An Air India flight bound for London crashed shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad on Friday, in what is being described as one of the most devastating aviation tragedies in recent memory. The aircraft, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, was carrying 242 passengers and crew. Officials confirm that there is at least one survivor.
Among the passengers were 169 Indian nationals, 53 British citizens, one Canadian, and seven Portuguese nationals. The cause of the crash remains under active investigation by Air India and India’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA).
The aircraft involved, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, is widely considered a flagship model for long-haul travel. Marketed as both fuel-efficient and technologically advanced, the Dreamliner has long been a point of pride for U.S.-based Boeing. However, this incident casts renewed scrutiny on the aircraft’s safety track record, particularly in light of past internal warnings.
Engineer’s Warning Echoes After Tragedy
Last year, Boeing engineer Sam Salehpour alleged serious structural flaws in the 787’s construction. With nearly two decades at Boeing, Salehpour claimed that manufacturing defects — particularly gaps in the fuselage assembly — could compromise the aircraft’s structural integrity over time. He told the U.S. Senate that these flaws could lead to premature wear and, in worst-case scenarios, catastrophic failure.
Salehpour also accused Boeing of retaliating against him for raising concerns, transferring him involuntarily to a different aircraft program. His lawyers stated that Boeing “chose speed and profits over safety,” ignoring the issues he flagged.
Boeing has strongly denied the allegations, expressing continued confidence in the Dreamliner’s safety. A statement issued by the company reiterated that the aircraft model “meets all regulatory standards,” and denied any retaliation against Salehpour.
Following the whistleblower’s testimony, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration launched an inquiry. While the FAA concluded that currently active Dreamliners were “in compliance with existing safety regulations,” it did not disclose further details about ongoing internal evaluations.
A Second Voice Raises Alarms
In June 2024, another whistleblower — Richard Cuevas, a contractor working with Spirit AeroSystems (a key Boeing supplier) — came forward. Cuevas alleged that his dismissal followed safety complaints related to the Dreamliner’s forward pressure bulkhead, a component critical for maintaining cabin pressure at altitude.
He has filed complaints with both the FAA and the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, asserting that the aircraft’s assembly inconsistencies were not only overlooked but misrepresented in public communications.
His attorneys argue that Cuevas’s observations, if accurate, raise serious questions about transparency and quality control within the Dreamliner program.
Boeing’s Response and Global Impact
In the wake of the Ahmedabad crash, Boeing has issued a brief statement expressing readiness to support Air India during the ongoing investigation. The manufacturer has not commented on whether prior safety warnings could be connected to this incident.
The flight’s crew reportedly issued a mayday call shortly after takeoff, but communication was lost soon after. The nature of the crash and the speed of the aircraft’s descent remain unclear.
This crash is already prompting renewed international scrutiny of Boeing, including from Canadian aviation safety officials who are monitoring the situation closely, given the Canadian national aboard and the model’s global usage.
More details are expected as black box data is recovered and analyzed.
