Facebook Instagram Linkedin X-twitter Youtube

About Us
Contact Us
Advertisement

About Us
Contact Us
Advertisement

Aviation Newsletter

WhatsApp Channel

Latest News
Aviation Today Perspectives
Aviation Jobs
About Us

Latest News
Aviation Today Perspectives
Aviation Jobs
About Us

Subscribe Now

Latest News
Aviation Today Perspectives
Aviation Jobs
About Us

Latest News
Aviation Today Perspectives
Aviation Jobs
About Us

News

Civil Aviation

Pilot Training

Flight School Analysis

Aviation Jobs

Training

Services

About Us

Subscribe Now

Aviation protocol

Lucknow, India: An IndiGo flight operating from Delhi to Bagdogra made an emergency landing at Lucknow’s Chaudhary Charan Singh International Airport on Sunday after a bomb threat was detected onboard, triggering a full-scale aviation security response. The aircraft, operating as IndiGo flight 6E-6650, was diverted mid-air after the crew alerted Air Traffic Control (ATC) about a suspicious message found inside the aircraft. According to official sources, a handwritten note claiming the presence of a bomb was discovered on tissue paper inside one of the aircraft’s lavatories. Following standard security protocols, ATC directed the aircraft to divert to Lucknow, where it landed safely. All passengers and crew were evacuated without injury, and the aircraft was moved to an isolation bay for inspection. The flight was carrying 222 adult passengers and eight infants, along with two pilots and five cabin crew members. Security agencies, including the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), local police, airport security personnel, and a Bomb Disposal Squad, conducted an extensive search of the aircraft, luggage, and cabin. A Bomb Threat Assessment Committee (BTAC) was also convened as part of the response. Initial inspections found no explosive device, and authorities later indicated that the threat appeared to be a hoax, though investigations remain ongoing to identify the source of the message and determine whether legal action will be pursued. IndiGo, in a brief statement, confirmed the diversion and said the airline followed all mandatory safety and security procedures. The airline emphasized that passenger safety remains its highest priority. Airport operations at Lucknow were temporarily affected during the security checks, but normal operations resumed once authorities cleared the aircraft. India has witnessed a rise in hoax bomb threats targeting aviation in recent months, prompting airlines and airports to adopt a zero-tolerance approach. Aviation security experts stress that even false threats must be treated as real until proven otherwise, given the potential risk to passengers and infrastructure. Authorities have reiterated that issuing false bomb threats is a serious criminal offence under Indian law and warned of strict action against those found responsible.

Incidents

IndiGo Flight With 230 On Board Makes Emergency Landing In Lucknow After Bomb Threat

Aviation Today News Desk / January 19, 2026

Lucknow, India: An IndiGo flight operating from Delhi to Bagdogra made an emergency landing at Lucknow’s Chaudhary Charan Singh International […]

Muscat, Oman: A Turkish Airlines flight from Istanbul to Muscat International Airport (MCT) became the centre of an unusual aviation exchange on Sunday when the aircraft’s flight crew and Muscat air traffic control (ATC) disagreed over a descent clearance during the approach phase. The Airbus A321neo was being vectored for an Instrument Landing System (ILS) approach when Muscat ATC instructed the crew to descend to 2,200 feet, identified by controllers as a minimum safe altitude suitable for sequencing and terrain clearance in that segment of airspace. The pilot responded that the airline’s company-approved navigation charts did not list 2,200 feet as an acceptable minimum altitude in that sector and that his flight crew could only descend to 3,600 feet in accordance with their procedures and published minimum vectoring altitudes (MVAs). In recorded ATC transmissions that have circulated within aviation safety analysis communities, the exchange became tense as the pilot repeatedly stated he was “unable to accept vectors” below the charted limit. The controller, while asserting that “our minimum safe altitude is 2,200,” urged the flight crew to comply with ATC instructions. Despite the firm tone in radio exchanges, both sides maintained professional conduct, and the disagreement did not escalate into an unsafe operational situation. The pilot proposed alternative vectors that would allow the aircraft to remain at or above 3,600 feet while aligning for the approach sequence. Minimum vectoring altitude and minimum safe altitude figures are critical safety parameters that provide required terrain and obstacle clearance during radar vectoring. Air traffic controllers and pilots derive these altitudes from different sources controllers from their local surveillance and obstacle databases, and pilots from company-approved charts often supplied by third-party aeronautical data providers. International aviation regulations and standard operating procedures emphasise that the pilot in command retains ultimate responsibility for the safety of the aircraft. When an ATC-issued clearance conflicts with a pilot’s verified safety limits, the flight crew may lawfully decline and request clarification or alternative instructions. The Turkish Airlines aircraft remained at or above the altitude the crew could accept until it was safely established on the final approach. There were no reported safety incidents, and the flight landed without further operational disruption.

