DGCA committee files report on IndiGo chaos, contents confidential

By Admin

27 Dec, 2025

Introduction
India’s largest airline, IndiGo, has come under intense regulatory scrutiny following a major operational disruption that led to the cancellation of over 5,000 flights within six days. Tens of thousands of passengers were stranded nationwide, prompting the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and the civil aviation ministry to launch parallel investigations. A government inquiry committee has now submitted its report, while a separate systemic review has revealed critical insights that challenge the airline’s public explanation for the crisis.

Formation of the Government Inquiry Committee
The four-member government inquiry committee was constituted by the DGCA on December 6 to examine IndiGo’s manpower planning, operational failures, and accountability mechanisms. The committee is headed by joint director general Sanjay K Bramhane. Officials confirmed that the committee submitted its report on Thursday evening and that its contents remain confidential.

The committee’s mandate focused on understanding the root causes behind the unprecedented scale of flight cancellations and determining whether internal planning failures contributed to the disruption that unfolded earlier this month.

Systemic Review Reveals Pilot Surplus
Alongside the inquiry committee, the civil aviation ministry ordered a broader systemic review to assess whether IndiGo’s operational preparedness was adequate, particularly in light of revised crew fatigue rules. An internal document from this review, accessed by HT, paints a significantly different picture from the airline’s earlier claims.

According to the data submitted by IndiGo to the DGCA, the airline employed 4,575 pilots in November to operate its fleet of 307 Airbus aircraft. Under global best practices, airlines typically require around six crew sets per aircraft to manage operations, training, leave, and contingencies. This translates to a requirement of approximately 3,684 pilots, indicating that IndiGo had a surplus of 891 pilots during the period in question.

Scheduling Failures, Not Crew Shortage
These findings directly challenge IndiGo’s assertion that newly implemented crew fatigue rules were a major contributor to the operational collapse. The systemic review concluded that pilot strength was more than sufficient and that the primary issue lay in scheduling and rostering inefficiencies.

The review explicitly stated that the existing pilot strength already provided a sizeable operational buffer, capable of covering training requirements, leave, recurrent checks, and seasonal disruptions when measured against global industry norms. Airlines worldwide generally operate with 5.5 to 6 crew sets per aircraft to ensure smooth functioning, a benchmark IndiGo comfortably exceeded.

Crew Utilisation Data Raises Further Questions
The review also highlighted that crew utilisation stood at 55% of the 100 hours per month allowed under existing regulations. This utilisation level was found to be comparable to other airlines and not significantly different from utilisation rates before the stricter crew rest rules came into effect.

This data further weakens the argument that fatigue regulations were the primary trigger for the crisis. Instead, it suggests that IndiGo’s crew rostering systems failed to adapt to regulatory changes despite having months of advance notice.

Financial Impact and Regulatory Response
The analysis formed part of a broader DGCA review conducted after IndiGo cancelled hundreds of flights and refunded more than ₹1,500 crore to affected passengers between late November and mid-December. The scale of refunds underscores the financial and reputational impact of the disruption, not just on the airline but on the aviation sector as a whole.

In response to the chaos, regulators temporarily rolled back certain crew fatigue norms in December, a move that now appears to have been driven by immediate operational pressures rather than a verified shortage of crew.

Conclusion
While the government inquiry committee’s report remains confidential, the systemic review has brought critical facts into the public domain. The evidence strongly indicates that IndiGo’s operational crisis was rooted in scheduling and rostering failures rather than a lack of pilots. As regulators assess accountability and future corrective measures, the episode serves as a reminder that scale and manpower alone do not guarantee operational resilience without robust planning systems and timely adaptation to regulatory changes.