Former Air India whistleblower captain raises complaints with India's aviation regulator over Boeing 777-200LR oxygen system

Seen here is an Air India Boeing 777-200LR [Registration VT-AEG, MSN: 30440, one of the aircraft leased from Delta Air Lines - Ex reg N706DN]] on final approach. Photo Copyright Trevor Carl.

​Since I published my second blog article on the 25th of January – where I highlighted some exclusive insights relating to a whistleblower Air India captain, who cannot be named for legal reasons, raising concerns about passenger and Boeing 777-200LR aircraft safety [claiming they're flying illegally and could be left without oxygen if the cabin were to suffer a sudden decompression] – I have the following updates:

COMPLAINTS SENT TO THE DGCA BY THE WHISTLEBLOWER CAPTAIN

The whistleblower captain has sent a series of complaints via emails in 2024 filed with the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) dated the 2nd of January, 27th of January, and the 7th of February. In these complaints, he painstakingly explains to the DGCA that he was “illegally terminated from Air India”.
 
He further “requested multiple times from the DGCA to hold a fair and just enquiry to be conducted based on the principles of natural justice, pertaining to the safety violation”, which he believes is being done willfully and deliberately even though Air India officials have been cautioned since January 2023.
 
According to the DGCA, they conducted a comprehensive investigation into the alleged violations. "Since the investigation prima facie revealed non-compliance by the airline, a show cause notice was issued to the Accountable Manager of Air India Limited", said the DGCA.
 
"The response to the show cause notice was duly examined with respect to the laid down stipulations under the relevant statutory provisions and the performance limits stipulated in critical documentations laid down by the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)", it said.
 
Of paramount importance to the whistleblower captain is that he wants to understand “why the DGCA hasn’t taken any corrective action against Air India to stop operating those illegal flights”, which was the primary subject of his complaint [because he believes this is a cause of extreme danger to the lives of passengers and crew on these leased Boeing 777-200LR aircraft while flying between Indian cities and San Francisco [SFO]].
 
The whistleblower captain states that Air India is "misusing the privileges of the Air Operator’s Certificate on a daily basis, which is a license by the granted by the DCGA to legally operate a commercial airline. Misusing privileges of license on a daily basis warrants a serious review of the situation”.

HOW IT ALL STARTED

​I have also read with interest some highly sensitive and confidential information relating to this matter shared by the whistleblower captain. From these documents, some things can be made public, especially in relation to how this situation got to where we are today.
 
On the 22nd of January 2023, the whistleblower captain raised a voluntarily safety report by writing to the various heads of departments of Air India via an email regarding this critical issue. Prior to this date, he did extensive research into this important matter.
 
While his research was on-going regarding the same issue, on the 30th of January he was scheduled to operate a similar flight from SFO to Bangalore. On that day, for the route which he was assigned to operate as the PIC (Pilot in Command), he was presented with at least three flight plans, one after the other. These were presented by the flight planners at the IFD [Integrated Flight Dispatch] via the flight dispatch office in New Delhi.
 
However, he felt he had no choice but to reject all of the flight plans because “he was duty bound towards the safety of his passengers and crew, as these flight plans were planned in a manner which was not only illegal but also fatal for the passengers and crew in case a depressurization emergency were to take place on certain segments of the route”. Therefore, he insisted that a safe and legal routing be offered by the flight dispatch department between SFO and Bangalore.
 
Now, because of the change in the routing demanded by the whistleblower captain [PIC in this case], the flight dispatch office had to figure out an alternate route beyond the job of automatically printing out the everyday flight plan routings. It is a standard procedure to get a flight plan before any flight; however, the issue here is that getting alternate flight plans for this reason is not a regular occurrence.
 
Sometimes an airline will have a standard route it uses for a flight – mostly on short domestic routes – and these routes will be saved in a database on the aircraft’s Flight Management Computer [FMC]. The FMC is an advanced computer system that plays a key role in providing flight guidance and control to the aircraft and is a critical component of the Boeing 777 aircraft which contains navigation and aircraft performance data. The FMC works in conjunction with other systems, such as the Flight Management System (FMS), the autopilot and auto – throttle etc., to ensure safe and efficient flight operations.
 
Ultimately, the FMC is responsible for calculating and displaying essential flight-related information to the pilots, including routes, speeds, altitudes, and vertical and lateral navigation. It also controls the autopilot and auto throttle systems, helping to maintain the aircraft’s stability and performance during various phases of flight.
 
Therefore, each flight route is planned based on several factors, including options for speed, altitude, fuel consumption, alternate airport/route, weight etc. Under normal circumstances, some of these things may of course change pending any requests from Air Traffic Control [ATC], weather, commercial dept. of the airline, such as for example last minute changes in cargo or the number of passengers.
 
Although the standard distance doesn’t usually change; however, with every flight the time taken to fly the same route can change (and therefore the fuel required) could alter, for example it would take longer if you were flying in strong head winds. Airlines require permission to fly through the airspace of each country they pass over. If for any reason you don’t have permission, the route will be altered, and they also try to find the most inexpensive route [compatible in every sense.].

LEASED BOEING 777-200LR AIRCRAFT ILL-EQUIPPED IN TERMS OF OXYGEN FOR THE FLOWN ROUTES

As per the whistleblower captain’s extensive research, he noted that his “aircraft was not equipped with the legal amount of stored breathing oxygen to provide passengers in case there was an emergency descent required over Greenland due to vast stretches of high mountainous terrain throughout the continent”. Furthermore, on the day of that flight the whistleblower captain realized the same held true for other route segments which were passing over high mountainous regions such as the Rockies and some parts of China [ especially Kunming airspace] as well.

