Are India's skies safe? Air safety watchdog responds amid rising concerns
It's a question many are asking after June's devastating Air India crash, which killed at least 270 people. The London-bound Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner went down less than a minute after taking off from Ahmedabad airport in western India on 12 June.
"India's skies have always been safe - in the past and even today," said Faiz Ahmed Kidwai, the chief of Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) - India's aviation safety regulator - in an interview with the BBC.
"If you look at global safety metrics, such as those published by International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), which track the number of accidents per million flights, India consistently performs better than the world average," he said.
"There were only two years within the 2010–2024 period where we exceeded the global average - those were the years when major accidents occurred."
In August 2020, Air India Express Flight 1344 crashed after skidding off a rain-soaked tabletop runway in Kozhikode, killing 21 people. A decade earlier, in May 2010, Flight 812 from Dubai overshot the runway in Mangalore and plunged into a gorge, leaving 158 dead. June's Air India crash was the third such accident in the country in 15 years.
While such major accidents remain rare, recent headlines have raised fresh concerns. From a Delhi-Srinagar flight that hit severe turbulence, to growing reports of maintenance oversights and training shortfalls, questions around aviation safety are once again in focus.
The latest involved SpiceJet, India's fourth-largest and longest-running low-cost airline.
The Economic Times newspaper found that the aviation regulator had recently summoned the airline's leadership after a series of alarming findings - not from routine audits, but triggered by a British aviation firm.
The newspaper reported that it began earlier this year when two of SpiceJet's De Havilland Q400 turboprops showed premature propeller failures. The airline alerted Dowty Propellers, a GE Aerospace-led UK manufacturer, which found damage to the internal bearings of the propellers.
Each propeller has bearings with two races, or rings or tracks. In this case, the inner race was damaged. Instead of addressing the root cause, SpiceJet "reportedly kept applying more grease to the [entire] unit instead of addressing the root cause". Frustrated by the lack of corrective action, Dowty escalated the issue directly to India's aviation regulator, the newspaper reported.
The DGCA's own audit in April "revealed even more deficiencies, including snag occurrences", the report said.
Mr Kidwai told the BBC that the "turboprop propeller issue came to our attention through one of SpiceJet's maintenance organisations".
"We took it up with SpiceJet and we ensured they took corrective action. We also found out that the senior management was not fully aware of the situation. We took action against the various post holders who were supposed to ensure compliance with the original equipment manufacturer and other regulations. We directed SpiceJet to remove them and suspend a few of them which they did," he said.
More recently, Reuters reported that the aviation watchdog reprimanded Air India's budget carrier in March for delaying mandatory engine part replacements on an Airbus A320 and falsifying records to show compliance.
Air India Express told the news agency it acknowledged the error to DGCA and undertook "remedial action and preventive measures".
Mr Kidwai told the BBC that the information in this case came through "self-reporting by the airline".
"I would not condone it [the lapses]. But [at least] we have started getting these reports. This came from the airline. Action has been taken in this case. In our audits we have mandated our people to be more alert and see whether there is any lapse and bring it to our attention."
In May, an IndiGo flight from Delhi to Srinagar faced severe turbulence and hail about 45 minutes after takeoff.
The Airbus A321, carrying 222 passengers, reportedly encountered extreme vertical air currents - updrafts followed by downdrafts - that dislodged overhead bins and caused nose damage. The crew declared an emergency and safely landed at Srinagar with no injuries. The regulator launched an investigation, during which two pilots were grounded.
Mr Kidwai told the BBC that the regulator had now "refined" its guidelines for pilots flying in turbulent conditions.
For instance, if there's significant cloud cover or any weather pattern that poses a risk - and "we've clearly defined what constitutes such a risk" - pilots are now required to take specific action a set number of nautical miles before reaching it, he said.
"This could include diverting, going around, or taking other appropriate steps."
Since 2020, Indian domestic carriers have reported 2,461 technical faults, according to the federal civil aviation ministry data. IndiGo accounted for over half (1,288), followed by SpiceJet with 633, and Air India and its subsidiary Air India Express with 389 cases, as of January 2025.
"Reporting of snags by airlines has gone up. This is good," Mr Kidwai said.
"I wouldn't say I'm pleased about it. But I do see value in the growing culture of reporting [snags]. It's far better for every snag to be brought to the attention of the authorities than keeping quiet and operating the aircraft."
