A Constructive Look at IndiGo's Tail Strikes and the Path to Deeper Safety
India's aviation sector is a story of incredible growth and ambition. As one of the fastest-growing aviation markets in the world, our skies are busier than ever, with new aircraft being inducted at a record pace. At the heart of this expansion is IndiGo, the airline that flies the majority of passengers in India, making it a cornerstone of our national connectivity. With this leadership position comes an immense responsibility—not just to connect our cities, but to uphold the highest standards of safety for every passenger.
It is with this sense of shared responsibility that we must look at a concerning pattern of safety events: a series of tail strike incidents involving IndiGo's Airbus A321 fleet. While thankfully no one has been injured, the repetition of these events, even after regulatory intervention, calls for a deeper, more constructive conversation about systemic safety in our rapidly expanding skies.
A Pattern That Demands Attention
A tail strike, where an aircraft's rear fuselage hits the runway during takeoff or landing, is a serious incident that can cause significant structural damage. In 2023, a cluster of at least four such incidents within six months prompted India's aviation regulator, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), to take action. The DGCA conducted a special audit, imposed a financial penalty, and mandated corrective measures.
To understand the specifics of this pattern,
A Closer Look at the Incidents
IndiGo responded by implementing the regulator's directives, including rostering more experienced pilots for the A321 and revising its guidance on the use of certain fuel-saving landing procedures. These were necessary and important first steps.
However, the problem didn't disappear. The most alarming development has been the recurrence of these incidents after these fixes were in place. One aircraft in particular, registered VT-IBI, suffered a tail strike on takeoff in September 2024 and then, troublingly, another one upon landing in March 2025, just months after returning to service. This repeat failure on a single airframe is a clear signal that the initial remedies, while well-intentioned, may not have addressed the root cause.
Are We Asking the Right Questions?
The DGCA's 2023 audit correctly identified "systemic deficiencies" in the airline's operations and documentation. The regulator's actions, including suspending the licenses of pilots involved in one incident for deviating from standard procedures, sent a strong message about accountability. Yet, if the issues are truly systemic, focusing primarily on individual crew actions or specific operational procedures is like treating the symptoms of an illness without curing the disease itself.
The persistence of these incidents suggests the "systemic deficiencies" may run deeper than flight procedures. They may be rooted in the immense operational pressures inherent in a low-cost, high-growth environment. There are reports of an organizational culture that prioritizes on-time performance to such a degree that it may inadvertently create pressure on crews to rush procedures. The decision by one flight crew to continue flying for hours to its destination after a tail strike—with the damage only being discovered on the ground—is a stark example of how operational momentum can sometimes overshadow immediate safety protocols.
The Need for Deeper, More Constructive Recommendations
To truly enhance safety, the focus must shift from isolated fixes to a holistic examination of the operational environment. Building on the DGCA's initial findings, the next phase of recommendations should be more profound.
Go Beyond Procedural Audits to Cultural Audits: It's time to analyze the unspoken rules and pressures. How are pilots and ground crew incentivized? Is there a genuine, blame-free safety reporting culture that empowers an employee to halt a flight or delay a departure without fear of reprisal? Addressing the cultural drivers behind these incidents is paramount.
Evolve from General to Hyper-Specific Training: The A321 is a "stretched" aircraft with unique handling characteristics and tighter margins for error. Instead of simply increasing manual flying hours, training should incorporate mandatory, scenario-based simulator sessions that replicate the exact conditions leading to past tail strikes—such as bounced landings, go-arounds after a long float, and crosswind conditions. This builds muscle memory for the specific challenges of this airframe.
Empower the Safety Management System (SMS): An airline's SMS should be more than a regulatory requirement; it must be an empowered, proactive force. It needs the authority to challenge and veto operational policies that, while efficient, may erode safety margins. The repeat incident with aircraft VT-IBI suggests a breakdown in the feedback loop—an incident happened, was investigated, yet the underlying conditions allowed it to happen again.
As India continues its historic aviation expansion, ensuring the robustness of our safety ecosystem is a shared responsibility. This is not about assigning blame but about collective improvement. The recurring tail strikes are a critical learning opportunity for the entire industry. By asking deeper questions and implementing more systemic, culturally-aware recommendations, we can ensure that India's growth in the skies is matched by an unwavering commitment to the safety of every single passenger.
