An IndiGo flight travelling from Delhi to Srinagar on 27 May was forced to fly through a dangerous hailstorm after Pakistan refused its request to enter its airspace. The flight, numbered 6E2142, eventually made an emergency landing at Srinagar International Airport at 6:30 pm. All 227 passengers and crew onboard were reported safe.
The aircraft has since been marked as ‘Aircraft on Ground’ due to the damage caused by the storm and is undergoing inspection and repair in Srinagar.
According to the airline, “All customers were attended to upon landing and no injuries were reported. The aircraft is currently undergoing necessary inspection and maintenance in Srinagar and will resume operations once all clearances have been secured.”
The incident has sparked renewed debate about flight safety procedures during extreme weather, especially in areas close to sensitive borders.
What went wrong in the air?
Former commercial pilot and aviation YouTuber Gaurav Taneja, known online as Flying Beast, offered a detailed analysis of the incident in a recent video. He said the pilots attempted to reroute due to worsening weather but were denied access to Pakistani airspace. According to him, a key mistake may have influenced that decision.
“From the information we have till now, the pilots didn’t declare an emergency; had they done so, Pakistan would’ve had to allow them into their airspace. Nobody has declared an emergency due to weather,” Taneja said.
Instead of issuing a full MAYDAY alert, which signals a life-threatening emergency, the crew declared a lower-grade distress signal—PAN PAN. This call indicates urgency, but not an immediate danger to life.
He pointed out that the airspace near Pathankot is controlled by the Indian Air Force’s Northern Control. The pilots communicated their weather concerns, but were advised to reach out to Delhi Air Traffic Control, which in turn would contact Lahore.
“Because Lahore is a civil airport, Northern Command couldn’t contact them. The aircraft must’ve gotten in touch with Lahore in a couple of minutes, Lahore must’ve gone up the chain to ask for permission to allow the aircraft into Pakistani airspace. The permission was denied,” Taneja explained.
“Laal rang radar pe dikhe, usme kabhi mat jaana”
Taneja didn’t hold back when questioning why the aircraft had been dispatched at all. He blamed both poor judgement and systemic issues. “Pilots are told that if there is bad weather ahead, at no cost can they penetrate that weather,” he said.
“On day one, pilots are told, ‘Bhai, laal rang radar pe dikhe, usme kabhi mat jaana’,” he added, referring to the radar's red zones that indicate highly dangerous conditions.
Even amber zones, he said, should be sidestepped. Green zones are safer but not ideal. Airbus recommends staying 20 nautical miles clear of any active storm. Though flying above the storm is theoretically possible, Taneja dismissed it as impractical due to fuel constraints, time, and air traffic disruption.
The radar in use, he said, might have missed key weather signals. “Older radar systems don’t have the capability of registering ice particles, snow, sandstorms, and dry hail. And this is likely what happened with the Delhi-Srinagar flight.”
No room to turn back
The pilots had few good options. “It doesn’t make sense to take a right turn, because you’d hit the Himalayas. It would be like out of the frying pan and into the fire,” said Taneja. Turning back was technically possible, but practically difficult.
“In my experience, an aircraft returns to base only in the event of a technical fault, either in the landing gear, or the hydraulics, or the electricals,” he said. “You might think that this would’ve been the easiest thing to do, but let me tell you what goes on.”
Climbing above the weather wasn’t viable either. “It isn’t recommended to climb 6000 ft, because this consumes a lot of fuel and takes a lot of time. It can also disrupt traffic and make things difficult for the ATC,” he explained.
Taneja also stressed that pre-monsoon weather is more dangerous than monsoon season. “This is when the weather is building.” In his view, the aircraft shouldn’t have been dispatched in the first place. “The meteorological department should’ve warned Delhi in advance.”
He said that pilots often avoid turning back unless there’s a major technical fault. “In my experience, an aircraft returns to base only in the event of a technical fault, either in the landing gear, or the hydraulics, or the electricals.”
Historic Parallel: The case of IC 814 in 1999
The refusal by Pakistan to grant airspace access echoes past incidents. In 1999, the hijacked Indian Airlines flight IC 814 was initially denied entry into Lahore despite running low on fuel. Eventually, when Pakistani authorities realised the aircraft might crash in a populated area, they allowed it to land with just minutes of fuel remaining.
Pilot Devi Sharan later recounted the episode to CNN: “In the meantime, (Pakistani airport officials) came to know we have to crash this airplane. Then they gave me runway (clearance) … I had about one and half minutes of fuel left so luckily I landed on the runway.”
Such decisions, Taneja said, can save lives—but only if procedures are followed. “The aircraft was at the threshold of the bad weather, and there was no turning back,” he concluded.
Calls for rethinking airline policies
Taneja has been consistent in calling for stricter weather evaluation before dispatching flights. He questioned why India’s meteorological department didn’t issue a timely warning.
“The aircraft shouldn’t have been dispatched in the first place,” he stated.
As air travel increases and weather patterns grow more unpredictable, this incident has reignited conversations about policy reform and technological upgrades—particularly around radar systems and airspace coordination across sensitive zones.
For passengers, the message is clear: weather is never just weather when flight routes run close to contested skies.
The aircraft has since been marked as ‘Aircraft on Ground’ due to the damage caused by the storm and is undergoing inspection and repair in Srinagar.
