Tragedy & Air India – A Record That Needs to Be Broken

Introduction
A routine takeoff turned into horror on June 12, 2025, when Air India Flight 171 crashed shortly after departing Ahmedabad, slamming into a college hostel in a densely populated area. The London-bound Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner carried 242 souls; only one survived, making this the worst aviation disaster in India in over a decade. As flames and black smoke billowed from the wreckage, shock and grief reverberated across the nation. For Air India – the country’s flag carrier – this tragedy is not an isolated incident but the latest chapter in a long, blood-stained history of air disasters. It arrives on the heels of years of efforts to revive the airline’s fortunes, only to refocus attention on an unsettling question: Why do catastrophic lapses keep recurring, and what will it take to break this deadly pattern?

A History Written in Wreckage

Air India’s story is unfortunately punctuated by major tragedies that have claimed hundreds of lives. The Ahmedabad crash has reopened old wounds from previous Air India-related disasters and invites scrutiny of persistent safety issues.

Air India Express Flight IX-812

In May 2010, Air India Express Flight IX-812 from Dubai overshot the tabletop runway at Mangalore’s Bajpe Airport and plunged into a ravine, erupting in flames. Of the 166 people on board, 158 perished in what was then India’s worst air disaster in over a decade. Investigators later discovered the Serbian captain had been asleep for much of the flight and was severely disoriented during the landing. The cockpit voice recorder captured the co-pilot frantically warning “Go around!” as the plane approached too far down the slick, rain-soaked runway. The captain attempted a late takeoff, but it was futile – the Boeing 737-800 failed to lift in time and tore through the airport boundary. Only 8 people survived by jumping from the wreckage before the aircraft was engulfed. The inquiry into the Mangalore crash laid bare grave issues of pilot fatigue and unstable approach management, foreshadowing problems that would resurface a decade later.

Air India Express Flight IX-1344

Ten years on, in August 2020, another Air India Express Boeing 737-800 carrying stranded Indians home in the COVID-19 pandemic met a chillingly similar fate. Flight IX-1344 from Dubai attempted to land in heavy monsoon rains at Kozhikode (Calicut) – another hilltop airport in Kerala – and skidded off the runway in poor visibility, breaking in two. There was no post-crash fire, but the impact was lethal: 18 people were killed on the spot (a toll that later rose to 21) and over 100 injured, including both pilots. The Kozhikode accident, coming exactly a decade after Mangalore, sent shockwaves through the public. Many noted the eerie parallels: a tabletop runway perched above a valley, a downpour at dusk, an aircraft touching down far beyond the safe zone. Investigators did not miss the resemblance either – the final inquiry report on the Kozhikode crash made over 40 references to the 2010 Mangalore crash and found “glaring similarities” in causes and circumstances. It was as if the industry had painfully circled back to the same tragedy, raising uncomfortable questions about lessons truly learned.

Air India Flight 182 “Kanishka.”

Air India’s darkest chapter, however, remains the 1985 bombing of Air India Flight 182 “Kanishka.” On June 23, 1985, a suitcase bomb planted by militants exploded in mid-air on the Boeing 747 en route from Montreal to London, tearing the aircraft apart over the Atlantic Ocean. All 329 people on board were killed instantly. It was the world’s deadliest aviation terror attack until 9/11 and the worst terrorist attack in Canadian history (the majority of victims were Canadian citizens). Subsequent investigations revealed a cascade of intelligence and security failures – warnings about potential Sikh extremist plots were not acted upon decisively, and lax baggage screening allowed the bomb to be loaded in Canada. The Kanishka bombing was a wake-up call for airport security globally, spurring tighter anti-terrorism measures and memorialized inquiries. Yet for Air India, it marked a somber legacy: the flag carrier’s name became tied to one of aviation’s gravest tragedies.

These incidents are just the most notorious among a string of fatal accidents involving Air India or its affiliates over the decades. In 1978, Air India Flight 855, a Boeing 747, crashed into the Arabian Sea off Mumbai after takeoff, killing all 213 on board. Other deadly crashes befell India’s state-run airlines as well – for instance, an Indian Airlines jet crash in 1991 near Imphal that killed 69, and an Alliance Air disaster in 2000 at Patna that claimed over 50 lives. The pattern of recurrent tragedies suggests that beyond bad luck, there are systemic cracks in India’s aviation safety framework that have persisted over time. Below is a summary of Air India’s major accidents:

Air India’s Major Crash History (Selected)

(Table: A chronology of Air India’s worst air disasters, including Air India Express flights. Fatality counts include all onboard deaths.)

