‘Don't Want To Continue...': Air India Pilot To ATC Before Making Turnaround To Hong Kong
The audio of the conversation between the pilot of Air India Dreamliner and the ATC has surfaced on social media where the pilots informed that they did not wish to proceed further
The pilots of New Delhi-bound Air India flight that turned back to Hong Kong after nearly 90 minutes of take-off after, didn't want to continue the journey after encountering a suspected technical snag midway.
The audio of the conversation between the pilot of Air India Dreamliner and the Hong Kong Air Traffic Control (ATC) has surfaced on social media where the pilots informed ATC that they did not wish to proceed further and requested clearance to return.
'We don't want to continue further," the pilot could be heard telling ATC.
The pilot requested to stay closer to Hong Kong citing technical reasons before deciding to return.
'Due to technical reason we would like to stay closer to Hong Kong. May be, we will come back and land in Hong Kong once we sort out the problem. We don't want to continue further," the pilot was heard telling the ATC.
Flight AI315, operated by a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, had departed from Hong Kong International Airport for New Delhi's Indira Gandhi International Airport today morning. The pilots decided to turn back the flight to the point of its origin as a precautionary measure after they suspected a technical issue.
The Hong Kong-Delhi flight in question took off at around 9.30 am (IST) before circling back to the airport within 90 minutes, data from online tracker Fligthradar24 showed.
According to Air India, the decision was made purely for safety reasons after a possible technical snag was detected. 'After taking off, a technical issue was suspected, hence the aircraft returned as a precautionary measure," the airline said in a statement. The aircraft is currently undergoing necessary checks.
The aircraft involved was a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, the same model as the one that crashed in Ahmedabad on June 12, killing 241 of the 242 on board, including Gujarat ex-chief minister Vijay Rupani and over 25 on the ground.
Ever since the fatal crash of Air India flight AI-171, several incidents involving mid-air technical glitches and emergency returns have come to the fore, raising concerns about aircraft safety. From precautionary turnbacks due to suspected malfunctions to bomb threats forcing diversions, the frequency of such occurrences has prompted heightened scrutiny of aviation protocols.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
18 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
DGCA issues 4 show cause notices to Air India for cabin crew rest, duty norms violations: Reports
India's aviation regulator DGCA issued four show cause notices to Air India for multiple violations regarding cabin crew rest, duty norms, training rules and operational procedures. Air India made voluntary disclosures to the DGCA on June 20 and 21.(Bloomberg/File) The aviation watchdog issued show cause notices to Air India for the violations on July 23, over a month after its Boeing 787-8 aircraft, bound for London, crashed in Ahmedabad, killing 260 people. The show cause notices were issued after Air India made voluntary disclosures to the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) on June 20 and 21, news agency PTI reported, quoting sources. The DGCA warned the airliner that it could face enforcement action for breaching safety standards, Reuters reported. What did DGCA's show cause notices say? The show cause notices cite a total of 29 violations, including pilots not being given mandatory rest, poor compliance with training requirements and lack of training for a high-altitude airport, according to Reuters. In an official statement, an Air India spokesperson said, "We acknowledge receipt of these notices from the regulator related to certain voluntary disclosures that were made over the last one year by Air India. We will respond to the said notices within the stipulated period. We remain committed to the safety of our crew and passengers." Also Read: 9 showcause notices to Air India for 5 safety violations in last 6 months: Govt However, the PTI report quoting sources said that three show cause notices were issued to Air India based on the violations of cabin crew duty and rest regulations during ultra-long-haul flights- two made on April 27 and one each on April 28 and May 2. There were violations reported in crew training and operational procedures during flights operated on July 26, 2024, October 9, 2024 and April 22, 2025. The aviation regulator also issued one of the show cause notices over violation of flight duty period/weekly rest violations during a flight on June 24 last year and June 13 this year, the report added. There were also three instances of violations of cabin crew training and operational procedures made during flights operated on April 10-11, February 16-May 19 and December 1, 2024. The Reuters report said that an Air India pilot flew from Kathmandu without the mandatory special simulator training required for the airport in April this year.
