The accident killed seven people aboard the aircraft, which was registered to a holding company affiliated with former NASCAR driver Greg Biffle. The jet, N257BW, was operating under Part 91 as a personal flight from Statesville Regional Airport in North Carolina to Sarasota, Florida. 

According to the NTSB, the airline transport pilot flying the aircraft held a CE-500 type rating with a limitation requiring a second-in-command. The right-seat occupant, the pilot’s adult son, held a private pilot certificate with single-engine land and instrument ratings but had logged about 175 total flight hours and was not qualified under federal regulations to act as SIC. 

Biffle, seated in the cabin near the cockpit, also held pilot certificates and assisted during portions of the flight. 

Investigators said the crew discussed several anomalies before and after departure. During taxi, the pilot and the two pilot-rated passengers noted an inoperative thrust reverser indicator light, though they believed the reverser itself was functioning properly. During the takeoff roll, the rear-seat passenger commented that the left engine appeared to be producing more power than the right. 

The airplane departed under visual flight rules with plans to activate an IFR clearance once airborne. After takeoff, the jet entered a climbing left turn, reaching about 2,200 feet mean sea level before continuing to turn and descend. Attempts by the right-seat occupant to contact Atlanta Center and activate the IFR clearance were unsuccessful due to controller workload. 

Cockpit voice recorder audio captured the pilot reporting problems with his altimeter and other left-side flight instruments. The autopilot disengaged shortly afterward, either intentionally or automatically. Control of the airplane was briefly transferred to the right-seat occupant before returning to the pilot. 

As the airplane maneuvered back toward Statesville, the crew configured it for landing. Although discussions suggested the landing gear had been extended, the gear indicator lights were not illuminated. A transmission on the common traffic advisory frequency stated, “We’re having some issues here.” 

The aircraft descended on final approach to Runway 28, striking the approach light system approximately 1,380 feet short of the runway threshold before impacting terrain and exploding in a fireball. Investigators found no evidence of an uncontained engine failure or pre-impact structural breakup. Both thrust reversers were found stowed. 

Weather conditions deteriorated during the flight, with reports of heavy drizzle and ceilings as low as 1,200 feet agl at the time of the accident.

A final report determining the probable cause of the crash is expected to be issued in about a year.

The aircraft, registered VT-ANX, was operating as Air India Flight AI132 from London-Heathrow (LHR) to Bengaluru. It departed Heathrow at 19:19 local time on February 1, 2026, and landed in Bengaluru at 11:54 on February 2. According to airline sources, the issue was observed after landing and subsequently reported by the flight crew. 

In a statement, Air India said it had grounded the aircraft as a precaution and informed India’s aviation regulator.  
 
“We are aware that one of our pilots has reported a possible defect on the fuel control switch of a Boeing 787-8 aircraft,” the airline said. “After receiving this initial information, we have grounded the said aircraft and are involving the original equipment manufacturer to get the pilot’s concerns checked on a priority basis.” 

According to a statement from Safety Matters Foundation, the reported issue involved abnormal behavior of the left engine fuel control switch during engine start. The switch allegedly failed to remain locked in the RUN position on two attempts, moving toward CUTOFF. While the event occurred on the ground, the foundation said such behavior could, under certain conditions, increase the risk of an inadvertent engine shutdown in flight. 

The incident is drawing attention because of similarities to the previous Air India Dreamliner crash. In June 2025, a Boeing 787 registered VT-ANB crashed shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad while operating as Flight AI171, killing 260 people. A preliminary investigation found that fuel supply to the engines had been cut off seconds after departure. Cockpit voice recordings captured one pilot questioning why the fuel control switch had been moved to CUTOFF, with the other pilot responding that he had not done so. 

Following that crash, Air India said it conducted inspections of fuel control switches across its 787 fleet and found no issues. The airline reiterated that position on February 2, stating that fleet-wide checks had been completed earlier under the direction of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). 

Aviation safety groups have also pointed to earlier warnings issued by the Federal Aviation Administration. In 2018, the FAA issued a safety alert advising operators that certain fuel control switches, including those installed on Boeing 787 aircraft, could malfunction in a manner that increases the risk of unintended engine shutdown, recommending inspection and replacement where necessary. 

For newly produced passenger aircraft, the requirement is set to take effect from 2027, making 25-hour CVRs the new baseline on fresh deliveries rather than an optional upgrade.

The FAA argues that two hours is increasingly misaligned with how incidents are reported and handled in real life, especially when an event is noticed late, when a flight continues through taxi-in and turnaround, or when crews operate additional sectors before anyone recognizes the need to preserve recordings.

The practical impact for investigations is straightforward: more timeline, more context. A 25-hour window can capture decision-making and workload well before the peak moment, plus the actions and communications after an event, which can be critical to understanding causal chains and human factors. The rule is also meant to reduce the growing number of cases where CVR audio is unavailable simply because it was overwritten.

Retrofit cost and privacy concerns

The move, however, comes with familiar pushback. Pilot unions and labor groups have long treated cockpit audio as uniquely sensitive, and a larger recording window amplifies concerns about misuse, access control, and chilling effects on cockpit communication. The FAA points to existing safeguards intended to keep CVR audio tied to safety investigations, but the privacy debate is unlikely to disappear, particularly when handling practices can vary once recorders are back in operator hands.

Cost is another fault line, especially around retrofit. For new-build aircraft, the incremental cost of installing a 25-hour CVR instead of a two-hour unit is generally considered limited. Retrofitting older aircraft is more complicated and expensive, depending on hardware, installation labor, and integration, and the FAA has been cautious about imposing a blanket fleetwide retrofit through regulation alone. Still, retrofit timelines are in place under separate legislative requirements for certain “covered” aircraft and operators, creating a longer runway toward compliance across the in-service fleet.

International alignment is part of the rationale. ICAO and European regulators have already moved toward 25-hour CVRs for new aircraft, and the FAA’s rule brings the US closer to that direction, reducing divergence among global manufacturers and operators.

On January 29, 2026, President Trump said he had spoken to Venezuela’s acting president, Delcy Rodríguez, and informed her that the US would reopen commercial airspace.

A statement from the FAA later confirmed that the agency had removed “four NOTAMs in the Caribbean region, including one related to Venezuela, as well as advisories affecting airspace over Curaçao, San Juan (Puerto Rico), and the Piarco Flight Information Regions”.

In a separate social media post, the FAA said: “These NOTAMs were issued as precautionary measures and are no longer necessary. Safety remains our top priority, and we look forward to facilitating the return of regular travel between the U.S. and Venezuela.”

On November 21, 2025, the FAA issued a NOTAM warning operators of potential dangers in Venezuelan airspace.

BREAKING: @POTUS announces that he has instructed his Administration to open up all commercial airspace over Venezuela.