Cracks in the System

Each of these tragedies prompted investigations that uncovered a distressingly familiar litany of shortcomings – in aircraft operation, regulatory oversight, and infrastructure – often with recommendations that went unheeded. The Mangalore and Kozhikode crashes, a decade apart, revealed systemic issues that had not been fully corrected in the interim. In both cases, the accident reports faulted unstabilized approaches: the aircraft came in too high and fast, touched down far beyond the runway midpoint, and could not stop in time.

One glaring lapse was in pilot management and training. After 2010, Air India Express was advised to ensure adequate rest and staffing for pilots, especially at challenging airports. However, in 2020 the Kozhikode crew scheduling was found suboptimal: the airline had only one captain based in Kozhikode versus 26 first officers. The captain who landed that ill-fated flight was actually due to fly again the next morning – a possible factor in his decision to press on despite deteriorating weather, since diverting would have stranded the next day’s schedule with no backup pilot. This hints at a culture where operational pressures can trump safety margins, and it underscores issues of pilot fatigue and crew resource management. Indeed, the Mangalore crash had already highlighted fatigue – the captain had been literally snoring in the cockpit prior to descent and then exhibited impaired judgment upon waking. Moreover, first officers in both crashes struggled to override or effectively challenge their captains. The Kozhikode inquiry emphasized the need for “assertiveness training” for co-pilots, noting the first officer did not take over controls even as the approach became dangerously unstable. Such failures of cockpit resource management suggest that training programs and airline SOPs were insufficient to empower co-pilots to prevent disasters when captains falter.

Another recurring theme is infrastructure deficiencies, particularly at India’s smaller or more geographically tricky airports. Mangalore and Kozhikode are both “tabletop” airfields – runways on elevated plateaus with steep drop-offs at the ends. They require extra safeguards that, shockingly, were still missing or inadequate even after one crash foretold the next. Runway safety areas and lighting are case in point. Investigators found that a decade after Mangalore, neither Mangalore nor Kozhikode had installed the recommended runway centerline lighting or adequate runway-end safety zones to help prevent overruns. Nor were there engineered arrestor beds (EMAS) or other buffers to stop an overshooting aircraft. In heavy rain at night, the lack of visual aids and friction can be a critical handicap. The Kozhikode accident occurred amid a downpour and low visibility, where a properly lit and grooved runway might have made a difference – yet those upgrades hadn’t materialized. This exposes a broader issue of airport infrastructure lagging behind traffic growth and hazard knowledge, especially at second-tier cities. The failure to urgently address known hazards at such airports points to an alarming complacency.

Crucially, oversight by India’s aviation regulator – the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) – has often been reactive rather than proactive. After the 2010 disaster, DGCA stipulated more frequent pilot line checks and inspections for flights into challenging airports. Yet the Kozhikode inquiry revealed that DGCA’s flight inspectors had conducted zero special inspections of operations at tabletop runways from January 2019 to June 2020. In other words, even as Air India Express continued braving monsoon storms into Kozhikode, regulators weren’t actively monitoring compliance with enhanced safety procedures. Such regulatory lapses have been noted before. In 2014, the U.S. FAA temporarily downgraded India’s aviation safety rating, citing insufficient oversight and a shortage of safety inspectors. Although India’s rating was later restored after improvements, the pattern shows DGCA historically stretched thin and struggling to enforce standards consistently. When systemic issues – like pilot fatigue, training quality, or airport safety measures – slip through the cracks, it often falls to an accident investigation to expose them, by which time lives have been lost.

