Boeing’s Lingering Safety Issues and the Ahmedabad Catastrophe

Will 300-plus deaths trigger not just a genuine accountability and a comprehensive and independent safety audit? Will US DOJ continue to settle cases involving near criminal culpability?

Karan Bir Singh Sidhu is a retired Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer and former Special Chief Secretary to the Government of Punjab. He writes independently on aviation safety, aerospace technology, and public accountability, with a special interest in the regulatory challenges facing high-risk industries—from commercial aircraft to crewed spacecraft.

Boeing's Lingering Safety Issues and the Ahmedabad Catastrophe

On June 12, 2025, Air India Flight AI171—a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner—crashed moments after takeoff from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport in Ahmedabad. Bound for London Gatwick, the aircraft was carrying 242 individuals; all perished in the horrific incident, except for a lone miracle survivor seated in 11A. Among the dead was Vijay Rupani, the former Chief Minister of Gujarat, who had now been assigned organisational duties for Punjab by his party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The plane slammed into the doctors' hostel of BJ Medical College in the densely populated Meghani Nagar area during lunchtime, causing additional fatalities on the ground. This catastrophe marks the first fatal crash involving the 787 Dreamliner since its commercial debut and has reignited intense scrutiny of the aircraft's long-troubled safety record.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, deeply shaken by the tragedy in his home state, issued a message of condolence declaring the incident "heartbreaking beyond words." He expressed solidarity with the bereaved families and directed all relevant ministries to coordinate rapid rescue, relief, and investigative efforts. He also spoke personally with Civil Aviation Minister Ram Mohan Naidu and Gujarat Chief Minister Bhupendra Patel, emphasizing the need for full accountability.

Despite its billing as a technological marvel, the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner has long been shadowed by a troubling series of safety concerns, technical failures, and regulatory interventions across global jurisdictions. What follows is an integrated examination of these issues—contextualised now by the horror in Ahmedabad.

The author with late Vijay Rupani in Chandigarh, last winter.

The 2013 Global Grounding: Battery Crisis

Lithium-Ion Battery Failures

Barely a year into service, the Dreamliner’s lithium-ion batteries caught fire twice in January 2013—first on a parked Japan Airlines aircraft in Boston and then on an All Nippon Airways flight that made an emergency landing due to smoke in the cabin.

Worldwide Grounding Action

These incidents triggered a global grounding of the entire 787 fleet—an extraordinary measure not seen since the McDonnell Douglas DC-10 grounding in 1979. The FAA initiated the move, quickly followed by EASA and other global regulators.

India’s Previous Response

India’s DGCA grounded all six Air India Dreamliners as part of the coordinated global safety action. The aircraft were cleared for flight again only after Boeing re-engineered the battery housing and added venting safeguards.

Engine Reliability Issues

Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 Failures

From 2016 onwards, the Trent 1000 engines suffered corrosion-related cracking in turbine blades, forcing operational limitations and downgrading ETOPS ratings from 330 minutes to 140 minutes by both the FAA and EASA. A fresh airworthiness directive in 2024 underlined that the issues persist.

General Electric GEnx Issues

Meanwhile, GE’s GEnx engines were also compromised—starting with multiple failures in 2012 and culminating in an uncontained engine failure on a United 787-9 in 2024. Vulnerabilities include susceptibility to ice crystal icing at high altitudes.

Manufacturing and Quality Control Deficiencies

Fuselage Assembly Issues

Boeing’s South Carolina plant came under scrutiny after 2021 whistleblower reports highlighted excessive gaps between fuselage panels, exceeding FAA tolerances. Boeing had to halt deliveries multiple times and rework aircraft already in service.

The Italian Titanium Scandal

Between 2016 and 2021, substandard titanium parts masquerading as aerospace-grade materials infiltrated nearly 500 787s via Boeing partner Leonardo. At least 35 aircraft had structurally compromised fuselages as a result.

Whistleblower Revelations

In 2024, Boeing engineer Sam Salehpour alleged that over 1,000 Dreamliners could face future structural failures due to improper fuselage gap filling. He described the situation as a "ticking time bomb," citing threats he faced for raising internal alarms.

Previous and Lesser-Known Safety Concerns

Over the years, a number of other incidents and technical anomalies have plagued the 787 program:

• In 2014, a Qatar Airways Dreamliner was grounded due to electrical panel smoke.

• In 2015, United Airlines reported a software glitch that caused engine shut-down mid-flight.

• The aircraft has seen repeated issues with braking systems, particularly in early deliveries.

• In 2016, a Norwegian Air Shuttle flight suffered hydraulic system failure mid-air.

• British Airways once grounded a 787 due to an unexpected shutdown of its air-conditioning packs.

• In 2018, technicians found improperly torqued fasteners during routine inspections.

• Reports from 2020 also noted inconsistent avionics response during turbulence.

• Instances of windshield cracking and nose gear vibration during taxiing have also been recorded.

Though not all were catastrophic, these issues cumulatively point to a pattern of system fragility and production oversight.

Recent Incidents and FAA Investigations

In March 2024, a LATAM 787-9 dropped altitude abruptly mid-flight due to a cockpit seat malfunction, injuring 50. Other Boeing 787-8 incidents have included fuel leaks, electrical faults, and engine anomalies—Ahmedabad being the sixth incident involving this model in 2025 alone.

The FAA is investigating multiple structural concerns, including improperly fastened fuselage sections and defects in forward pressure bulkheads, affecting nearly 1,000 planes.

