An Air India Airbus A320neo (flight AI‑2455), operating from Thiruvananthapuram to Delhi on Sunday night, was diverted to Chennai following a suspected technical issue and deteriorating weather conditions. The flight included several Members of Parliament (MPs), including senior Congress leader K C Venugopal. ([turn0news13], [turn0news14])
MP’s Allegation
MP Venugopal described the ordeal on social media as “frighteningly close to tragedy.” He recounted the flight experienced unprecedented turbulence, followed by a “flight signal fault” announcement an hour after takeoff. The aircraft then circled Chennai for approximately two hours before attempting to land. According to Venugopal, the first landing attempt nearly ended in disaster as another aircraft was reportedly on the same runway, prompting a sudden go-around executed by the pilot. He called for a thorough investigation into the incident, stating:
“Passenger safety cannot depend on luck.”
([turn0search10], [turn0search4])
Airline & Regulator Response
Both Air India and the DGCA (Directorate General of Civil Aviation) refuted Venugopal’s claims:
- Cause of Diversion: Attributed to a suspected weather radar malfunction, not a runway hazard or intrusion. The diversion was taken as a precautionary step, and prevailing weather conditions in Delhi reportedly influenced the decision to land in Chennai instead. The pilots followed protocol throughout. ([turn0search0], [turn0search6], [turn0news14])
- Landing Maneuver: The go-around was initiated at the behest of Chennai Air Traffic Control, due to a report of debris on the runway, not because another plane was present. Post-flight inspections found no radar faults, though a radar transceiver component was replaced as a safety measure. ([turn0search0], [turn0search6], [turn0search3])
Air India also apologized for the unsettling experience and reiterated that passenger safety remains its top priority. ([turn0search4], [turn0news12])
Broader Implications
Venugopal’s claims triggered a political response. BJP IT head Amit Malviya commented that if the MP’s allegations are proven false, it could warrant serious repercussions—including being barred from future flights. ([turn0search3])
At a Glance
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Flight | Air India AI‑2455 (Thiruvananthapuram to Delhi) |
| Reason for Diversion | Suspected weather radar malfunction and poor weather conditions |
| MP’s Claim | Nearly landed on runway occupied by another aircraft |
| DGCA/Air India Stand | Claims diversion was precautionary; go-around due to runway debris, not runway intrusion |
| Investigation | Technical inspections carried out; no faults found; safety protocol upheld |
| Political Fallout | BJP criticized MP’s claim; DGCA monitoring continues |
Final Thought
While the flight safely reached its destination, MP Venugopal’s account and the airline’s rebuttal reveal a trust-deficit in aviation communication. Though the DGCA and Air India maintain that the situation was handled appropriately, the debate highlights the need for greater transparency, real-time clarity, and accountability in aviation safety incidents—especially involving public official