Latest news with #MurlidharMohol
Scroll.in
32 minutes ago
- General
- Scroll.in
Ten emergency landings due to technical snags reported since January 2024: Centre
Ten incidents of aircraft making emergency landings due to technical snags have been reported since January 2024, the Ministry of Civil Aviation told Parliament on Monday. Minister of State for Civil Aviation Murlidhar Mohol also said that two incidents of turbulence were reported in the same period. In addition to these, an Air India aircraft 'declared mayday and eventually met with an accident' on June 12, said the minister. Air India's Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner aircraft, which was en route to London's Gatwick airport from Ahmedabad, had crashed just 33 seconds after taking off on June 12. There were 242 persons aboard the aircraft. One passenger survived with ' impact injuries '. Thirty-four persons were also killed on the ground after the plane crashed into the hostel building of the BJ Medical College and Hospital in Ahmedabad, according to Air India. This was said to be the world's worst aviation disaster in a decade. In his reply, Mohol also said that the Directorate General of Civil Aviation had conducted 171 regulatory audits between 2020 and June 2025. Structural audits of Delhi airport Replying to a question on the roof collapse incidents in June 2024 and May 2025, Mohol said structural audits at the Indira Gandhi International Airport in New Delhi found the terminals to be safe. One person was killed and several others injured when part of the roof at the airport's Terminal 1 collapsed amid heavy rain on June 28, 2024. The fallen canopy struck vehicles outside the terminal building. On May 25, a portion of the roof at the same terminal collapsed during heavy rainfall. A video shared on social media showed part of the terminal's tensile overhang giving way as water poured down and flooded the pavement below. At the time, the Delhi International Airport Limited had said that the incident took place because of extreme weather, adding that there was 'no structural compromise'. In his reply, Mohol said that the May incident did not involve a roof collapse but damage to a 'non-structural element'. 'A small portion of the tensile fabric (a non-structural element) in the forecourt area tore off due to an unusually high-intensity thunderstorm, accompanied by strong winds and unprecedented rainfall over a short duration,' he said. Mohol added that the Terminal 1 canopy was inspected by Cortex Construction Solutions and the results were validated by the Indian Institute of Technology-Banaras Hindu University. The structure has been found to be safe, he said. Structural audits of Terminals 2 and 3 were conducted by the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras. They were also found to be safe, the minister said. He added that all airport operators have been directed to evaluate all structures before the onset of the monsoon season. At the Delhi airport, Terminal 1 handles domestic flights by IndiGo and SpiceJet, Terminal 2 also serves domestic passengers and Terminal 3 handles all international flights along with some domestic operations.
Time of India
32 minutes ago
- General
- Time of India
Technical snags led to 10 emergency landings since January 2024: Civil Aviation Ministry
Advt Airport structural safety By , ETInfra The Civil Aviation Ministry on Monday informed Parliament that 10 incidents of emergency landings of aircraft due to technical snags have been reported since January 2024, reports a written reply to the Rajya Sabha, Minister of State for Civil Aviation Murlidhar Mohol said that two incidents of turbulence were also reported during the period. 'In addition to the above, on June 12, 2025, Air India aircraft VT-ANB declared MAYDAY and eventually met with an accident,' he Air India flight from Ahmedabad to London Gatwick crashed on 12 June, killing 260 2020 to June 2025, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) conducted 171 regulatory audits , the minister a separate written reply, Mohol said that structural audits of Delhi Airport 's Terminal 2 and Terminal 3, conducted by IIT-Madras , found both structures to be said that on 28 June 2024, the forecourt canopy at Terminal 1D of Delhi Airport collapsed during heavy rain. On 25 May 2025, there was no incident of roof collapse. However, a small portion of the tensile fabric in the forecourt area tore due to high-intensity thunderstorms, strong winds and heavy rainfall over a short duration. 'The incident had no impact on airport operations,' Mohol said.A thorough inspection of the canopy structure at Terminal 1D was conducted by Cortex Construction Solutions Pvt Ltd, with the results validated by IIT-Banaras Hindu University, which found the structure safe. Larsen & Toubro's Engineering, Design & Research Centre also undertook a structural study before reconstruction works, with prior approval from minister said that all the airport operators have been directed to carry out a thorough evaluation of all civil, electrical and technical aspects of the building, including the design, specifications and workmanship of the roof sheeting structure before the onset of monsoon every year.
