Out on a wing

DGCA needs more rigorous response to safety

The Directorate General of Civil Aviation’s (DGCA’s) show-cause notice to SpiceJet, the country’s second-largest airline by market share, for “failure to establish safe, efficient and reliable” services, is an underwhelming response from the aviation regulator with the primary responsibility for passenger safety. The notice to SpiceJet comes after the airline suffered three technical problems in 24 hours — one, a fuel indicator malfunction on an international flight that needed a diversion to Karachi, another a cracked windshield, and the third, a faulty weather radar requiring the flight to turn back. Prima facie, three technical glitches do not amount to a crisis; senior DGCA officials say an average of 30 incidents of go-arounds, diversions, technical snags and medical emergencies occur in a day, but few of them have safety implications.

But the regulator was aware that the airline suffered a frequent shortage of spares, which impairs safety standards, as far back as September last year. In that month, a financial assessment by the DGCA showed that SpiceJet was unable to pay its suppliers and vendors on a regular basis and frequently invoked the minimum equipment list, under which the regulator allows airlines to operate with certain inoperative equipment. In its notice, the regulator said its action was based on incidents that occurred after April 1, when aircraft either had to turn back or land at their destination “with degraded safety margins”. There have been eight malfunctions in 18 days. That being the case, it is unclear why the DGCA waited so long to take action, nor why it has restricted itself to a show-cause notice that does not prevent the carrier from continuing operations. It has also been generous in allowing the airline three weeks to respond. The airline also claims that the regulator audited all its aircraft a month ago and they were found to be safe. If this is the case, the regulator may need to conduct an internal enquiry to clarify the basis of the approval.
 

In fact, the DGCA would do well to take on board Civil Aviation Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia’s statement that “even the smallest error hindering safety will be investigated and course corrected” and apply it to the entire industry. The urgency for doing so became evident on Wednesday in incidents involving Vistara, the Tata-Singapore Airline-owned carrier, which suffered engine failure on landing in Delhi from Bangkok. The incident did not result in casualties but it is hard to escape the conclusion that challenging turnaround times that airlines impose on themselves to maximise profits after two years of pandemic-induced slowdown are causing slips in safety standards. The expansion of domestic airlines to international operations is adding to these pressures. Given this, it is critical for the DGCA to impose more stringent consequences on airlines for such incidents even if they do not result in casualties. Air India in its public sector avatar had one of the world’s worst safety records. Private Indian airlines have managed to avoid this reputation. It is critical that this does not change as the competition becomes more acute, but that demands significantly heightened vigilance from the industry regulator.