Mr Kidwai said with the number of flights increasing, it's important to "see whether the turnaround time for flights is adequate for [maintenance] checks or not".
To be sure, demands on the regulator have grown: India has emerged as the third-largest passenger aviation market in the world. Yet, over the past two years, the ministry of civil aviation has faced budget cuts, reflecting a reduced financial priority for the sector.
Today, the country's scheduled carriers operate nearly 850 aircraft - a significant increase from around 400 just a decade ago.
The number of air passengers has more than doubled since 2014–15 - from 116 million to 239 million.
The number of commercial aerodromes has also seen a substantial rise - from around 60-70 a decade ago to nearly 130-140 today.
"In total, including both scheduled and non-scheduled operators, we now have 1,288 aircraft in operation. By the end of the decade, we are projected to operate over 2,000 aircraft," Mr Kidwai said. (Non-scheduled operators include charter airlines, private jet operators, air taxis and helicopter services.)
So had the latest Air India crash dented the reputation of air travel in India? Mr Kidwai said the data didn't point to that.
"We looked at the data to assess whether it had any impact on domestic or international operations. There was no significant drop in traffic. At most, we observed a very marginal dip for a short period, affecting both domestic and international flights, along with a few cancellations," he told the BBC.
"It's natural for people to feel anxious after such incidents. But over time, as more clarity emerges and the situation is better understood, that anxiety tends to subside. Time is a great healer."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
Takeaways From the Times Investigation Into the Jeju Air Crash
Seven months after Jeju Air Flight 2216 crashed at Muan International Airport in South Korea, the cause of the accident is still being investigated. The crash — the worst aviation disaster on Korean soil, with 179 dead — came shortly after the pilots reported a bird strike. Investigators are also looking into whether the pilots may have erred by shutting down the less- damaged engine after colliding with the birds. But the high death toll may owe more to circumstances on the ground. After crashing on its belly without its landing gear deployed, the plane skidded along the runway and slammed into a concrete wall before bursting into flames. 'There is a cause for the accident and a separate cause for death,' said Lee Jun-hwa, an architect based in Seoul who lost his mother in the crash. A New York Times investigation found that a series of design and construction choices led to the presence of the concrete hazard close to the runway. Government regulators ignored a safety warning, making a disastrous outcome of any collision more likely. Reporters for The Times obtained blueprints and other design documents and asked five experts to review them. They also combed through documents issued by Korean authorities over the last 26 years. 1The original design in 1999 said that the antennas would be mounted on breakable structures. Antenna Nearly 14 feet Runway Breakable structure Slope not to scale Base In the original design, the wall was 866 feet from the end of the runway, close to its location during the crash Antenna Nearly 14 feet Runway Breakable structure Slope not to scale Base The original design specified 866 feet, where the wall is located today Antenna Nearly 14 feet above runway Breakable structure Base To runway 2But by 2007, a concrete slab was built on top of concrete pillars, which were covered by a dirt mound. Antenna Runway Slope not to scale Over 7 feet Base Dirt Concrete pillars Antenna Runway Slope not to scale Over 7 feet Base Dirt Concrete pillars Antenna Over 7 feet To runway Base Dirt Concrete pillars 3Last year, the slab was reinforced with more concrete on top, for a total slab thickness of nearly 3 inches. Antenna Runway Slope not to scale About 14 feet Antenna Runway Slope not to scale About 14 feet Antenna To runway About 14 feet Note: Diagrams are not to scale and are based on drawings of approved plans, which may differ from what was built. Sources: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, South Korea and Korea Airports Corporation (drawings); Lee Jun-hwa (slab thickness measured after the crash) Concrete pillars exposed after crash Concrete slab Antennas 19 concrete pillars total Concrete pillars exposed after crash Concrete slab Antennas 19 concrete pillars total Concrete pillars exposed after crash Concrete slab Antennas 19 concrete pillars total Note: Diagram based on drawings of the concrete structure of both runways, which may differ from what was built. Sources: Korea Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport and Korea Airports Corporation (drawings). Photo by Chang W. Lee/The New York Times Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
New York Times
5 hours ago
- New York Times
Tensions Flare Between Two Federal Agencies Charged With Aviation Safety