Hindustan Times
4 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Plane crashes in Russia, India, US: 2025 deadliest in years in aviation safety
The plane crash in Russia that is feared to have claimed 49 lives on Thursday comes barely a month-and-a-half after the Air India crash in Ahmedabad. Even before the July 24 crash in Russia's eastern Amur region, the year 2025 was already way above the past decade's average of deaths in air crashes per year. A large portion of the damaged plane fuselage is lifted from the Potomac river during recovery efforts after the American Airlines crash. (Getty Images/AFP) The number of civil aviation fatalities in 2025 had crossed 460 after the Ahmedabad crash claimed 260 lives. The average over the past decade is 284, as per Jan-Arwed Richter, founder of Jacdec, a German consulting firm that tracks aviation safety. Now, if the Russia crash indeed causes the number of deaths feared — all 49 onboard — the total for 2025 will cross 500, which will be almost double the average. In between, an air force jet crash in Bangladesh caused 29 deaths, most of them civilians on the ground. Year began with American Airlines collision In January, American Airlines Group Flight 5342 collided with a US Army helicopter near Washington. It killed all 67 people aboard both aircraft — 64 passengers and crew on the airliner and three crew on the helicopter. A day after that crash, on January 29, the African nation of South Sudan saw a smaller plane, a Beechcraft 1900D, on a charter transporting oil workers crashed shortly after takeoff, killing 20 out of 21 on board. January ended with another crash in the US, this one of an air ambulance in Philadelphia that killed eight people. The Bering Air Flight 445 in Alaska first went missing and then its wrckage was found a day later, on February 7. All 10 onboard were dead. Those onboard the Delta Connection Flight 4819 from Minneapolis-Saint Paul in the US to Toronto, Canada, were lucky as no one was killed even as the plane crashed upon landing on February 17. In Honduras, a charter, a plane crashed into the sea, which killed 13 of the 18 passengers and crew. Singer-politician Aurelio Martinez was among the victims. April saw a crash in the US again, when a helicopter on a sightseeing tour in New Jersey crashed into the Hudson river, killing all five passengers and the pilot. Boeing 737 shot down amid civil war A strange but deadly crash took place on May 3, when a cargo Boeing 737-290C Advanced was shot down in the city of Nyala by the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), owing to suspicion that it was carrying weapons for the rebel Rapid Support Forces (RSF) engaged in a civil war. Twenty people died. The US saw a crash in May too. On May 22, a Cessna plane crashed in San Diego, killing six people onboard. Ahmedabad tragedy On June 12, India saw the biggest air disaster in its history when Air India Flight 171 from Ahmedabad to London crashed soon after takeoff. The Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner was carrying 242 passengers and crew, all of whom, except one passenger, died. Another 19 people were killed on the ground as it crashed second after takeoff onto a nearby medical college and hostel. A month later, on July 13, a smaller plane crashed shortly after takeoff from an airport in Essex, UK. Four occupants died. Then came the Bangladesh disaster when the air force plane crashed on a school building. On July 24, Thursday, a Russian passenger plane carrying 49 people, including six crew members, crashed in the eastern Amur region.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
4 hours ago
- First Post
Air India crash victims' families given wrong bodies: How could this have happened?
It's a double trauma for the families who lost their loved ones in the Air India crash in Ahmedabad. Over a month after the tragedy, it has been discovered that two families in Britain have been handed over the wrong remains. Their lawyer has described it as 'appalling' and called for a serious probe. But how could such a mistake occur? read more On June 12, Air India flight AI 171 took off from Ahmedabad for its journey to UK's Gatwick when just 32 seconds after take-off, the plane crashed, killing 260 people and becoming one of the deadliest aviation incidents in recent history. Now, over a month after the tragedy, a new pain has hit some of the families of the victims after it was discovered that the remains of their loved ones were wrongly identified before repatriation to Britain, according to a lawyer representing them. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The news of error comes amid Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to London where he is expected to meet with his British counterpart Keir Starmer and sign the crucial India-UK Free Trade Agreement (FTA) deal. Did India bungle up in sending remains to Britain? A Daily Mail report has revealed that two families of the Air India crash victims in the UK received the wrong bodies. The report states that relatives of one victim had to abandon funeral plans after being informed that the coffin contain the remains of any unknown passenger rather than their family member. In the other case, the 'commingled' remnants of more than one person killed in the crash were mistakenly placed in the same casket. James Healy-Pratt, the lawyer of the families in Britain, was quoted as telling the New York Times, 'This has added an indescribable psychological distress to families who are already going through the trauma of losing a loved one,' he said. 'It's appalling that the families have to go through this,' he said. 