"American citizens will be, very shortly, able to go to Venezuela — and they'll be safe there." pic.twitter.com/6EO5jFDIV5

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) January 29, 2026

On January 3, 2026, the same day that Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro was extradited from the country by the US military, a NOTAM was issued prohibiting all civil flight operations of US aircraft in Venezuelan airspace.

The FAA lifted the restriction on January 4, 2026, replacing it with advisories warning of a potentially hazardous situation persisting in the region, akin to prior warnings that had been issued in November 2025.

Following President Trump’s direction to reopen airspace, the Department of Transportation (DoT) gave the official go-ahead for air transportation between the US and Venezuela to restart.

The FAA has removed four NOTAMs in the Caribbean region, including one related to Venezuela, as well as advisories affecting airspace over Curaçao, San Juan (Puerto Rico), and the Piarco Flight Information Regions.

These NOTAMs were issued as precautionary measures and are no… https://t.co/q1cGF0kfyD

— The FAA (@FAANews) January 29, 2026

According to the DoT, air travel between the two countries was stopped on May 15, 2019 (during President Trump’s first term), “based on a public interest determination”.

At the time, the US Department of Homeland Security determined that “conditions in Venezuela threaten the safety and security of passengers, aircraft, and crew”.

American Airlines first to respond

American Airlines was the swiftest to declare its intention to restart commercial operations to Venezuela following the decision by President Trump to ease airspace rules.

In a press release, American Airlines said it was “proud to be the first airline to announce plans to reinstate nonstop service between the US and Venezuela”.

“We have a more than 30-year history connecting Venezolanos to the U.S., and we are ready to renew that incredible relationship,” said Nat Pieper, American’s CCO. “By restarting service to Venezuela, American will offer customers the opportunity to reunite with families and create new business and commerce with the United States.”

Despite President Trump indicating it was now safe for US citizens to travel to Venezuela, the US State Department website still advises people not to travel.

American Airlines added: “The airline remains in close contact with federal authorities, and is ready to commence flights to Venezuela, pending government approval and security assessments.”

On January 28, 2026, Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro confirmed that shortly before midday the SATENA Beechcraft 1900D, registered HK-4709, suffered a loss of communication.

After a search was launched involving the Colombian Air Force and National Army, at around 16:10 traces of the aircraft were found in Curasica, within La Playa de Belén in the north of the country.

President Petro has ordered the Ministry of Transportation and the Civil Aeronautics Authority to conduct a thorough investigation into what caused the tragedy.

Among those who lost their lives was Diógenes Quintero, 36, a member of the House of Representatives for Catatumbo.

#ATENCIÓN. Se conocen las primeras imágenes del avión de Satena accidentado en zona rural del mpio/Hacarí, cuando cubría la ruta Cúcuta–Ocaña. La aeronave fue ubicada en un sector de difícil acceso, mientras organismos de socorro adelantan labores de verificación.

En desarrollo https://t.co/j8WHF4HU1I pic.twitter.com/sghI368oWG

— Colombia Oscura (@ColombiaOscura) January 28, 2026

On Facebook, President Petro, wrote: “I am deeply saddened by these deaths. My heartfelt condolences to their families. May they rest in peace.”

SATENA Beechcraft 1900D, operated by SEARCA, Cúcuta-Camilo Daza Airport (CUC) at 11:42 and was due to land at Ocaña-Aguas Claras Airport (OCV) at around 12:05.

Government officials said that search and rescue efforts in the area where the aircraft crashed were hampered due to weather conditions.

Flightradar24 said that the last received position from HK-4709 was 8.199758, -73.13736 at 16:54 UTC.

Oscar Zuluaga, President of SATENA, released a video statement following the discovery of the wreck and said that the airline’s “solidarity is with the families and loved ones”.

Separately, in a statement from SATENA said: “We extend our most sincere condolences with profound sorrow and our deepest solidarity to the families of our passengers and crew who lost their lives in the accident. We will make all our resources available for humanitarian assistance to the families and to clarify what happened.”

The Civil Aeronautics Authority will formally launch an investigation to determine the circumstances surrounding the incident.

“The immediate activation of technical investigation teams has been ordered to establish, with rigor and transparency, the causes of this regrettable accident, in accordance with national and international protocols,” said Director of Civil Aeronautics Authority, Luis Alfonso Martínez.

Ajit Pawar, the deputy chief minister of Maharashtra state, was traveling from Mumbai to Baramati, his home constituency, where he was scheduled to campaign ahead of local elections. Two members of his staff and two flight crew members were also killed in the crash. 

India’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) said the aircraft crashed during its second approach to Baramati after the crew executed a go-around on the initial attempt. According to the regulator, the first approach was abandoned because of poor visibility. 

Flight tracking data and preliminary information indicate the Learjet was cleared to attempt a second landing when it went down short of the runway and erupted in flames. Video and images from the scene showed thick smoke rising from the wreckage, which came to rest in an open field near the airport. Witnesses told local media they heard multiple explosions following the impact. 

The aircraft was operated by a Delhi-based charter company, identified by the DGCA as VSR Ventures. The operator’s director told Indian media that the crew was experienced and that the cause of the crash was not immediately clear. 

Baramati airfield does not have an air traffic control tower and relies on pilot self-coordination for arrivals and departures. The field primarily supports general aviation and charter traffic. Investigators have not said whether weather, visibility, or runway conditions played a role, though the lack of visual contact during the first approach will be a focus of the inquiry. 

The DGCA said it has launched a formal investigation into the accident, including a review of the aircraft’s maintenance records, crew qualifications, and operational decisions made during the approach. Officials have not yet confirmed whether flight data or cockpit voice recorders have been recovered. 

Pawar, 66, was a veteran politician and a key figure in Maharashtra’s coalition government, which is led by India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party. He had served multiple terms as deputy chief minister under different administrations and held several senior cabinet portfolios. His death prompted an outpouring of tributes from across India’s political spectrum. 

Prime Minister Narendra Modi described the loss as “shocking and saddening,” while Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis declared a public holiday in the state and announced three days of mourning. 

The aircraft, a NASA WB-57, touched down around 11:30 a.m. local time on Runway 17R and slid along the runway before coming to a stop. Video from local media outlets showed the aircraft remaining upright as emergency responders quickly surrounded it.  

Officials said the runway was temporarily closed while crews secured the aircraft and began recovery operations. First responders from a military subcontractor handled the initial response.  

In a statement provided to local media, a NASA spokesperson said a mechanical issue led to the gear-up landing and confirmed that all crew members were safe. 

“As with any incident, a thorough investigation will be conducted to determine what occurred,” the spokesperson said.  

The WB-57 involved in the incident is based at Ellington Field near NASA’s Johnson Space Center. NASA operates a small fleet of the aircraft, which it uses for scientific and atmospheric research missions at altitudes above 60,000 feet.  

Originally built in the early 1960s, the WB-57 traces its roots to the Martin B-57 Canberra, an US-built version of the British English Electric Canberra bomber. The high-altitude WB-57F variant was later developed for reconnaissance and research missions and has since been adapted by NASA for its current civilian science work.  

