triumph lies an old patriarchal script: women as metaphors of the motherland, valued only when they serve its wartime needs. Liberation lies not in militarised spectacle, but in dismantling the gendered metaphors that bind women to nationalist rites – and expanding the meaning of agency beyond the theatre of war. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Al Jazeera
4 days ago
- Al Jazeera
Pakistan ramps up defence spending by 20 percent after India conflict
Pakistan has announced a major boost to defence spending in its new budget, just weeks after coming to the brink of a fifth war with archrival India. The budget for the fiscal year 2025-2026, announced by the government on Tuesday, ramps up defence spending to 2.55 trillion rupees ($9bn), up 20 percent from the current fiscal year, which ends this month. The hike in defence expenditures comes amid a cut in overall spending, which is shrinking by 7 percent to 17.57 trillion rupees ($62bn). The budget reflects Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif's goals of spurring growth while boosting Pakistan's military in the wake of the most serious conflict between the nuclear-armed neighbours in nearly three decades. The bitter foes attacked each other with fighter jets, missiles, drones and artillery for several days in May before a ceasefire was declared. The hostilities were triggered by a deadly attack by gunmen in Pahalgam in Indian-administered Kashmir on April 22, which India accused Pakistan of supporting. Pakistan denied any role in the attack. A 20 percent boost in defence spending had been expected by economists, who said it would likely be offset by cuts in development spending, the Reuters news agency reported. India's defence spending in its 2025-2026 fiscal year, running from April to March, was set at $78.7bn, up nearly 10 percent from the previous year, and it has indicated it will ramp up its spending further in future budgets.