The relationship between the National Transportation Safety Board, the government entity that investigates civilian airplane accidents, and the Federal Aviation Administration, the agency responsible for aviation safety, can frequently be contentious, especially after a major national tragedy. Last week, a rift between those two main regulators of aviation safety spilled out into public view. Frustrations — and sometimes tempers — flared in uncommonly raw fashion during the board's marathon of investigative hearings into the deadly midair crash between a military helicopter and a commercial jet near Ronald Reagan National Airport in January. Board members grilled witnesses, including air traffic controllers and F.A.A. managers, over three days and 30 hours of public testimony. Jennifer Homendy, the N.T.S.B. chair, led other board members in accusing the F.A.A. of knowingly stymieing efforts to improve safety at Reagan National Airport and stonewalling parts of the board's investigation into the crash. And Ms. Homendy directly accused the agency of fostering a culture among the air traffic control operation that discouraged employees from raising legitimate safety concerns, including by wielding the threat of retaliation. 'There is and always has been a healthy tension between the two agencies,' said Jeff Guzzetti, a former accident investigator for the F.A.A. and the N.T.S.B. And while the level of public outrage on display during board hearings depends largely on the proclivities of its members, he added, 'in this particular case, it's a shift.' Ms. Homendy and the other board members were careful not to direct their ire toward Sean Duffy, the transportation secretary, or Bryan Bedford, the F.A.A. administrator. Still, the very public airing of grievances raised questions about the working relationship between the two agencies at a critical juncture. The N.T.S.B. makes safety recommendations, but it is up to the F.A.A. to put them into place. The crash at Reagan National Airport, and a series of near misses and tower outages at major airports in the months since, have dampened public confidence in the safety of flying, intensifying the need for cooperation. 'Warning signs were ignored, or just not known or identified or sought, which is quite tragic,' Ms. Homendy told reporters late Wednesday, after the first day of testimony. In a statement, the F.A.A. said officials 'have and will continue to fully support the N.T.S.B.'s investigation,' stressing that the agency had been proactive about addressing concerns and adopting the board's early recommendations. The statement added that 'if there has been any stonewalling, withholding of information or intimidation — those actions will be identified and remedied without hesitation.' The gloves had already begun to come off in the final hours of the hearing on Wednesday. Ms. Homendy lost her patience with F.A.A. managers who claimed they never knew that air traffic officials from Reagan National Airport had urged higher-ups to address the potential risks posed by a helicopter route, known as Route 4, that crossed under the descent path for airplanes landing on a supplementary runway, No. 33. The Army Black Hawk that crashed into the commercial jet on Jan. 29 was flying along Route 4, and at the time of impact, was 78 feet higher than the F.A.A.-mandated ceiling of 200 feet. A number of witnesses testified that the devices pilots relied upon to measure their altitude frequently were off by about 100 feet of helicopters' actual flying height. Air traffic controllers, knowing the risks, sought to make changes as part of a helicopter-focused working group at the airport — but were told by district managers that doing so would be seen as 'too political,' according to the transcript of an interview included in an N.T.S.B. report. 'Every sign was there that there was a safety risk, and the tower was telling you that,' Ms. Homendy told F.A.A. officials. She accused agency managers of routinely dismissing safety concerns raised by employees in the airport's air traffic control tower and of reassigning people who had previously voiced concerns after the accident. She also said they used F.A.A. bureaucracy as an excuse to avoid making needed changes. 'Are you kidding me? Sixty-seven people are dead,' she said, denouncing the F.A.A.'s process for reviewing safety recommendations. 'Fix it. Do better,' she added. By the last day of the hearings, Ms. Homendy was accusing F.A.A. officials outright of trying to stymie the N.T.S.B.'s investigation by withholding documents and data the board had been requesting for months. 'I think you're interfering in the investigation,' she charged, 'because you're basically telling us 'no' every way you can.' Aviation safety experts said it was understandable for tensions to run unusually high after the collision because of the magnitude and rarity of the tragedy — it was the first fatal crash involving a major American airline in over 15 years. But part of the N.T.S.B.'s visible agitation in the hearings could also be strategic, those experts said. The fact that the crash happened just outside the nation's capital — along with the fact that power brokers from the Trump administration and Congress are eager to respond — has created a unique opportunity for the board to influence sweeping changes. 'The intensity has increased partly because of the visibility of this particular catastrophe and the proximity to Washington,' said Alan Diehl, a former aviation safety official with the N.T.S.B. and the F.A.A. 