Despite its age, the WB-57 remains one of the few aircraft in the world capable of carrying large scientific payloads to extreme altitudes for extended periods. NASA uses the aircraft for a wide range of missions, including atmospheric sampling, climate research, storm observation, wildfire monitoring, and space-related studies such as tracking rocket launches and observing solar eclipses.  

The aircraft’s unique performance and payload flexibility have kept it in service decades longer than most aircraft of its generation. NASA officials have previously noted that there is no direct modern replacement that offers the same combination of altitude, endurance, and payload capacity.  

Video of Tuesday’s incident circulated widely online, showing what appeared to be a controlled and stable touchdown with flames and smoke visible. The aircraft remained aligned with the runway centerline and did not appear to yaw or veer during the slide, minimizing damage and risk to the crew.  

NASA did not immediately say how long the aircraft will remain out of service or whether it sustained structural damage during the landing. Recovery crews worked to remove the aircraft from the runway before normal airport operations resumed.  
  
The incident marks the second notable runway event involving a NASA WB-57 at Ellington Field in recent years. In March 2019, a WB-57 overran the runway during takeoff and came to rest on grass adjacent to the pavement. Both crew members escaped without injury, and NASA said at the time the aircraft was shut down and moved to a hangar for inspection while the cause was investigated. No connection between the two events has been suggested.  

The agency said it will release additional information as the investigation progresses.  

Despite the incident, which took place on the evening of January 26, 2026, the aircraft, an A350-1000 (registration G-XWBN), operated flight BA274 as normal and landed at its intended destination, London Heathrow (LHR) without further incident. The flight took nine hours and 17 minutes. 

Although it had no further consequences, the incident has since gone viral on social media after footage from one of the airport cameras, which broadcasts live airport movements, was posted online.  

The footage captures the moment one of the wheels became detached from the aircraft’s rear undercarriage and fell to the ground just as the aircraft was climbing up. 

No damage to objects or people on the ground has been reported. 

Pictures that emerged after the aircraft’s arrival in the UK show its undercarriage is missing one of the rearmost right-side wheels. 

The January 29, 2025, collision killed all 67 people aboard both aircraft, including passengers, crew members, and the helicopter’s military pilots. Among the victims were 28 members of the figure skating community, along with their families, who were returning from a national development camp in Wichita, Kansas. 

The NTSB’s findings, presented during a day-long public board meeting in Washington, placed responsibility squarely on flawed airspace design, inadequate oversight, and breakdowns in air traffic control and helicopter operations—while explicitly finding that the pilots of the PSA regional jet were not at fault. 

“This was preventable,” NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy said, describing long-standing risks that went unaddressed despite years of warnings. 

What happened 

On the night of the crash, the PSA Airlines CRJ700, operating as American Eagle Flight 5342, was arriving from Wichita and had been cleared to land on Runway 33 at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. At the same time, a US Army UH-60 Black Hawk was flying a published helicopter route along the Potomac River. 

Investigators found the helicopter was flying higher than allowed for that route, placing it directly in the path of arriving jet traffic. The helicopter crew requested and was granted visual separation from the jet—a decision the NTSB said should never have been approved under the circumstances. 

The local controller, handling both helicopter and airline traffic, did not issue a safety alert or advise the jet crew of the helicopter’s position. The NTSB found the controller’s workload had increased rapidly and that a “make it work” culture had normalized unsafe operations in the congested airspace. 

The two aircraft collided at night over the river and plunged into icy water. There were no survivors. 

The NTSB concluded the crash resulted from multiple failures across organizations, including the Federal Aviation Administration, the Army, and air traffic control operations at Reagan National. 

Investigators said the crash grew out of an airspace design that placed helicopter routes dangerously close to jet arrival paths, in some cases providing as little as 75 feet of vertical separation. Despite years of data showing repeated close calls between helicopters and commercial aircraft, the FAA declined multiple recommendations to move or redesign those routes. 

Systemic failures

The board also found that controllers had become overly reliant on visual separation, even at night in dense urban airspace where spotting other aircraft is difficult. On the night of the crash, the local controller was handling a mix of airline and helicopter traffic without adequate safeguards, a workload that investigators said reduced situational awareness at a critical moment. 

Compounding the risk, the Army helicopter was not broadcasting its position using ADS-B, limiting what controllers and other pilots could see. Investigators also pointed to poor coordination and incomplete sharing of safety data between the FAA and the Army, which left known risks unaddressed. 

Throughout the hearing, investigators emphasized that the PSA Airlines flight crew followed all procedures and never received information that would have allowed them to detect or avoid the helicopter before the collision. 

Investigators said the PSA CRJ700 flight crew followed all procedures, were not advised of the helicopter’s position or issued a safety alert, and were placed in a situation where no reasonable action was available to avoid the collision. 

Changes already underway 

In response to the crash, the FAA has permanently closed the helicopter route involved in the collision, except for limited essential operations. The agency has also reduced arrival rates at Reagan National and increased tower staffing. 

The NTSB said those steps were necessary but overdue. 

The board also highlighted the ROTOR Act, pending legislation that would require military and government helicopters to carry ADS-B equipment and keep it activated in shared airspace. Investigators said the technology could have provided collision alerts up to a minute before impact. 

The Justice Department has already acknowledged federal liability in the case, citing failures to meet basic duties of care. 

Board members warned that the conditions that led to the crash are not unique to Washington. Homendy said other airports with mixed helicopter and airline traffic pose similar risks if systemic issues remain unresolved. 

The NTSB is expected to release its full final report in the coming weeks.

The group, the Foundation for Aviation Safety, alleges the aircraft experienced repeated electrical and systems failures over several years before it crashed shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad on June 12, 2025, killing 260 people. India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau is leading the inquiry, with US participation because the aircraft and its engines were designed and built in the United States. 

The Foundation for Aviation Safety, or FAS, is not a regulator or investigative authority. It is an advocacy group led by Ed Pierson, a former senior manager at Boeing’s Renton factory who has publicly criticized the company’s safety and quality-control practices for several years. The organization says it focuses on identifying systemic risks in commercial aviation and pressing regulators and lawmakers to address them. 

In January 2026, FAS submitted a package of materials related to the Air India aircraft to the US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. According to the group, the submission was intended to raise concerns about aircraft safety oversight and Boeing’s internal reporting practices, rather than to assert a cause of the crash. 

The submission does not represent sworn testimony and is not part of a formal congressional investigation. Lawmakers have not publicly validated the claims or announced new hearings tied specifically to the Air India accident. Congressional submissions of this kind function as briefings or requests for oversight attention, not findings of fact. 

FAS says its concerns are based on a review of maintenance records, incident reports, and regulatory filings related to the aircraft, registered VT-ANB. The jet was among the earliest Boeing 787s built, entering service with Air India in early 2014 after its first flight the previous year. 