'You lose a loved one on the 12th of June, and within a matter of weeks you virtually lost them again.' He added that the family who received the 'commingled' remains were able to have them separated and hold a funeral service. However, the other family is 'in limbo', the lawyer was quoted as telling Daily Mail, adding, 'Family X have no-one to bury because it was the wrong person in their casket. And if isn't their relative, the question is, who is it in that coffin? Presumably it's another passenger and their relatives have been given the wrong remains.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A security personnel and volunteers at the site after an Air India plane crashed moments after taking off from the airport, in Ahmedabad. File image/PTI While Family X's identity hasn't been revealed, those who received the 'commingled' remains were Miten Patel, who lost his mother and father — Ashok and Shobhana Patel. The couple from Kent were on the Gatwick-bound plane when it crashed. Speaking on the mix-up, he Miten told BBC that it was 'obviously very upsetting'. 'People were tired and there was a lot of pressure. But there has to be a level of responsibility that you're sending the right bodies to the UK.' The blunder was realised after a coroner in London, Dr Fiona Wilcox, sought to verify the identities of the remains repatriated to Britain by matching their DNA with samples provided by the families. She has, however, declined to comment on the issue. What do families of other victims have to say? While only two instances of incorrect remains have been discovered so far, it has led to concern for the victims of the families, some now even doubting if they had bid adieu to the right person. As Altaf Taju, from Blackburn, whose London-based parents Adam (72) and Hasina (70), perished along with their son-on-law Altafhusen Patel (51) told the Daily Mail, 'It's horrific that this could have happened, but what could anyone do?' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD He takes solace in the fact that his parents and brother-in-law were not involved in the confusion. That's because they were buried quickly, in India as per the Muslim faith. A person stands next to the wreckage of the Air India aircraft, bound for London's Gatwick Airport, which crashed during take-off from an airport in Ahmedabad. File image/Reuters The family of Akeel Nanabawa, Hannaa Vorajee and their four-year-old daughter, Sara, from Gloucester, who were all killed in the crash, also expressed concern over the matter. They noted in a report by The Guardian that the process of identification had left them uneasy. 'From the outset, there was a clear lack of transparency and accountability in how the identification and repatriation of victims was handled. Communication was poor. Processes were unclear. And concerns raised by bereaved families — both in India and the UK — were often met with silence.' How has India responded? Reacting to the news, the spokesperson for India's Ministry of External Affairs, Randhir Jaiswal, said that India has 'been working closely with the UK side from the moment these concerns and issues were brought to our attention'. 'In the wake of the tragic crash, the concerned authorities had carried out identification of victims as per established protocols and technical requirements. All mortal remains were handled with utmost professionalism and with due regard for the regard for the dignity of the deceased. We are continuing to work with the UK authorities on addressing any concerns related to this issue,' a statement issued read. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Air India, the concerned airline in the crash, said it had no comment and it has emerged that the company played no role in identifying the remains of those who died. An official, however, told The Guardian, 'It was the hospital, they who were the ones who confirmed the next-of-kin matches.' But how could misidentification actually happen? This blunder, according to experts, was a result of body tissues of different people getting fused in the aftermath of the crash. This may have led to different results when making DNA analysis. The identification of the victims in the Air India crash began almost immediately after the tragedy. It was led by local recovery teams from Ahmedabad's police and fire departments and the state disaster response force. They used sniffer dogs and high-tech search equipment and were aided by local volunteers who sifted the twisted, smouldering metal with their hands. People carry the body of a victim from the crash site after an Air India Boeing 787 Dreamliner plane crashed in Ahmedabad. File image/Reuters That's where DNA testing comes in. Barring identical twins, every individual has unique DNA. Experts note that DNA identification is the gold standard for identifying human remains, especially after mass fatality events in which bodies might not be easy to identify otherwise. These DNA samples are then matched against those taken from relatives. That's because family members share DNA. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD One has to note, however, that this is a highly time-consuming process. It took authorities 10 months to collect DNA samples following the 9/11 attacks in the US. Experts note that the impact of the Air India crash and the ensuing fire, which generated temperatures reaching 1,500°C, left most of the bodies unrecognisable and could have also changed the DNA present in the body. HP Sanghvi, the director of the forensic lab where most of the DNA samples were sent even told New York Times, 'These high temperatures affect the DNA present in various parts of the body. This process is very complex.' With inputs from agencies