Regulatory History: India and Europe

India's DGCA has previously grounded Boeing models like the 737 MAX in 2019, only lifting the ban in 2021 after global scrutiny and manufacturer assurances. The DGCA also issued fresh advisories in 2024 for Boeing 737 aircraft with Collins Aerospace rudder systems.

EASA, for its part, has remained consistently engaged in 787 oversight—from participating in the 2013 grounding to issuing fresh directives in 2024 concerning the Trent 1000.

Accountability of the Tata Group

Air India is now fully owned by the Tata Group, having been privatized and acquired by the industrial conglomerate in 2022. Yet, the airline continues to operate under the legacy brand name “Air India,” which perpetuates the widespread impression that it remains the national carrier. This misperception is not without consequence. Ironically, the Tata Group—a company known for prefixing its name prominently even in joint ventures like Tata Sky, Tata Timken, and Tata Hitachi—has conspicuously avoided branding the airline as “Tata Airlines”.

This divergence in branding has allowed the group to capitalize on national nostalgia while evading direct scrutiny when service fails to meet expectations. Indeed, service standards under Tata ownership have not improved—in many cases, they have deteriorated. While the nation mourns the deaths of innocent souls, whether aboard the aircraft or in the medical hostel on the ground, it is time to ask whether the Tata Group deserves to continue using the name “Air India.” If its so-called prestigious brand is not committed to safety, service, and transparency, then that brand deserves to be publicly scrutinized—if not stripped of its borrowed name.

Boeing's Failures in Spaceflight

Boeing's recent track record in aerospace extends beyond commercial aviation into space exploration—with equally troubling signs. In 2024, Boeing's Starliner spacecraft suffered a critical malfunction during what was intended to be a short-duration mission to the International Space Station. As a result, Indian-American astronaut Sunita Williams and her crewmate remained stranded aboard the ISS for several months, far beyond the mission's planned timeframe. The delay, attributed to software glitches and propulsion anomalies, forced NASA to intervene. Ultimately, it was SpaceX—led by Elon Musk—that provided a contingency rescue and return solution through its Dragon spacecraft. The episode exposed systemic flaws in Boeing’s space division, adding another layer to the conglomerate’s widening credibility crisis.

Peering Ahead

The FAA owes it to the world to make public its findings on the whistleblowers’ stunning allegations. If an inquiry was ever conducted into the claims—ranging from deliberate concealment of fuselage defects to threats against engineers who spoke up—its results must no longer remain shrouded in bureaucratic silence. Transparency is not a courtesy; it is an imperative when lives are at stake.

Will these 300-plus deaths trigger not just a reckoning but a genuine accountability—and, if necessary, culpability—audit? The families of the victims, regulators, and the public at large deserve more than assurances. They deserve answers, responsibility, and reform that prevents the next calamity.

The safety record of the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, examined through the lens of the Ahmedabad catastrophe, is a tapestry of design flaws, engineering failures, regulatory lag, and corporate defensiveness. From battery fires to structural frauds, the aircraft has repeatedly invited regulatory red flags worldwide.

Boeing’s assertions that these risks were manageable or "non-critical" must now be viewed against the unassailable reality of June 12. With nearly 300 lives extinguished in a single, preventable moment, it is not just Boeing's engineering but its very accountability that stands accused. If this tragedy does not provoke comprehensive reform, one wonders—how many more must die before it does?

FOOTNOTE

Boeing’s Legal Settlements with the U.S. Department of Justice

• In January 2021, Boeing entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) with the U.S. Department of Justice to avoid criminal prosecution for fraud charges linked to the two 737 MAX crashes that killed 346 people. The company agreed to pay over $2.5 billion in criminal penalties, victim compensation, and reimbursement to airline customers. In exchange, Boeing avoided trial and received a three-year probation during which it was required to implement robust compliance systems.

• By May 2024, Boeing was found to have violated this agreement. The DOJ concluded that the company had failed to implement an effective ethics and compliance program, especially in light of fresh safety incidents—most notably the Alaska Airlines door plug blowout, which occurred just days before the DPA was set to expire.

• Rather than pursue criminal prosecution and risk a felony conviction, the DOJ and Boeing reached a new non-prosecution agreement in 2025. Boeing committed to paying over $1.1 billion, including an additional criminal fine, a new crash victims’ compensation fund, and hundreds of millions earmarked for safety and compliance upgrades. The company’s board was also required to meet with victims’ families, and an independent compliance monitor was appointed.

• Separate from these DOJ arrangements, Boeing also settled multiple civil and regulatory cases: a $200 million payment to the SEC for misleading investors, hundreds of individual wrongful death suits, and a $237 million director liability settlement paid through insurance. In total, Boeing has spent more than $5 billion insulating itself from deeper legal and reputational fallout.

• Yet despite these enormous financial penalties, no senior executive or board member has faced personal criminal accountability. Boeing has avoided a felony conviction, preserved its eligibility for federal contracts, and protected its leadership from jail time. These outcomes cannot but be regarded as an institutional effort to push safety issues under the rug while shielding those in power.

• These repeated settlements raise a larger ethical question: can a corporation truly reform when it is allowed to buy its way out of culpability? The fiduciary duty of Boeing’s leadership may formally be to its shareholders—but in the aviation industry, that duty must extend to every passenger who entrusts their life to its machines. So far, that responsibility appears to have been neglected, if not abandoned.