According to the group, those records show a pattern of recurring electrical and systems issues during the aircraft’s service life. FAS alleges the aircraft experienced software faults, repeated circuit breaker trips, wiring damage, short circuits, power losses, and overheating electrical components. The most serious claim involves a January 2022 incident in which a fire allegedly broke out in a P100 power distribution panel during descent into Frankfurt, requiring the panel’s replacement. 

FAS has not released the underlying documents publicly, and the claims have not been independently verified by investigators or regulators. Air India has not commented in detail on the group’s assertions, and the AAIB has not said whether the aircraft’s prior maintenance history played any role in the accident. 

The group says its review extends beyond the single aircraft involved in the crash. FAS claims it examined roughly 2,000 reports of issues across hundreds of Boeing 787s operating in the United States, Canada, and Australia. Some of those reports, including concerns about water intrusion into electrical bays, have been acknowledged previously by the US Federal Aviation Administration. 

The Boeing 787 relies more heavily on electrical systems than earlier airliners, having replaced many mechanical and pneumatic functions with electrically powered systems to reduce weight and improve efficiency. That design approach drew scrutiny early in the aircraft’s life, including a global grounding in 2013 following lithium-ion battery fires. Boeing redesigned several systems afterward, including power distribution components. 

Boeing has consistently stated that the 787 has a strong operational record. Prior to the Ahmedabad crash, the model had flown for nearly 15 years without a fatal accident. 

Investigators have not determined the cause of the Air India crash. A preliminary AAIB report released one month after the accident described fuel control switches moving to the cut-off position shortly after takeoff, but did not assign responsibility or identify whether the movement resulted from human action or a technical malfunction.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) confirmed that the private jet, registered N10KJ, was taking off on January 25, 2026, at 19:45, when the incident occurred.

According to reports from a government official, the crash resulted in a significant fire onboard the aircraft and the Bombardier ended upside down in the aftermath of the accident.

In a statement, Bangor Airport said that emergency crews were at the scene and that the airport was now closed.

“There was an incident involving a single aircraft that was departing from BGR. First responders are still on the scene and are expected to be actively working the site for several more hours before any additional information is available,” said a spokesperson for the airport.

Un jet d'affaires Bombardier Challenger 650, immatriculé N10KJ, s'est écrasé à l'aéroport international de Bangor, dans le Maine, aux USA.

L'avion transportait huit personnes. Aucune information n'a été communiquée concernant l'état de santé des occupants. pic.twitter.com/AdAzPO8S1a

— air plus news (@airplusnews) January 26, 2026

The airport added that no further information would be made available until 08:00 on January 26, 2026.

According to LiveATC.net, air traffic controllers and pilots can be heard before the crash speaking about low visibility at the airport.

After the Bombardier Challenger 650 was cleared for takeoff, a voice can be heard saying “aircraft upside down”.

Severe winter storms have swept through large swathes of the US over the weekend leading to thousands of cancellations.

UPDATE (27/1): Bangor Maine Police Department issued an update on January 26, 2026, that said the flight manifest recorded six people on the flight.

Accrording to the police no one on the flight was taken to hospital and all six people on board the aircraft at the time of the crash are presumed to be deceased.

Earlier in the day the FAA said that there were eight people on the flight, seven of whom had died and one who was taken to the hospital.

The FAA later wrote on social media: “The FAA provides initial, preliminary information that may change as the investigation progresses. NTSB is leading the investigation, and future updates will be provided by that agency or local authorities.”

On January 23, 2026, Korean Air, Asiana Airlines, Jin Air, Air Busan and Air Seoul announced that the in-flight use of power banks will be banned from January 26, 2026, as part of enhanced safety measures.

The new policy means that passengers will not be allowed to use power banks to charge electronic devices such as mobile phones, tablets, laptops, or cameras while inside the aircraft.

A spokesperson for the airlines said: “Power banks may still be carried into the cabin in accordance with existing regulations on capacity and quantity, but their use and charging are strictly prohibited.”

Additionally, all power banks must be kept within arm’s reach and must not be stored in the overhead bins. The airlines suggest they should be kept on the passenger, in the seatback pocket, or under the seat in front.

Accident survenu à l' @Airbus #A321 immatriculé HL7763 exploité par #AirBusan le 28/01/25 à l'aéroport de #Busan en Corée du Sud / Travail sur site en cours (enquête dirigée par ARAIB – publication avec leur accord).
Accident to the @Airbus #A321 registered HL7763… pic.twitter.com/dHqIJfW072

— BEA (@BEA_Aero) January 31, 2025

“To prevent short circuits, passengers must cover metal charging ports with electrical tape or place each battery in a separate plastic bag or pouch,” the spokesperson added.

Korean Air and the other Hanjin airlines had already taken steps to limit the danger posed by devices such as power banks, imposing measures in line with Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport policies.

These include providing insulation tape for short-circuit prevention at check-in counters and boarding gates; equipping aircraft with fire-containment bags; and attaching temperature-sensitive stickers to overhead bins for quicker overheating detection.

Cabin crew training has also been enhanced, with specialized drills for power bank fire scenarios in addition to standard fire response training.

As of March 2025, passengers traveling with South Korean airlines have been banned from storing lithium-ion power banks and e-cigarettes in overhead storage compartments.

“The ban on the in-flight use of power banks is a necessary measure to ensure the highest standards of flight safety, and passenger cooperation is essential,” said a Korean Air representative. “Korean Air remains fully committed to providing a safe, secure and comfortable travel experience for all customers.”

The dangers of potential power bank fires on flights were brought into focus after a serious fire incident on an Air Busan aircraft just before takeoff at Busan Gimhae International Airport (PUS) on January 28, 2024.

In March 2025, authorities announced that the fire was likely caused by a power bank battery stored in an overhead bin.

The aircraft, VC-25A tail number 92-9000, had departed Andrews on a flight to Switzerland when the crew reported the problem. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the crew opted to return “out of an abundance of caution,” with reporters on board noting that some cabin lights temporarily went out following departure. The aircraft landed at 23:07 local time, delaying the president’s onward trip to the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, by roughly two hours.

Aircraft changeover

Following arrival at Andrews, passengers disembarked and boarded a Boeing C-32A, the military variant of the 757 operated by the 89th Airlift Wing for senior US government transport. Once the president was on board, the C-32A carried the Air Force One call sign for the remainder of the trip.

Air Force One is a radio call sign for any Air Force aircraft carrying the president, though the role is usually flown by one of two VC-25A, heavily modified 747-200B jets. A second VC-25A is typically positioned to provide redundancy on presidential trips. However, the other airframe in the fleet, 82-8000, has been stored in San Antonio since December 2024. Thus, the switch was made to a C-32A instead.

The VC-25A

The VC-25A platform features significantly more wiring than the baseline 747, with hardened and redundant electrical systems designed to support secure global communications, classified data networks, and in-flight refueling operations. The VC-25A’s system architecture is built to ensure mission continuity during prolonged sorties, including in crisis scenarios.

