The tragic Air India crash in Ahmadabad on June 12, where flight AI171 crashed shortly after taking off, highlights the severe risks air crashes pose to human life and underscores the need for robust safety measures. The disaster is India’s worst air tragedy in over a decade, in which a staggering loss of 269 lives was confirmed after DNA testing. The crash raises alarms about maintenance, pre-flight check, or design flaws. It also leads to questions on airport zoning and emergency readiness because the crash happened in a densely populated area near a hospital, and thus the risk extended beyond passengers to civilians. Any crash calls for some immediate responses – such as black box recovery, setting up of an inquiry, and regulatory actions – but some long-term actions are also required to ensure safety in the skies.
Investigators are examining potential mechanical factors such as engine thrust, flap and landing gear configuration, and aircraft control systems. The Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has mandated immediate safety checks—namely flight-control inspections and engine thrust reviews—on Air India’s entire fleet of Boeing 787s. If similar safety risks are identified, the DGCA may temporarily ground other Boeing 787-8s aircraft pending inspections. (Air India’s Boeing 787 fleet includes 26 Boeing 787-8s, and 7 Boeing 787-9s). Meanwhile, the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) is leading the probe with technical assistance from the NTSB (USA), UK’s AAIB, Boeing, and GE Aerospace. The world is watching closely as India’s aviation authorities and global regulators seek answers—both to assign responsibility and prevent future disasters. The incident is under international scrutiny, too, with engagement of Western regulators signalling global concern and the need for transparent, technically sound findings. Detailed findings from black box data and wreckage analysis—examining engines, flaps, controls and cockpit actions—will emerge in weeks to months. The findings could trigger stricter enforcement of maintenance checks, revamped flight safety protocols, and better urban planning around airports.
Air crashes in India have historically posed significant risks to human life, both on board and on the ground. Historical data lists major incidents, such as the 1996 Charkhi Dadri mid-air collision (349 fatalities), the 2010 Air India Express Flight 812 crash in Mangalore (158 fatalities), and the 2020 Air India Express Flight 1344 crash in Kozhikode (18 fatalities). These events highlight the vulnerability of passengers and bystanders, with the recent Ahmadabad crash exemplifying the potential for mass casualties in densely populated areas. The risk to human life is exacerbated by factors like pilot error, mechanical failures, and environmental hazards, as seen in past crashes like the 1978 Air India Flight 855 (213 fatalities due to instrument failure) and the 1988 Indian Airlines Flight 113 crash (130 fatalities due to pilot error). This leads us to ask a pertinent question: Why does India struggle with aviation safety despite being one of the fastest-growing air travel markets in the world?
Experts cite multiple reasons as answer for this question.
1. Overburdened Infrastructure: Many Indian airports are operating at 120% capacity, especially Tier-2 cities with fewer runways and emergency resources.
2. Inexperienced Crew and Staff: The demand for pilots and technicians has led to shortcuts in training, with some institutions failing to meet international standards.
3. Regulatory Inertia: The DGCA, India’s aviation regulator, is understaffed and often lacks the power to enforce its directives against large carriers.
4. Aging Aircraft Fleet: Budget airlines frequently use older aircraft with patchwork maintenance to save costs.
5. No Independent Accident Board: Unlike the NTSB (U.S.) or AAIB (U.K.), India doesn’t have a completely independent air accident investigation board insulated from political or corporate influence.
India must urgently reform its aviation safety framework, drawing from best practices around the world. It should establish an independent crash investigation body with public transparency, and mandate regular third-party safety audits and making them publicly accessible. At the same time, disaster response training should be organised for all airport and airline personnel. India’s response to the Air India crash involved agencies like RPF, CISF, NDRF, and local services, deploying over 500 personnel and 30 ambulances. However, compared to the US, where the NTSB and FAA lead with specialized units, or Canada with dedicated SAR squadrons, India’s multi-agency approach lacked the efficiency of single, trained aviation SAR units seen in countries like France and Germany. In smaller cities, airport infrastructure should be upgraded with modern firefighting, runway, and radar equipment. Additionally, a centralized compensation and victim assistance office should be created so that grieving families don’t suffer both loss and bureaucracy.
Remember, every air crash leaves behind not just wreckage, but families torn apart, futures lost, and deep public distrust. The Ahmedabad crash is not just a tragedy—it’s an alarm bell that demands India treat air safety not as a checkbox, but as a sacred responsibility. Human life cannot be reduced to press statements and compensation packages. It demands systems that prioritize life over logistics, and accountability over apologies. Until then, every take-off in Indian skies carries not just passengers, but the silent prayer that they will land safely—not because the system is strong, but despite its cracks.