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Climate
- Time of India
Severe weather, non-timely action in re-routing plane probable causes for IndiGo incident in May: DGCA
Advt Severe weather and non-timely action in re-routing the aircraft clear of weather were the probable causes that led to IndiGo's Delhi-Srinagar flight incident where the aircraft's nose radome was damaged on May 21, according to the probe findings by aviation regulator May 21, IndiGo's A321 neo aircraft VT-IMD while operating flight 6E-2142 from Delhi to Srinagar encountered severe weather, including hail, during cruise. After landing in Srinagar, the aircraft radome was found damaged, Minister of State for Civil Aviation Murlidhar Mohol told the Rajya Sabha on incident was investigated by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA)."The investigation has revealed that severe weather existing en-route and non-timely action in re-routing the aircraft clear of weather was the probable cause of the occurrence," the minister said in a written May 23, two days after the incident, DGCA had said IndiGo flight crew initially attempted to return but as they were close to the thunderstorm cloud, they decided to penetrate the weather."Subsequently, they encountered hailstorm and severe turbulence. Crew chose to continue at the same heading to exit the weather by the shortest route towards Srinagar," it had said in a in a thunderstorm cloud, the regulator had said warnings of Angle of Attack fault, Alternate Law protection lost, backup Speed scale unreliable were triggered."Due to updraft and downdraft encountered by the aircraft the Autopilot tripped and aircraft speed had wide variations. As a result, Maximum Operating Speed/Maximum operating Mach (VMO/MMO) warnings and repeated stall warnings were triggered," it had May 21, the flight crew had sought permission to enter Pakistan airspace to avoid turbulence but the request was rejected.
Hindustan Times
8 hours ago
- Climate
- Hindustan Times
‘Severe weather, delayed re-routing to blame for IndiGo flight damage'
: Severe weather and non-timely action in re-routing the aircraft were the probable causes that led to the IndiGo's Delhi-Srinagar flight incident where the aircraft suffered damages to its radome on May 21, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) found in its investigation. 'Severe weather, delayed re-routing to blame for IndiGo flight damage' The IndiGo A321 neo aircraft VT-IMD while operating flight 6E 2142 from Delhi to Srinagar encountered severe weather, including hail, during cruise. Due to this, the aircraft radome was found damaged after landing. The incident was investigated by aviation regulator DGCA. 'The investigation has revealed that severe weather existing en-route and non-timely action in re-routing the aircraft clear of weather was the probable cause of the occurrence,' Union minister of state for civil aviation Murlidhar Mohol told the Rajya Sabha in a written reply on Monday. He was responding to a question from AAP lawmaker Sanjay Singh. The incident occurred when the aircraft, while cruising at FL360, entered hailstorm and severe turbulence near Pathankot. No passenger was injured in the incident. According to the crew statement, they requested the Northern control (IAF) for deviation towards left (International Border) due to weather on the route, however it was not approved. Later, the crew contacted Lahore to enter into their airspace to avoid the weather but the same was refused too. 'Crew initially attempted to return but as they were close to the thunderstorm cloud, they decided to penetrate the weather. Subsequently, they encountered hailstorm and severe turbulence. The crew chose to continue at the same heading to exit the weather by the shortest route towards Srinagar,' the DGCA said in a statement on May 23, two days after the incident. 'While in thunderstorm cloud, warnings of Angle of Attack fault, Alternate Law protection lost, backup Speed scale unreliable were triggered. Due to updraft and downdraft encountered by the aircraft the Autopilot tripped and aircraft speed had wide variations,' it added. As a result, Maximum Operating Speed/Maximum operating Mach (VMO/MMO) warnings and repeated stall warnings were triggered, it said. 'During this period the aircraft rate of descent reached 8500 fpm. Crew flew the aircraft manually till they exited the hailstorm. After carrying out all check list actions (ECAM actions), the crew declared PAN PAN to Srinagar ATC and requested for RADAR vectors and made a safe landing with Auto Thrust operating normally,' it added.