The airframe also integrates self-sufficiency features such as internal boarding stairs, a dedicated baggage handling system, and specialized power and environmental control units, allowing operations at airports with limited ground support. That design philosophy places additional emphasis on electrical and power management reliability, with minor anomalies treated conservatively.

Aging presidential fleet

Both VC-25As entered service in 1990 and remain in daily use while Boeing continues work on their successors under the Presidential Aircraft Recapitalization program. The fleet’s age and bespoke mission systems have contributed to higher sustainment complexity and protracted modernization cycles, drawing periodic scrutiny as deliveries of the next-generation aircraft have slipped.

The US Air Force plans to replace the current VC-25As with the VC-25B, based on two Boeing 747-8 airframes that are being extensively modified with new power generation, communications, and survivability upgrades. The program has faced repeated delays, with current planning pointing to the second half of this decade for entry into service, a timeline that keeps the aging VC-25A fleet in front-line presidential use for several more years and gives minor technical events like this one additional political and public visibility.

The alert, SAFO 26001, highlights the airspace and debris risks that can arise from space launch and reentry operations. The FAA said the safe coexistence of spaceflight and traditional aviation now depends on close coordination, careful planning before departure, situational awareness in flight, and the ability of pilots and air traffic controllers to react quickly when conditions change. With launches becoming more frequent, the agency said interruptions to planned routes and day-of-operation traffic flows are increasingly likely, particularly near established launch corridors. 

Those concerns are not theoretical. In March 2025, a SpaceX Starship test flight broke apart during ascent, scattering debris over a wide area. The FAA activated emergency procedures, and air traffic controllers rerouted aircraft and imposed ground stops at multiple Florida airports while the risk from falling debris was assessed. Nearly 240 flights were disrupted, with aircraft delayed, held offshore or diverted until the hazard had passed. The incident underscored how a single launch anomaly can ripple across the national airspace system within minutes. 

Under current procedures, the FAA develops an airspace management plan for every launch. These plans can include Temporary Flight Restrictions, Aircraft Hazard Areas and, in rare cases, Debris Response Areas. Hazard areas are usually published in advance through NOTAMs and define where aircraft should not operate during launch windows. 

The FAA cautioned that these protected areas can be large, especially for newer or experimental launch vehicles whose flight paths are less predictable. Larger rockets can also require more complex airspace protections. 

Dean Snell, senior manager of Air Traffic Services at the National Business Aviation Association, said some launches already affect significant portions of US airspace. 

“Some of these pre-published AHAs affect significant amounts of airspace,” Snell said. “The size of the AHA is usually determined by the predictability of the launch vehicles and boosters. For this reason, launches of prototype and early development vehicles cover more airspace due to the lower predictability of the flight path. We also see more complex AHAs for the larger launch vehicles such as SpaceX’s Starship and Blue Origin’s New Glenn.” 

Snell added that Debris Response Areas are different. While noted in advance, they are only activated if something goes wrong. “The DRAs will be noted in advance via NOTAM but will not be officially implemented unless there is a non-nominal event,” he said, adding that weather-driven launch delays can also cause hazard areas to be canceled and reactivated with little notice. 

The FAA said pilots and flight planners should factor space launches into routine planning, closely review NOTAMs, anticipate reroutes and carry enough fuel to absorb unexpected delays. With commercial space activity accelerating, the agency warned that launch-related airspace restrictions are becoming a regular feature of flying in the US, not a rare exception. 

The ATR 42-500, operated by Indonesia Air Transport for the Marine and Fisheries Resources Surveillance (PSDKP), left Yogyakarta Adisucipto International Airport (JOG) on January 17, 2026, shortly after 08:00, local time and reportedly lost contact around 13:15.

Early reports suggested that there were 11 people onboard the flight, but local media is now reporting that there were 10 people traveling when the aircraft crashed.

It is understood that seven crew members and three passengers were on board the 25-year-old ATR 42-500, registered PK-THT.

Indonesia’s search and rescue team (Basarnas) said that they found the wreckage on a mountain peak at 08:50 on January 18, 2026.

Serpihan pesawat ATR 42-500 milik Indonesia Air Transport di Bukit Bulusaraung, Kabupaten Pangkep, Sulawesi Selatan, Minggu (18/1). pic.twitter.com/mzduplqzOo

— Akuratco (@akuratco) January 18, 2026

Local website Tribun News said that Commander of XIV/Hasanuddin Military Region, Major General TNI Bangun Nawoko, confirmed that one victim had so far been found.

“Today, our team has not only successfully recovered some debris from the plane, but I also assured the team via radio that one victim has been found,” the commander said.

He added: “We can’t yet provide details about the victim’s condition here. What’s clear is that this will require considerable effort, as the conditions are extraordinary, and it’s quite closed in, foggy, and very difficult.”

The ATR wreckage was found at 1,353 meters above sea level, and a one-kilometer search radius has been placed around the crash site.

In a statement the Indonesian government said: “The extended family of the Ministry of Transportation expressed its deep condolences for the disaster of the Indonesia Air Transport PK-THT aircraft. The current priority is search and rescue efforts, and ensuring that the entire process is carried out professionally, coordinated, and according to procedure.”

Keluarga besar Kementerian Perhubungan menyampaikan duka mendalam atas musibah pesawat Indonesia Air Transport PK-THT.

Prioritas saat ini adalah upaya pencarian dan penyelamatan, serta memastikan seluruh proses dilakukan secara profesional, terkoordinasi, dan sesuai prosedur. pic.twitter.com/gi0EN2H1oW

— Kemenhub RI (@kemenhub151) January 18, 2026

According to the website Aviation Safety, the ATR was cleared by air traffic control for an approach on Runway 21 at APG.

In a statement ATR said: “ATR has been informed that an accident occurred in Indonesia involving an ATR 42-500. Our first thoughts are with all the individuals affected by the accident. The ATR specialists are fully engaged to support both the investigation led by the Indonesian authorities and the operator.”

According to The South China Morning Post, the flights form part of COMAC’s bid to have the C919 certified by Western regulators and open new business avenues in foreign markets.

EASA confirmed to Reuters that “validation activities” involving the C919 had been carried out by way of test flights.

The South China Morning Post learned details of the test flights from a source with knowledge of the development, who also claimed that senior foreign pilots working in China were helping to demonstrate the C919’s reliability.

Additionally, the source claimed that EASA had “agreed the aircraft is good and safe,” although there were some “teething problems that required tweaks”.

While China’s rival to Boeing’s 737 and Airbus’ A320 is already operating in parts of the world, it has not yet been certified by either EASA or the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), vastly limiting its potential.

COMAC first applied for the C919 to be certified in 2019, but it was delayed during the COVID-19 pandemic and the process only restarted in 2023.