'By doing that, the N.T.S.B. hopes to convince both the F.A.A. and Congress that we need a revolution,' he added, 'in both personnel policies within the F.A.A. as well as the funding policies.' Ms. Homendy, who spent more than 14 years on Capitol Hill before President Trump nominated her to fill one of the Democratic slots on the board, has a keen understanding of Washington dynamics, according to board watchers. She is known for being more public-facing and, at times, being more comfortable adopting an adversarial posture than some of her predecessors. But she was not alone last week in being pointedly critical of the F.A.A. J. Todd Inman, a Republican member of the N.T.S.B, also accused the agency of stonewalling the investigation. The F.A.A. withheld documents about staffing at the control tower for months, he charged, dumping thousands of pages on the board on the Friday before the hearing, only after Ms. Homendy appealed to agency and Transportation Department leaders for help. At another point, Mr. Inman lost his patience with officials' promises to do better. 'We'd like to be treated privately the same way we are publicly,' he said. Mr. Inman also accused the F.A.A. of refusing to share critical data about real-time flight tracking technology, forcing the safety board to spend $50,000 annually to evaluate it 'because the F.A.A. does not consider N.T.S.B. a trusted government partner.' F.A.A. officials in the hot seat frequently defended their agency. Nick Fuller, the F.A.A.'s acting deputy chief operations officer, responded to allegations that the agency had withheld documents and data by arguing that some of the board's requests had been unclear, and that 'in fact, we just gave you the latest and greatest' information. Mr. Fuller also pushed back on accusations from all three presiding board members that after the Jan. 29 accident, the F.A.A. had removed managers at Reagan National's control tower who had previously raised concerns about traffic, staffing or other safety pitfalls. He argued that staffing changes had not been retaliatory, but rather executed in the interest of solving the problem quickly. 'I was given a task to fix the facility risk between helicopters and fixed wing,' Mr. Fuller said, referring to airplanes, 'and it wasn't to work through a collaborative process and allow a few months — it was to get the job done immediately.' On several occasions during the hearings, Ms. Homendy sought assurances that F.A.A. employees who were called as witnesses in the investigation would not be retaliated against for their testimony — a step prompted by reports that some who had critical things to say were being harassed, she told reporters on Thursday after that day's testimony. 'Nobody can take what is clearly a safety issue and get it up through the offices that should be making the decision to ensure safety in the airspace — or somebody's ignoring them,' she told reporters. 'You raise a red flag, and two things happen: You don't get it, you don't get the safety change that you have asked for, or you're transferred out after an accident occurs.' But experts warned against assuming that the acrimony of the hearing would disrupt the two agencies' expert staff members from being able to work together. 'Overall, the process is healthy,' said John Cox, a former airline pilot who runs a safety consulting firm. 'Is there friction? Yes. Is it normal? Yes. Was last week a little more so than normal? Yes,' he added. 'Will that encourage F.A.A. to move more quickly? I hope.'
CBS News
7 hours ago
- CBS News
Sailboat captain urges caution after deadly crash near Miami Beach kills three children
A week after a fatal crash between a sailboat and a barge on Biscayne Bay, near Miami Beach, claimed the lives of three children, a South Florida sailboat captain is calling for increased awareness and safety on the water. Meanwhile, the lone survivor's family continues to wait for answers from the U.S. Coast Guard. Russell Beyer, a veteran sailboat captain who teaches classes on Biscayne Bay, says the crash underscores the unpredictable nature of sailing and the importance of preparation. "It feels like every day is different. There's different variables all the time," Beyer said. He described the nuances of steering under sail, noting that it requires skill, experience, and adaptability. "They either steer and turn too much or they don't turn enough," he said of new sailors. On the day of the crash, Beyer said the conditions were relatively calm, similar to what he experienced on the water this Monday. "The wind is roughly nine knots," he said. Beyer emphasized that sailors should always have more than one way to maneuver quickly in case of danger. He noted that on his own boat, in addition to the rudders, he relies on a motor for quick response. "Right now we're doing three knots. It's not very responsible when I turn the wheel. I just turned the wheel, the boat hasn't even started to turn," Beyer said. Justin Shapiro, a maritime attorney representing the family of 7-year-old Calena Gruber—the only child to survive the crash after being rushed to the hospital—said the Coast Guard investigation is critical to determining responsibility. "Coast Guard navigation rules say the sailboat generally has the right of way over a powered vessel. But there's an exception where the powered vessel has restricted mobility," Shapiro said. Shapiro added that the family is holding off on any legal decisions until the investigation is complete. The Coast Guard has not released further details about the incident. CBS News Miami has reached out to officials but has not received a response.
