FirstAlerts
Plane CrashesVersion 14

Air India Phuket–Delhi Flight AI2379: Preliminary Report Expected in 10–15 Days After 300-Foot Altitude Loss

Seventeen people were injured, according to several Indian outlets, and the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau has summoned the crew for questioning; the cause has not been determined.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 4, 2026, 6:15 p.m. ETUpdated Aug 13, 2026, 4:29 a.m. ET

More on this incident

people were injured aboard flight from Phuket to on August 4, 2026, when the aircraft briefly lost around 300 feet of altitude in , according to BNO News, Simple Flying and The New Indian Express. The aircraft is described as an by Simple Flying, the Times of , BNO News and The New Indian Express, and as an by the Daily Mail and The Economic Times; Hindustan Times described it as an , gave the flight as and dated the occurrence August 4, 2025. Injury counts differ: People's Daily Online and the Daily Mail reported injured, two of them crew members, while The Economic Times reported injuries to 20 passengers and four cabin crew members. Accounts of the timing also differ — Simple Flying reported , BNO News gave and The New Indian Express said . The New Indian Express reported the flight took off from Phuket at 8.27 am and landed at Terminal 3 at 11.07 am after dropping about 300 feet while cruising above 36,000 feet; The Economic Times reported the drop occurred over Odisha. The aircraft was carrying between 134 and 137 passengers, according to conflicting reports from Simple Flying and the Times of , with eight crew members on board, the Times of said. BNO News reported those on board included three infants, two pilots and six cabin crew. The New Indian Express reported the pilot initially announced an emergency landing at Lucknow but continued to ; the flight did not divert and completed its scheduled route. Overhead panels and interior fittings were damaged and a photo appeared to show cracks in several overhead panels, BNO News reported. The New Indian Express reported the aircraft has been grounded and is believed to have suffered substantial damage, with not disclosing details. described the event as a "brief turbulence-related event", according to The Hindu BusinessLine. The Economic Times reported that a post-flight maintenance report flagged repeated warnings of low hydraulic pressure — with low-pressure alerts across the green, blue and yellow hydraulic systems — a left and right elevator fault, an entry recording "AUTO FLT AP OFF" indicating the autopilot was off, and two autopilot disconnections; that document has not been confirmed by an authority and no link to the altitude loss has been established. said 13 passengers and four crew members sustained injuries and were taken to hospital for evaluation, according to the Times of , which reported five passengers had been discharged as of 6.50 pm on August 4. The New Indian Express reported one cabin crew member sustained serious injuries, citing a DGCA source, and that the injured were treated at the airport's Medanta medical centre before being moved to Fortis Hospital, Vasant Kunj and a spinal injury centre. Civil Aviation Minister Ram Mohan Naidu visited Fortis Hospital, and Hindustan Times reported the minister said two crew members with spinal injuries remained there. Outlets reported one injured passenger suffered fractured ribs from an armrest and another passenger's head struck the cabin ceiling. The Times of reported the family of an injured passenger alleged there were no ambulances on standby and no senior or airport staff present after landing. The Hindu BusinessLine reported that social media users demanded accountability from , that an Instagram creator, Ansh Mehra, said the aircraft lost 300 feet, and that former Air Marshal Sanjeev Kapoor said those most seriously hurt in such events are often passengers not wearing seat belts; the same report referenced a fatal crash in Ahmedabad the previous year. Accounts of the investigation's status differ. The Economic Times reported the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau has taken up the investigation under ICAO protocols, urged media and the public not to draw conclusions until all evidence is examined, and is collecting technical, operational, medical and human-factor evidence, with France's Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses and Airbus technical representatives providing technical assistance; it also reported investigators are examining the sequence of events, system data and crew actions. The Hindu BusinessLine reported the AAIB is examining all aspects related to the incident, including turbulence, drug-test results and any faults in the aircraft's hydraulic and flight-control systems, and has summoned the pilots and crew of for questioning; the same outlet reported a preliminary report is expected in 10 to 15 days and that the DGCA will decide on any action against after that report, with fines and management liability not ruled out. Hindustan Times reported the civil aviation ministry said the occurrence has been classified as a serious incident and is under AAIB investigation, having earlier said the DGCA was investigating, and that the ministry summoned chief executive Campbell Wilson. BNO News reported the DGCA opened an investigation and secured the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder, that Airbus was notified and that the aircraft was moved to a hangar after landing. The New Indian Express reported the DGCA initiated a comprehensive investigation. The Times of reported the DGCA launched a probe and that said it is cooperating. Both flight crew members have been taken off roster by the DGCA pending the investigation, and Hindustan Times reported that a psychoactive substance screening test of the pilot in command indicated a result requiring confirmatory testing — described in reporting as a "non-negative" initial urine screening after landing — with samples sent to a designated laboratory. The Economic Times reported that, according to sources, the pilot-in-command allegedly told investigators he had not slept adequately and would take controlled rest, and that other sources indicated the pilot had failed the secondary drug test, which it said has not been officially confirmed by the government. The Daily Mail reported the pilot was found sitting on the cockpit floor when warning signals alerted the crew that altitude was being lost, that the pilot denied consuming any psychotropic substances, that an AAIB investigator had to help the pilot sit down and assist him in providing a urine sample, that the flight allegedly followed a crew party in Phuket hosted by the pilot during a layover of less than 24 hours, and that a crew member is said to have filed a complaint against the pilot over alleged marijuana use. Those are allegations and accounts in reporting, not findings. The cause of the altitude loss has not been determined; most outlets describe the investigation as open, while The Hindu BusinessLine's account leaves the cause unstated. The registration reported by BNO News, The New Indian Express, The Economic Times, The Hindu BusinessLine and Hindustan Times, , was derived from flight tracking data rather than published by an official body; Indian aircraft registry records list as an Airbus, a twin-engine jet landplane registered in . A weather observation at Indira Gandhi International Airport, 9.2 miles away and about 30 minutes from the reported time, recorded wind from 150 degrees at 3 knots, visibility of 2.8 statute miles, mist, scattered cloud at 900 feet and a temperature of 84°F — an instrument reading at a nearby field, not stated to have caused or contributed to anything. This report will be updated as the record develops.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Reference data

From aircraft and geographic registries, not from the news sources. Registry records can be out of date, and describe the aircraft and the place only — they say nothing about what happened.