EASA executive director Florian Guillermet said last year that, if successful, the C919 will be certified in “three to six years”. However, whether or not Western airlines will purchase the aircraft is another matter.

In an interview with Skift in March 2025, Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary suggested that, if the price was right, then the carrier would buy the COMAC’s narrowbody aircraft.

“If it was cheap enough – 10 or 20% cheaper than an Airbus aircraft – then we’d order it,” said O’Leary.

In a letter to O’Leary following his comments, US Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi warned the low-cost carrier against purchasing Chinese-made COMAC jets.

“Respectfully, U.S. and European airlines should not be even contemplating the future purchase of airplanes from Chinese military companies,” Krishnamoorthi wrote.

According to the San Miguel County Sheriff’s Office, the incident occurred at approximately 12:15 p.m. local time as the business jet attempted to land at the high-elevation mountain airport. The pilot reported encountering a strong crosswind on touchdown, which caused the aircraft to lose directional control and slide about 900 feet off the runway. 
 
A photo of the aftermath of the incident shows the Citation’s main landing gear collapsed in the snow and mud beside the runway. The aircraft, a 2007 Cessna Citation 750, also sustained damage to its left wing and nose wheel.  

The two pilots and one passenger were able to exit the aircraft unaided. Emergency responders from Telluride Fire assessed the occupants at the scene, and no injuries were reported. 

The National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration have launched an investigation into the incident. Airport officials kept the runway closed while investigators examined the aircraft and the landing environment. 

Telluride Regional Airport sits at an elevation of more than 9,000 feet and is known for challenging operating conditions, particularly during winter. Mountain airports like Telluride combine thin air, steep terrain, short runways, and rapidly changing weather, all of which can complicate approaches and landings. 

Strong and shifting winds are common in mountainous areas in Colorado, especially during colder months, when weather systems interact with surrounding terrain. Crosswinds, downdrafts and windshear can develop without warning, leaving little margin for error during the landing phase of flight. 

Despite those challenges, airports such as Telluride remain popular destinations for private aircraft. Their difficulty is also part of their appeal, offering access to remote resorts and ski destinations that are otherwise hard to reach. For operators and passengers alike, mountain airports often represent a trade-off between convenience and complexity. 

The aircraft, an Airbus A321 (registration TC-JRR) was operating flight TK1853 between Istanbul (IST) and Barcelona-El Prat (BCN) and landed safely at around 11:00 local time. The aircraft taxied to a remote area of the airport where all 148 passengers and seven crew members were evacuated. 

The alert was triggered during the last stage of the flight, when the aircraft was over the Western Mediterranean near the island of Sardinia. A member of the crew noticed a passenger had created an internet access profile on the aircraft’s inflight connectivity system with a username that could be interpreted as having contained a bomb threat. 

Upon declaring emergency, two fighter jets, one French and one Spanish, were scrambled and escorted the airliner until it landed in Barcelona. 

Once the evacuation was completed, security forces proceeded to check both the aircraft and the passengers, with no explosives reportedly being found. 

During the event, Barcelona airport continued to operate as normal, said Spanish airport operator AENA.  

The cargo flight crashed near Louisville, Kentucky, on November 4, 2025, after departing Louisville Muhammad Ali International Airport (SDF). The aircraft, a McDonnell Douglas MD-11F, was destroyed and both pilots were killed.

In its latest update, the NTSB said examination of the wreckage confirmed that the aircraft’s left engine and its pylon separated from the wing moments after takeoff. Investigators determined that the separation occurred at the engine-to-wing attachment point, a critical structural area designed to support engine loads during all phases of flight.

According to the NTSB, detailed analysis conducted at the agency’s materials laboratory identified fatigue cracking in components associated with the left engine pylon attachment. Investigators found cracking that had developed over time, along with evidence of additional damage consistent with the structure failing under load once the final separation occurred.

Airport surveillance video reviewed by investigators shows the left engine and pylon detaching from the wing shortly after the aircraft lifted off. The video also captured a fire in the area of the left engine immediately following the separation, before the aircraft descended and impacted terrain.

The NTSB said both the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder were recovered from the wreckage and are being used to reconstruct the final moments of the flight. Data from the recorders has helped investigators align recorded aircraft performance with physical evidence found at the accident site.

The update does not assign probable cause and does not identify responsibility for the failure. The NTSB emphasized that the investigation remains ongoing and will continue to examine maintenance history, inspection records, and certification standards related to the engine pylon structure.

The agency has not yet issued safety recommendations related to the findings, but the new information provides the clearest picture so far of the mechanical sequence that led to the loss of the aircraft.

UPS has said it is cooperating fully with the investigation.

Following the November 2025 crash, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued an Emergency Airworthiness Directive that effectively grounded the global fleet of McDonnell Douglas MD-11 aircraft pending inspections.

Major operators, including UPS Airlines and FedEx Express, had already voluntarily removed their MD-11 freighters from service before the FAA action. The directive was later expanded to include related DC-10 and MD-10 variants because of shared engine pylon design features. Aircraft were permitted to return to service only after completing FAA-mandated inspections and corrective actions developed with support from Boeing.

The grounding disrupted cargo operations during the peak shipping season but reflected regulators’ concern that the failure seen in the UPS crash could pose a broader risk across the fleet.

The MD-11F has been a mainstay of UPS’s long-haul cargo fleet for decades, and the crash has drawn close attention across the cargo aviation sector, particularly regarding aging aircraft structures and inspection practices.

The NTSB said further updates will be released as additional analysis is completed.

On January 14, 2026, the Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport confirmed that Giorgos Saunatsos, had submitted his resignation to the department’s minister Christos Dimas, who accepted the decision.

On January 14, 2026, a special committee submitted its findings to the Greek government surrounding aircraft being grounded for several hours on January 4, 2026.

During the incident air traffic controllers “could not communicate with aircraft in the sky” with almost all frequencies of the Athens Flight Information Region (FIR) impacted.

According to the report, a “digital noise” heard over communications was caused by desynchronization when multiple systems arrived at the Athens Area Control Centre (KEPATHM).

This then resulted in the “unintentional activation/continuous emission of a critical number of transmitters and the degradation/disruption of critical telecommunication interfaces”.

While the investigation could not single out the exact cause, the report said that the existing Voice Communication System (VCS) and the critical telecommunications infrastructure used to support it were “based on outdated technology”.

“SDH – Synchronous Digital Hierarchy – is no longer supported by the manufacturer, without the ability to provide substantial operational guarantees,” added the report.

ekathimerini reported that recommendations were made to the CAA in 2019 that its systems required new circuits.

Among the report’s recommendations was the acceleration of the transition to Voice over IP (VoIP) technology and relocation of the KEPATHM facilities to a more suitable environment.

On January 5, 2025, the Head of the Athens Misdemeanor Prosecutor’s Office, Aristidis Koreas, ordered a preliminary investigation to establish what went wrong.

The probe was be led by the police’s electronic crime team but the report gave no evidence that the outage was caused by a cyber attack.

