Context

• Over the past century, aviation has transformed the way we connect across the globe, however, as history has shown, this progress is not without risk.
• The issue of civilian aircraft being shot down, often due to misidentification, poses a significant threat to aviation safety.
• Therefore, it is important to examine the incidents that highlight this danger, the underlying causes, and the pressing need for global regulatory and operational reforms to ensure safer skies.

Historical Cases of Aircraft Shoot-Downs Due to Misidentification

• Korean Airlines Flight 007
  • On September 1, 1983, Korean Airlines Flight 007 deviated from its flight path due to a navigational error and was tragically shot down by a Russian Sukhoi fighter plane.
  • All 269 on board lost their lives, sparking outrage and propelling Hans Ephraimson-Abt, who lost his daughter in the crash, to advocate for aviation safety
  • Unfortunately, international efforts to prevent such tragedies have often been obstructed by geopolitical interests, as demonstrated by Russia's opposition to conflict risk regulations proposed by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
• DHL Cargo plane
  • On November 22, 2003, a DHL Cargo plane took off from Baghdad for Bahrain.
  • As the flight was making a rapid climb out, a surface to air missile launched by terrorists struck the left wing between the engine and the wing tip.
  • The crew lost all hydraulics and because the fuel tank was full, there were no fuel vapours to explode in the exposed fuel tank.
  • The crew controlled the flight using only differential engine thrust and managed to carry out a safe landing, displaying exceptional skill.
• Iran Air Flight 655
  • Another catastrophic case occurred on July 3, 1988, when Iran Air Flight 655 was mistakenly identified as a fighter jet by the U.S. Navy warship USS Vincennes and subsequently shot down over the Strait of Hormuz, killing 290 civilians.
  • This misidentification during the Iran-Iraq war stemmed from procedural failures and reliance on inaccurate assumptions, demonstrating the lethal consequences of flawed decision-making in conflict zones.
• Indian Air Force Mi-17 Helicopter
  • On February 27, 2019, India's own air defence system tragically downed an Indian Air Force Mi-17 helicopter during a post-Balakot operation, misidentifying it as a hostile target.
  • Such errors emphasise the risks posed by inadequate identification protocols and the need for robust training and technology to mitigate human errors.

Contemporary Risks in Conflict Zones

• The 2014 downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine by Russian-backed forces with a surface-to-air missile underscores the dangers posed by armed conflicts and rogue elements.
• Similarly, the crash of an Azerbaijani airliner in December 2024 near Aktau, Kazakhstan, attributed to Russian anti-aircraft systems, reveals a troubling pattern of negligence or miscalculation.
• Fog and GPS interference may have contributed to the tragedy, highlighting the vulnerabilities of modern navigation systems.
• Post-9/11 measures have introduced specific protocols for handling deviations and radio communication failures to prevent civilian aircraft from being perceived as threats.
• However, as illustrated by the 2017 interception of Jet Airways Flight 9W 118 by German fighter jets, these procedures are not foolproof.
• The Indian safety regulator's dismissal of the incident as a mere communication failure underscores the lack of accountability and transparency in addressing such close calls.

A Closer Look of Challenges in Indian Aviation

• Navigational Vulnerabilities
  • India's geographical location places it in proximity to conflict-prone regions, including Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Myanmar.
  • Reports of GPS interference, jamming, and signal spoofing in these areas raise concerns about the reliability of navigational systems.
  • For instance, modern aircraft rely heavily on GPS for precise navigation, yet disruptions in these systems can lead to deviations from assigned flight paths, making aircraft susceptible to misidentification by military defence systems.
  • Airlines must have contingency plans and alternative navigation methods, such as inertial navigation systems, to counter these risks.
  • However, the extent to which Indian carriers have implemented such measures remains unclear, highlighting a potential gap in preparedness.
• Pilot Training and Skill Proficiency
  • The rapid expansion of India’s aviation industry has created a high demand for skilled pilots.
  • To meet this demand, some airlines have resorted to accelerated training programs, which may compromise the depth and quality of pilot education.
  • The Swiss Cheese Model of accident causation highlights how insufficient training can act as a critical "hole" in the safety net, allowing minor errors to escalate into major incidents.
  • For example, pilots must be equipped to handle scenarios involving GPS interference or communication failures.
  • Yet, there are concerns about whether Indian airlines provide adequate training to address these modern challenges.
• Aging Aircraft and Operational Risks
  • Another challenge is the reliance on older, leased aircraft in some fleets.
  • Reports suggest that certain aircraft operated by Indian carriers, including Air India, are not adequately equipped for extended flights over challenging terrains, such as mountainous regions.
  • This is particularly concerning given that many Indian airlines operate long-haul routes, including non-stop flights to destinations on the west coast of the United States.
  • These routes demand aircraft with robust technical capabilities and redundancy systems to handle emergencies.
• Regulatory Gaps and Accountability
  • India's aviation safety regulator, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), has faced criticism for its lack of transparency and proactive oversight.
  • The Jet Airways Flight 9W 118 incidents in 2017, where the aircraft lost radio contact over multiple airspaces, exemplifies this issue.
  • The DGCA attributed the incident to a communication system malfunction but failed to explain why established protocols, such as transponder codes for communication failure, were not followed.
  • This raises questions about the DGCA’s ability to enforce accountability and implement corrective measures.
  • Regulatory gaps not only undermine public trust but also weaken India’s standing in global aviation safety rankings.

The Way Forward to Ensure Safety and Security of Civilian Aircrafts: The Need for Global Action

• The grim tally of over 500 lives lost to aircraft shoot-downs underscores the urgent need for global cooperation in mitigating risks associated with conflict zones.
• International regulatory bodies like ICAO must enforce stringent guidelines to prevent misidentification and ensure compliance across member states.
• Moreover, technological advancements such as fail-safe communication systems and AI-driven threat assessment tools should be prioritised to reduce human error in high-stakes situations.
• For India, the focus must shift to enhancing pilot proficiency through rigorous training and implementing robust standard operating procedures for navigation in adverse conditions.
• The DGCA must take proactive measures to ensure that safety is not compromised in the race for aviation growth.

Conclusion

• The skies, once seen as a symbol of freedom and connection, have become increasingly fraught with danger in an era of geopolitical tension and technological vulnerabilities.
• The historical and contemporary incidents of civilian aircraft shoot-downs are stark reminders of the devastating consequences of misidentification and procedural failures.
• As the aviation industry continues to expand, particularly in regions like India, the need for rigorous safety protocols and international cooperation becomes ever more pressing.