Incidents

Turkish Airlines Pilot Disputes Descent Clearance With Muscat ATC, Flight Lands Safely

Aviation Today News Desk / December 29, 2025

Muscat, Oman: A Turkish Airlines flight from Istanbul to Muscat International Airport (MCT) became the centre of an unusual aviation

New Delhi, India: The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has directed Air India to carry out a comprehensive inspection of the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) systems across its entire fleet of Boeing 787 Dreamliners. This action comes after an incident in which the RAT deployed automatically on one of the airline’s aircraft during landing in Birmingham, UK. Boeing has also requested that other 787 operators report any similar occurrences worldwide. The DGCA has specifically instructed Air India to verify the stowage integrity of the RAT in all aircraft where the Power Conditioning Module (PCM) was recently replaced. The Ram Air Turbine serves as an emergency backup system, providing hydraulic and electrical power if the aircraft’s main engines fail. It operates by using the aircraft’s forward motion to spin a small turbine that extends from the fuselage underside. This ensures critical flight control systems and avionics remain operational during emergencies, such as dual-engine failures or complete electrical system loss. Notably, the RAT deployed during the June 2025 crash of Air India flight AI171 after a dual-engine flameout at Ahmedabad, resulting in the loss of 260 lives. The recent directive stems from an October 4, 2025, incident involving Air India flight AI117, flying from Amritsar (ATQ) to Birmingham (BHX), where the RAT deployed automatically at around 500 feet during descent. The aircraft landed safely, with all electrical and hydraulic systems reportedly functioning normally. According to the DGCA advisory, “Air India has been advised to review the work package of ‘D’ Check for the actions required in view of the change of PCM module, for any discrepancies.” The regulator noted that the RAT is rarely activated during routine operations and is typically reserved for critical failures, making any uncommanded deployment a serious concern. Air India confirmed that despite the unexpected RAT deployment, all onboard systems were stable throughout the flight. Following the incident, the Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP) requested the DGCA to inspect the electrical systems on all Boeing 787s operating in India. In a letter, FIP President GS Randhawa highlighted that the Aircraft Health Monitoring (AHM) system had detected a fault in the Bus Power Control Unit (BPCU), which could have triggered the RAT deployment. The BPCU is essential for managing electrical power distribution, and any malfunction may activate backup systems. FIP emphasized that this incident points to potential systemic electrical vulnerabilities in the Boeing 787 and called for thorough inspections of all aircraft in the country. Civil Aviation Minister Ram Mohan Naidu stated, “The DGCA is already on the job. Once we have more details, we will coordinate with the relevant stakeholders to ensure preventive measures are implemented and such incidents are avoided in the future.” The DGCA has extended its review beyond Air India, requesting Boeing to provide a detailed report on preventive measures and to share information on similar uncommanded RAT deployments globally in recent years. This aims to identify any recurring patterns and enhance the safety protocols of the 787 fleet.

Airlines

DGCA Orders Air India To Reinspect RAT Systems On All 787s After Uncommanded Deploy

Aviation Today News Desk / October 17, 2025

New Delhi, India: The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has directed Air India to carry out a comprehensive inspection

← Previous 1 2

Facebook-f Instagram Linkedin-in X-twitter Youtube

AVIATION TODAY brings the latest in aviation and aims to cater information to professionals and Aviation Enthusiasts about the Industry.

Quick Links

About Us
Contact Us
Services
Advertise
FAQ

Navigate

Latest News
Civil Aviation
Pilot Training
Flight School Analysis
Aviation Jobs
Training

General Support

info@aviationtoday.in

News Desk Support

news@aviationtoday.in