The website behind the statistics studied 320 airlines and considered incident rates while adjusting for the total number of flights, fleet age, serious incidents, pilot training and international safety audits.

This year’s results, which is based on a consistent year-on-year criteria, also included “placing a greater emphasis on turbulence prevention, as it remains the leading cause of in-flight injuries”.

Etihad Airways claimed the top spot among the full-service carriers in what AirlineRatings.com described as a first for a Gulf carrier.

“Etihad achieved this through a combination of factors: a young fleet, advancements in cockpit safety, particularly around turbulence, a crash-free history, and the lowest incident rate per flight of any airline on the list. The airline also participated in our independent onboard safety audit and demonstrated excellent adherence to turbulence management in the cabin,” said CEO of AirlineRatings.com, Sharon Petersen on January 13, 2026.

Peterson stressed that the margins between the safety of each airline are “narrow” and that “small numerical differences should not be interpreted as gaps in safety”.

“All airlines in the Top 25 are world leaders in aviation safety and claims that one is significantly safer or less safe than another is both sensationalist and false,” explained Peterson.

HK Express took the top spot for the safest low-cost airline for a second time, “driven by a modern fleet, exceptionally low incident rate, and an almost flawless onboard safety audit”.

The top 25 full-service airlines for 2026 

1. Etihad 
2. Cathay Pacific 
3. Qantas 
4. Qatar 
5. Emirates 
6. Air New Zealand 
7. Singapore Airlines 
8. EVA Air 
9. Virgin Australia 
10. Korean Air 
11. STARLUX 
12. Turkish Airlines 
13. Virgin Atlantic 
14. ANA 
15. Alaska Airlines 
16. TAP Air Portugal 
17. SAS 
18. British Airways 
19. Vietnam Airlines 
20. Iberia 
21. Lufthansa 
22. Air Canada 
23. Delta (excludes Endeavor Air) 
24. American Airlines (excludes Envoy Air, Piedmont Airlines, and PSA Airlines) 
25. Fiji Airways 

Commenting on the results, Etihad said: “We’re proud to be named the World’s Safest Airline for 2026 AirlineRatings.com. This recognition is a testament to the unwavering commitment of our entire team to uphold our core value: Safety First, Always. The wellbeing of our guests and employees guides every decision we make, and this award inspires us to keep raising the bar.”

The top 25 safest low-cost airlines for 2026

1. HK Express 
2. Jetstar Airways 
3. Scoot 
4. flydubai (in future will be assessed as a full-service airline)  
5. EasyJet Group 
6. Southwest 
7. airBaltic 
8. VietJet Air 
9. Wizz Air Group 
10. AirAsia Group (excludes AirAsia Cambodia due to only two aircraft) 
11. TUI UK 
12. Vueling 
13. Norwegian 
14. JetBlue 
15. FlyNAS 
16. Cebu Pacific 
17. Jet2 
18. Ryanair Ireland and UK (excludes Buzz) 
19. Spring Airlines China 
20. Transavia Group 
21. Eurowings Group 
22. Volaris (excludes Volaris Costa Rica and Volaris El Salvador due to fleet size) 
23. WestJet Group 
24. GOL 
25. SKY Airline Chile 

“Overall, it is important to note that every airline featured in the 2026 list has recorded incidents over the past two years, from tail strikes to on-board fires and engine shutdowns, yet the actual incident rate per flight sits between 0.002 and 0.09 across the airlines, which is a true credit to the industry as a whole,” concluded Peterson.

Safety concerns

Radio altimeters, also called radar altimeters, measure an aircraft’s height above terrain and obstacles using low-power signals in the 4.2-4.4 GHz band. Pilots use this information directly, and many aircraft systems depend on it to function properly. The FAA cited a wide range of uses, including low-visibility approach and landing functions such as autoland and enhanced-vision operations, as well as for safety systems like terrain awareness and warning, wind shear alerts, and traffic collision avoidance.  

The core concern, the FAA said, is that higher-powered terrestrial wireless signals in neighboring bands can interfere with an altimeter’s ability to detect faint reflections from the ground. That can lead to erroneous altitude readings, missing readings, or nuisance alerts in systems that rely on accurate height-above-ground data. At very low altitude, the FAA claims, those failures can create hazardous conditions that a pilot may not detect in time to correct.  

The proposal lays out a staggered compliance schedule. The FAA would require aircraft operating under Part 121, along with large Part 129 aircraft with 30 or more passenger seats or a payload capacity above 7,500 pounds, to meet the new minimum performance standards by the date the FCC authorizes wireless services in the Upper C-band. For all other aircraft equipped with radio altimeters, the FAA would require compliance two years later.  

The FAA said that it expects the initial compliance deadline will be achievable sometime between 2029 and 2032, depending on factors such as equipment availability and retrofit capacity. The agency noted that it will set the final deadlines in the final rule after reviewing public comments.  

Long-term solution

The NPRM also tries to put the proposal in the context of the long-running Lower C-band dispute. Wireless services already operate in the 3.7-3.98 GHz range, which sits below the Upper C-band. The FAA noted that it issued airworthiness directives in 2021 and later years to address unsafe conditions tied to potential interference, and it pointed to voluntary steps taken by wireless providers to reduce disruption.  

Those voluntary commitments, the FAA said, will come to an end on January 1, 2028, unless the parties extend or modify them. The FAA argued that the current approach does not provide a long-term solution for either existing Lower C-band operations or future Upper C-band expansion.  

The agency also included data it says supports the interference risk. The FAA said it began tracking reports of potential interference in January 2022. As of August 19, 2025, it had received 659 reports of potential C-band interference, including 493 associated with radio altimeters or related systems. After analyzing 625 reports, the FAA said it identified 118 events in which it eliminated other likely causes and treated C-band interference as a potential factor. The FAA said most of those events involved radio altimeter display errors and nuisance alerts from systems that depend on radio altimeter inputs. 

The accident occurred January 2, 2026, near Telegraph Canyon, east of Phoenix, when an MD Helicopters MD530F carrying four people crashed in rugged terrain. Preliminary information from local authorities indicates the aircraft may have struck a slackline, a type of recreational high-altitude line rigged across a canyon, before falling hundreds of feet.  

All four occupants were killed, including the 59-year-old pilot and three passengers, all members of the same family from Oregon.  

Slacklining is an extreme sport in which a long, narrow strip of webbing is tensioned between two anchor points, often cliffs or towers. Unlike a tightrope, a slackline is designed to flex and sway under load. While many slacklines are set close to the ground, a variation known as highlining involves suspending the line hundreds of feet in the air, sometimes spanning distances of more than a kilometer. Highlines are often difficult to see from the air, even at close range.  

According to the Pinal County Sheriff’s Office, an eyewitness reported seeing the helicopter strike a portion of the line before descending into the canyon. No one was on the slackline at the time of the crash.  