The role of airline management and government ownership in these failures cannot be ignored. For decades, Air India was a state-run enterprise (from 1953 until 2022). Insiders argue that bureaucratic management and political interference bred a poor safety culture. The carrier hemorrhaged money and could not invest in modernizing its fleet or processes, creating a recipe for disaster over time. Aging aircraft and outdated technology remained in service longer than they should have. Maintenance standards at Air India also came under scrutiny during its worst financial years – cost-cutting and shortage of spare parts sometimes led to high rates of aircraft technical snags. While maintenance was not a direct cause in the crashes discussed, a cash-strapped airline inevitably faces challenges keeping its fleet at peak safety. The government’s failure to prioritize aviation safety funding and policy reforms until tragedy strikes has been a repeated critique. Whether it was implementing anti-hijacking security in the 1980s or upgrading airports in the 2010s, authorities often acted only after disasters forced their hand. Public safety policies and recommendations have existed on paper – the trouble has been in execution.

Boeing in the Crosshairs

The Ahmedabad crash also cast a spotlight on Boeing – the manufacturer of the 787-8 Dreamliner involved in the accident. Until this disaster, the 787 had a nearly flawless safety record with no fatal crashes. This makes the incident in Ahmedabad the first deadly crash involving a Boeing 787, and it has raised significant concerns globally.

Boeing has faced intense scrutiny over the past several years due to high-profile issues with its 737 MAX aircraft. The 737 MAX disasters in Indonesia (2018) and Ethiopia (2019), which together claimed 346 lives, exposed flaws in the aircraft’s design and a troubling culture of prioritizing production over safety. Investigations revealed that Boeing had failed to properly inform airlines and pilots about the MCAS system, which contributed to the crashes.

Following those disasters, Boeing pledged to overhaul its internal processes and safety culture. However, repeated whistleblower complaints and media reports since then have alleged ongoing issues in quality control, particularly at Boeing’s Charleston plant where many 787s were assembled. Concerns about faulty parts, rushed inspections, and management pressure to meet production targets have not been fully put to rest.

While the cause of the Ahmedabad crash remains under investigation, the aircraft’s manufacturer is already under close observation. A joint team from India’s DGCA and the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board is working with Boeing to determine if mechanical failure or design flaws played any role in the tragedy. If any fault is found with the aircraft’s systems, it could have sweeping consequences for airlines and manufacturers worldwide.

The Road Ahead

India’s aviation sector is growing rapidly, and with that growth comes a pressing need to reinforce a culture of safety. The government, regulatory bodies, and airline operators must address the glaring gaps revealed time and again through these avoidable tragedies.

1. Implement Past Recommendations: Many safety recommendations from previous investigations remain unimplemented. Authorities must prioritize enforcement and compliance, especially at high-risk airports like Kozhikode and Mangalore.
2. Upgrade Airport Infrastructure: Airports with challenging geography need immediate investment in runway safety areas, better drainage, centerline lighting, and friction enhancements.
3. Strengthen DGCA Oversight: The DGCA must conduct more frequent and detailed inspections. Staffing and training for regulators should be increased to allow for proactive oversight.
4. Improve Pilot Training and Work Conditions: Airlines should implement assertiveness and fatigue management training. Crew scheduling must ensure adequate rest and encourage a non-hierarchical cockpit environment where safety decisions prevail.
5. Encourage Whistleblowing and Transparency: A culture where concerns can be raised without fear is essential. Boeing’s past troubles show the danger of silencing engineers and inspectors.
6. Independent Safety Audits: India could benefit from establishing a truly independent body to investigate aviation incidents and monitor implementation of safety reforms, separate from DGCA.

Conclusion

India’s aviation history, marked by tragedy and systemic failures, must now reach a turning point. The crash of Air India Flight 171 in Ahmedabad is a tragic reminder that complacency costs lives. It underscores the urgency of transitioning from reactive reforms to a preventative, safety-first mindset across the entire aviation ecosystem.

The victims of past disasters – whether from sabotage, pilot error, infrastructural negligence, or systemic oversight – deserve more than temporary headlines. They deserve a lasting legacy in the form of safer skies. Air India, now under private ownership, has a renewed opportunity and responsibility to lead by example. Likewise, Boeing must ensure transparency and accountability as it cooperates with investigators.

If there is any hope to be salvaged from such immense loss, it lies in the collective will to ensure these stories of grief are never repeated. It is time to finally break the record – not by counting more crashes, but by ensuring there are none to count.

Sources: Official crash investigation reports, Aviation Safety Network, BBC, The Hindu, Reuters, The Guardian, DGCA India, NTSB, Boeing communications, The New York Times, Flight Safety Foundation, ICAO accident archives.

Author: Team BTP

Add to favorites