Registration
VT-EXO
Type
AIRBUS — twin-engine jet landplane
Terrain elevation
722 ft
Nearest aerodrome
5.7 miles N of Safdarjung Airport (VIDD)

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 1413 Aug 2026, 08:29current

    Added the 10–15 day preliminary-report timeline and DGCA's pending decision on action, the AAIB's summons of the crew and scope of its examination, the maintenance report's elevator fault and "AUTO FLT AP OFF" entry, and unconfirmed sourced claims about controlled rest and a failed secondary drug test.

  2. Version 1313 Aug 2026, 08:23

    Added Economic Times reporting of a purported maintenance report listing hydraulic low-pressure alerts and two autopilot disconnections, its higher injury figure (20 passengers and four cabin crew), the drop's location over Odisha, and its A320 type description.

  3. Version 1212 Aug 2026, 11:32

    Added Daily Mail reporting on the pilot (found on the cockpit floor, denial of substance use, investigator assistance with the sample, alleged layover party and a crew complaint over alleged marijuana use), its 12-injured figure, and noted The Hindu BusinessLine leaves the cause unstated.

  4. Version 1112 Aug 2026, 00:34

    Added Economic Times reporting that the AAIB has taken up the investigation under ICAO protocols with BEA and Airbus technical assistance, the ministry's summons of Air India CEO Campbell Wilson, the "non-negative" initial screening description, and unconfirmed reports of technical glitches and hydraulic failures.

  5. Version 1011 Aug 2026, 00:16

    Added the ministry's classification of the occurrence as a serious incident under AAIB investigation, the DGCA taking both flight crew off roster, the pilot in command's screening test sent for confirmatory analysis, the minister's account of two crew with spinal injuries, Air India's 'brief turbulence-related event' description, and public reaction reported by The Hindu BusinessLine.

  6. Version 97 Aug 2026, 14:43

    No new facts; the tracking-derived registration VT-EXO is now attributed to the outlets that reported it.

  7. Version 85 Aug 2026, 23:53

    Added People's Daily Online's competing injury count of 12, including two crew members, alongside the 17 reported elsewhere.

  8. Version 75 Aug 2026, 23:47

    Added New Indian Express reporting: departure and arrival times, cruise above 36,000 feet, a third time estimate, the announced then abandoned Lucknow emergency landing, aircraft grounded with believed substantial damage, a seriously injured cabin crew member per a DGCA source, hospital treatment details and the civil aviation minister's visit.

  9. Version 65 Aug 2026, 23:43

    Added conflicting reported times (11:00 vs 11:07), BNO News details on recorders secured, Airbus notified, aircraft moved to hangar, and occupant breakdown; corrected the weather observation to the reading at Indira Gandhi International Airport.

  10. Version 67 Aug 2026, 14:44current

    Removed the "This remains a developing story and details may change" line and any live-coverage framing, replacing it with an explicit statement that the piece reflects the most recent reporting available from the cited outlets and that no cause has been published. Added a closing sentence to the investigation paragraph noting no finding has been announced, so the reader still learns the matter is unresolved without the story claiming to be actively updating. All sourced content is unchanged: the 17-injured figure (Simple Flying, BNO News, The New Indian Express) still leads with the competing 12 from People's Daily Online in the same breath; the three time accounts (11:00 local time / 11:07 a.m. local time / around 10.30 am IST) and the three investigation accounts are still reported as sourced ranges naming each outlet; the VT-EXO registration is still flagged as tracking-derived and unconfirmed; the weather observation retains its non-causal caveat.

  11. Version 54 Aug 2026, 23:41

    Moved the open-investigation status to the close of the story per house style; no new facts.

  12. Version 55 Aug 2026, 16:51

    Added DGCA probe and Air India cooperation, Times of India breakdown of 13 passengers and four crew hospitalised with five discharged, crew count, injury details, family's emergency-response allegation, Phuket origin, and passenger-count range; dropped the geographic reference paragraph.

  13. Version 44 Aug 2026, 23:41

    No new facts; wording of the lead and sourcing caveats tightened.

  14. Version 44 Aug 2026, 23:40

    Added headline and dek; specified Delhi as the location in the lead.

  15. Version 34 Aug 2026, 23:40

    Tightened the registration paragraph to make clear the tail number is tracking-derived and not an official identification.

  16. Version 34 Aug 2026, 23:28

    No new facts; added headline and dek, story text unchanged.

  17. Version 24 Aug 2026, 22:03

    Added headline and dek; tightened wording on the unconfirmed registration and the weather observation.

  18. Version 24 Aug 2026, 23:23

    Reordered to lead with the reported injuries and flight details; no new facts.

  19. Version 14 Aug 2026, 22:48

    First published.

  20. Version 14 Aug 2026, 20:33

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.