According to the airline, “All customers were attended to upon landing and no injuries were reported. The aircraft is currently undergoing necessary inspection and maintenance in Srinagar and will resume operations once all clearances have been secured.”
The incident has sparked renewed debate about flight safety procedures during extreme weather, especially in areas close to sensitive borders.
What went wrong in the air?
Former commercial pilot and aviation YouTuber Gaurav Taneja, known online as Flying Beast, offered a detailed analysis of the incident in a recent video. He said the pilots attempted to reroute due to worsening weather but were denied access to Pakistani airspace. According to him, a key mistake may have influenced that decision.
“From the information we have till now, the pilots didn’t declare an emergency; had they done so, Pakistan would’ve had to allow them into their airspace. Nobody has declared an emergency due to weather,” Taneja said.
Instead of issuing a full MAYDAY alert, which signals a life-threatening emergency, the crew declared a lower-grade distress signal—PAN PAN. This call indicates urgency, but not an immediate danger to life.
He pointed out that the airspace near Pathankot is controlled by the Indian Air Force’s Northern Control. The pilots communicated their weather concerns, but were advised to reach out to Delhi Air Traffic Control, which in turn would contact Lahore.
“Because Lahore is a civil airport, Northern Command couldn’t contact them. The aircraft must’ve gotten in touch with Lahore in a couple of minutes, Lahore must’ve gone up the chain to ask for permission to allow the aircraft into Pakistani airspace. The permission was denied,” Taneja explained.
“Laal rang radar pe dikhe, usme kabhi mat jaana”
Taneja didn’t hold back when questioning why the aircraft had been dispatched at all. He blamed both poor judgement and systemic issues. “Pilots are told that if there is bad weather ahead, at no cost can they penetrate that weather,” he said.
“On day one, pilots are told, ‘Bhai, laal rang radar pe dikhe, usme kabhi mat jaana’,” he added, referring to the radar's red zones that indicate highly dangerous conditions.
Even amber zones, he said, should be sidestepped. Green zones are safer but not ideal. Airbus recommends staying 20 nautical miles clear of any active storm. Though flying above the storm is theoretically possible, Taneja dismissed it as impractical due to fuel constraints, time, and air traffic disruption.
The radar in use, he said, might have missed key weather signals. “Older radar systems don’t have the capability of registering ice particles, snow, sandstorms, and dry hail. And this is likely what happened with the Delhi-Srinagar flight.”
No room to turn back
The pilots had few good options. “It doesn’t make sense to take a right turn, because you’d hit the Himalayas. It would be like out of the frying pan and into the fire,” said Taneja. Turning back was technically possible, but practically difficult.
“In my experience, an aircraft returns to base only in the event of a technical fault, either in the landing gear, or the hydraulics, or the electricals,” he said. “You might think that this would’ve been the easiest thing to do, but let me tell you what goes on.”
Climbing above the weather wasn’t viable either. “It isn’t recommended to climb 6000 ft, because this consumes a lot of fuel and takes a lot of time. It can also disrupt traffic and make things difficult for the ATC,” he explained.
Taneja also stressed that pre-monsoon weather is more dangerous than monsoon season. “This is when the weather is building.” In his view, the aircraft shouldn’t have been dispatched in the first place. “The meteorological department should’ve warned Delhi in advance.”
He said that pilots often avoid turning back unless there’s a major technical fault. “In my experience, an aircraft returns to base only in the event of a technical fault, either in the landing gear, or the hydraulics, or the electricals.”
Historic Parallel: The case of IC 814 in 1999
The refusal by Pakistan to grant airspace access echoes past incidents. In 1999, the hijacked Indian Airlines flight IC 814 was initially denied entry into Lahore despite running low on fuel. Eventually, when Pakistani authorities realised the aircraft might crash in a populated area, they allowed it to land with just minutes of fuel remaining.
Pilot Devi Sharan later recounted the episode to CNN: “In the meantime, (Pakistani airport officials) came to know we have to crash this airplane. Then they gave me runway (clearance) … I had about one and half minutes of fuel left so luckily I landed on the runway.”
Such decisions, Taneja said, can save lives—but only if procedures are followed. “The aircraft was at the threshold of the bad weather, and there was no turning back,” he concluded.
Calls for rethinking airline policies
Taneja has been consistent in calling for stricter weather evaluation before dispatching flights. He questioned why India’s meteorological department didn’t issue a timely warning.
“The aircraft shouldn’t have been dispatched in the first place,” he stated.
As air travel increases and weather patterns grow more unpredictable, this incident has reignited conversations about policy reform and technological upgrades—particularly around radar systems and airspace coordination across sensitive zones.
For passengers, the message is clear: weather is never just weather when flight routes run close to contested skies.
You may also like
Mehbooba Mufti meets LG to press for Kashmiri Pandits' return
Ahead of PM Modi's visit, bomb threat triggers panic at Jammu Tawi railway station
RJD-Congress alliance will collapse due to Dalit-Backward discontent: Bihar Minister Santosh Suman
Mark Ruffalo and Brian Cox demand Keir Starmer helps free Brit before his mum dies
Lockerbie from locals' eyes - homes vaporised, bodies in bushes and eerie silence