"For these leased aircraft, it is not safe and legal to fly over China's high mountainous terrain, especially around the Kunming ZPKM flight information region (FIR, which is Airway A599 and then Airway A581] which contains the Kunming, Lijiang, Dali airspace" said the whistleblower captain. 
 
He noted that “it would have taken a considerable amount of time, which was much more than the capability of Air India’s leased B777-200LR aircraft, which carried only 12 minutes of stored/breathing oxygen on board, to descend to at least an altitude of 10,000 feet or below to prevent passengers from experiencing hypoxia”. 

Map of China's flight information regions (FIRs). The Kunming FIR region is the one with high mountainous terrain. Air India's Boeing 777-200LR flights are being used to fly Indian destinations to SFO via the Kunming FIR, Wuhan FIR, and Shanghai FIR regions over China and then onto South Korea and the Pacific Ocean: Copyright ICAO.

Here is a screenshot of Air India flights AI179 [Mumbai to San Francisco] and AI180 [New Delhi to San Francisco] on the 13th of February 2024 at 13:30 GMT over the Kunming FIR. Both these aircraft are the leased Boeing 777-200LR ones from Delta Air Lines: Photo Copyright FlightRadar24

Kunming FIR in detail with coordinates: Photo Copyright ICAO

FLIGHT PLANS NOT COMPATIBLE

​Despite the aircraft not being equipped with more than 12 minutes of stored breathing oxygen, the whistleblower captain, while he was still at the crew hotel in San Francisco, noticed the initial flight plan he was presented with was illegal because it required him to fly the Boeing 777-200LR aircraft with less than the minimum legal amount of stored breathing oxygen over high mountainous terrain, especially the route segment over the Rockies.
 
Fearing for the safety of the lives of his passengers and crew, he requested the flight planners at the IFD to provide an alternate flight plan. Almost seven hours went before the flight dispatch team provided him with a flight plan which was legally acceptable.
 
“This highlights gross incompetence on the part of the Air India flight dispatch team, which is supposed to be of assistance to its operations 24/7 and efficiently and timely produce results, such as providing a flight plan even if it requires a change in routing,” said the whistleblower captain.
 
That was to be the whistleblower’s final flight, and since then he claims, “Air India has illegally terminated me without conducting a proper enquiry”.
 
I wonder if the passengers were ever refunded for this flight. I have reached out to Air India’s press office for a comment but have not received a response. 

PASSENGER WOES ON INDIA-SAN FRANCISCO ROUTES 

​Mind you, this is not the first time an Air India flight from San Francisco to India [and vice-versa] has been delayed. On June 6, 2023, Air India flight AI173D from Delhi [DEL] to San Francisco [SFO] carrying 216 passengers and 16 crew on board was diverted to the Magadan port city in far east Russia following a mid-air glitch in one of the Boeing 777-200LR aircraft engines.
 
All passengers and crew were stranded in the port city for two days, and the replacement aircraft ferried them to San Francisco on 8 June. However, the return flight to Mumbai was cancelled. "Air India flight AI180, scheduled to operate from San Francisco (SFO) to Mumbai (BOM) on June 8, 2023, was cancelled due to an unforeseen technical issue," an Air India spokesperson said.

It is a sad state of affairs for an airline that was once known as a world-class luxury brand, especially in the 60s, 70s, and the 80s. By the 1970s Air India had over 10,000 employees in over 50 countries. It was a brand to be reckoned with and had an aura of sheer glamour and excitement. According to the book “Empires of the Sky – The Politics, Contests and Cartels of World Airlines.” by Anthony Sampson, Air India’s founder, the legendary aviator and industrialist J.R.D. Tata was approached to design Singapore Airlines’ inflight services which international travelers speak of highly today. The best of Asian hospitality that Thai Airways and Cathay Pacific are known for today was first embodied by Air India right from the 1950s.

However, things began to deteriorate from the 1990s onwards as competition became fiercer, especially from the Middle Eastern and other Asian carriers. Air India began making heavy losses after merging with the state-owned domestic operator Indian Airlines in 2007. It relied on taxpayer-funded bailouts to stay operational, and since then it has sadly been the butt of jokes for bad quality of service.

Air India used to be one of the world's most glamourous airlines in the 1960s and 70s: Picture Copyright: Architecturaldigest.in

DETAILS NOT CLEAR

​The captain claims he did not refuse to fly, but instead he asked for an alternate route because he was concerned for the safety of the lives of the passengers and crew members.
 
A few details are murky and not clear as mud: why did it take the flight planners almost seven hours to provide the captain with an alternate [legally acceptable] flight plan at San Francisco? [note that airlines are used to operating and working in 24/7 time zones for emergencies like this, and the resources are there for back up support.], has this ever happened before with any other airline?
 
More importantly, what exactly has the DGCA fined Air India for? and under what provision of the law (DCGA Civil Aviation Regulations [CAR])? and why has not the order dated 24th of January 2024 against Air India been made public by DGCA? The whistleblower captain “has not had any replies, even after he has applied under the 2005 Right to Information Act”.
 
The whistleblower captain has also asked [I quote] “Why has the DGCA not publicly disclosed the order copy dated the 24th of January 2024, which imposes a fine on Air India, especially to the whistleblower captain, as he is the complainant?”
 
He further states that “the DGCA have released a press note, which is ambiguous and not specific. This order should have been made public to all the stakeholders to learn from it and understand it from the air safety point of view to implement these safe practices in their airlines and know what not to do”.
 
Another veteran airline captain spoke to me on condition of anonymity and said: “It is important to note that whistleblowers play a crucial role in the fight for accountability and a fairer and safer world, and especially in aviation”.