Indian Express
17 hours ago
- Climate
- Indian Express
IndiGo plane's nose damage incident: DGCA probe reveals severe weather, non-timely action in rerouting as probable causes
Aviation safety regulator Directorate General of Civil Aviation's investigation into the May 21 incident in which an IndiGo Airbus A321 aircraft suffered a damaged nose after flying through a severe hailstorm has identified severe weather and 'non-timely action' in rerouting the aircraft to keep it clear of inclement weather as the probable causes, Minister of State for Civil Aviation Murlidhar Mohol informed the Rajya Sabha on Monday. 'IndiGo A321 neo aircraft VT-IMD while operating flight 6E-2142 from Delhi to Srinagar encountered severe weather, including hail during cruise. After landing at Srinagar, the aircraft radome was found damaged. The incident has been investigated by Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). The investigation has revealed that severe weather existing en-route and non-timely action in re-routing the aircraft clear of weather was the probable cause of the occurrence,' Mohol stated in a written response to a question in the Upper House. No further information was provided by Mohol on the DGCA investigation into the incident. Two days after the incident, the DGCA had said that the pilots flying operating that flight had requested the Indian Air Force Northern Area Control for deviation towards the India-Pakistan international border to avoid inclement weather, and later contacted the Lahore air traffic control (ATC) to briefly enter Pakistani airspace—a no-go zone for Indian aircraft—to circumvent the storm. Both these requests were denied, and the flight crew decided to go through the inclement weather and continue the journey to Srinagar, the DGCA had said then based on the pilots' statement. 'While cruising at FL360 (36,000 feet), aircraft entered hailstorm and severe turbulence near Pathankot. As per crew statement, they requested Northern control (IAF) for deviation towards left (International Border) due to weather on the route, however it was not approved. Later crew contacted Lahore to enter into their airspace to avoid the weather but the same was refused too. Crew initially attempted to return back but as they were close to the thunderstorm cloud, they decided to penetrate the weather. Subsequently, they encountered hailstorm and severe turbulence. Crew chose to continue at same heading to exit the weather by the shortest route towards Srinagar (sic),' the DGCA had said on May 23. At the time, sources in the Indian Air Force had said that the Northern Area Control's advice to the pilots was within the frame of the ban on Indian aircraft in Pakistani airspace, adding that the flight was assisted immediately in coordinating its route diversion. 'The aircraft was immediately assisted in coordinating their route diversion by contacting Delhi Area and passing requisite contact frequencies of Lahore control for overflight weather diversion request. Once Lahore refused overflight clearance, and the aircraft proceeded towards Srinagar, the flight was subsequently professionally assisted till a safe-landing at Srinagar airfield by giving control vectors and groundspeed readouts,' the IAF sources said. Air traffic services at the Srinagar airport are also under the control of the IAF. In the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack, as diplomatic relations between India and Pakistan deteriorated, Pakistan shut its airspace to Indian aircraft and airlines, banning them from overflying its airspace. In the case of the IndiGo Delhi-Srinagar flight, Lahore ATC did not allow the use of its airspace despite the urgent weather situation that the aircraft was grappling with in view of the airspace closure. The aircraft departed from Delhi at 5:13 pm on May 21, according to flight tracking data. Around 45 minutes into the flight, when the aircraft was passing over the Pathankot area, the seat belt signs were switched on by the flight crew, which was followed by severe turbulence for a few minutes and a hailstorm hitting the aircraft's fuselage. The aircraft landed at the Srinagar airport at around 6:30 pm. Given the damage to the nose of the aircraft, it was grounded in Srinagar for necessary maintenance and inspections. According to the pilots' statement to the aviation safety regulator, the aircraft sounded various technical warnings while navigating the thunderstorm. These included warnings of 'angle of attack fault, alternate law protection lost, and backup speed scale unreliable'.