Slackliners involved in the installation said they had followed established procedures, including filing a NOTAM to alert pilots of the temporary aerial hazard. NOTAMs are intended to provide pilots with time-sensitive safety information, including obstacles, airspace restrictions, and hazards along a planned route.  

However, aviation safety experts and pilots have long criticized the NOTAM system as overly complex and cumbersome to use, particularly for low-altitude operations such as helicopter flights. NOTAMs are issued as text-based notices, often requiring pilots to manually sift through large volumes of dense information to identify items relevant to a specific flight.  

In this case, the filing of a NOTAM has raised questions about whether critical hazard information can still be missed, even when pilots comply with preflight briefing requirements. Helicopter operations are especially vulnerable to wire and obstacle strikes, which remain among the deadliest accident categories in rotorcraft aviation.  

The accident comes as the US Department of Transportation has said the FAA’s legacy NOTAM system will be fully replaced by February 2026. The agency has described the existing platform as outdated and in need of modernization, following multiple outages and longstanding usability concerns.  

While investigators have cautioned against drawing conclusions before the final report is released, the crash has added urgency to broader discussions about how temporary, nontraditional obstacles are communicated to pilots and whether future NOTAM reforms will improve hazard awareness in real-world flying conditions.

A government-commissioned simulation report, disclosed on December 8, 2025 by opposition lawmaker Kim Eun-hye, concluded that all 179 passengers who died would likely have survived had the concrete mound supporting the airport’s localizer been designed to break upon impact, or not existed at all.

The admission marks a significant reversal from the ministry’s initial position immediately after the December 29, 2024 crash, when officials insisted that the installation was legal.

The crash

A Jeju Air Boeing 737-800 operating a domestic flight from Bangkok made an emergency belly landing at Muan International Airport in South Jeolla Province after a bird strike disabled its landing gear. The aircraft slid along the runway before colliding with a concrete structure supporting the localizer, a navigation aid used during runway approaches.

The collision triggered an explosion and fire, killing 179 of the 181 people on board. Only two flight attendants seated at the far rear of the aircraft survived, making it one of South Korea’s deadliest aviation disasters in decades.

Simulation findings

According to the simulation conducted by the Computational Structural Engineering Institute of Korea, the aircraft would have slid approximately 630 meters before stopping without the barrier. Passengers would likely have survived without serious injuries.

A separate simulation assuming a frangible, breakaway structure similarly projected no serious injuries and limited damage to the aircraft.

“The hill that should have been breakable became a deadly barrier,” Kim said in a statement. “We must uncover the full truth behind how this happened.”

Regulatory failure

The ministry told the National Assembly that “the localizer at Muan Airport failed to comply with airport safety operation standards”. According to regulations established in 2003 and enforced in 2010, any navigation facility installed within 240 meters of a runway end must be designed to break upon impact and be installed as low as possible.

The concrete structure stood 199 meters from the runway’s end. Though the airport opened in 2007, before the 2010 enforcement date, a critical opportunity to rectify the issue came during a 2020 upgrade project.

Despite including a requirement to review frangibility measures in the upgrade project’s design tender, the localizer remained on its concrete mound. Meeting records show no objections were raised when Muan Airport opted to keep the structure unchanged.

“This amounts to an acknowledgment that necessary safety improvements were not made during the 2020 upgrade,” Kim said, calling for strict accountability.

Calls for justice

Victims’ families issued a statement calling the crash “a clear case of human error” and rejecting claims that it was unavoidable. They demanded an official apology from investigators; legislative changes to ensure independence of accident probes; full disclosure of investigation materials; and a comprehensive parliamentary inquiry.

The families’ demands gained momentum when the Korean National Assembly approved a cross-party investigation on December 22, 2025, by a vote of 245 to one. The independent special committee comprises 18 members and began work immediately for an initial 40-day period, with the possibility of extension.

The probe will examine the crash’s cause; where responsibility for the disaster lies; whether bird strike risks were underestimated; the design and management of the concrete structure; and whether government agencies attempted to downplay or cover up the incident.

Opposition lawmakers revealed that the simulation report had been completed in August but remained undisclosed until now. The People Power Party called for a full criminal investigation, warning that a special counsel probe should be launched if the current inquiry proves insufficient.

Lawmakers also noted that airport navigation structures such as localizers are not explicitly covered under the Serious Accidents Punishment Act and urged legal revisions. They called for investigations to include senior officials involved in the airport’s construction and the 2020 upgrade, noting that none of the 44 individuals currently under investigation include high-ranking Transport Ministry officials.

Muan International Airport has remained closed since the crash and is not scheduled to reopen until April 2026. The full investigative report is still pending after authorities missed a one-year deadline to release a progress update.

In a safety investigation report released January 2, 2026, the NTSB said two Hawker accidents in 2024 and 2025 exposed serious gaps in pilot training, qualification standards, and manufacturer guidance for stall test flights following certain maintenance actions. Both crashes occurred while flight crews were performing manufacturer-mandated stall tests after routine inspections. 

The board issued urgent safety recommendations to Textron Aviation, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the National Business Aviation Association, calling for defined pilot qualification criteria, standardized stall test plans, clearer recovery procedures, and immediate outreach to owners and operators. 

A test few pilots ever fly 

Certain Hawker models, including the 750, 800, 800XP, 850XP, and 900XP, require a stall test flight after maintenance involving wing leading-edge components. The test is designed to confirm that the aircraft’s stall warning system and stall behavior remain within certification standards before the airplane returns to service. 

The NTSB said the wing design on these airplanes is highly sensitive to small installation errors, surface defects, or minor ice contamination. Even deviations measured in hundredths of an inch can produce unacceptable stall behavior, including sudden uncommanded roll or entry into a spin. 

While the Hawker’s Structural Repair Manual requires the test, investigators found no clear manufacturer-defined training, experience thresholds, or recovery procedures for pilots tasked with flying it. In many cases, the responsibility falls to an operator’s regular line pilots. 

Two crashes, same scenario 

On October 16, 2025, a Hawker 800XP crashed near Battle Creek, Michigan, during a post-maintenance stall test flight, killing the pilot, copilot, and a maintenance passenger. The aircraft had been down for maintenance for seven months. Preliminary data showed the jet entered a rapid descent shortly after the crew began the test. A radio transmission referenced a stall and an attempted recovery. The investigation remains ongoing. 

About 20 months earlier, on February 7, 2024, a Hawker 900XP crashed near Westwater, Utah, also during a required stall test flight, killing both pilots. Flight data showed the aircraft decelerated and pitched up before entering a stall at the same moment the stick shaker activated, with no prior warning. The jet rolled repeatedly and descended in a corkscrew pattern from which the crew did not recover. 

The NTSB determined that wing performance degradation from structural ice likely caused the stall warning system to activate too late, leaving the crew with little margin to respond. 

In both accidents, the pilots were properly trained and qualified for normal operations but had limited or no real-world experience performing stall test flights. 

What’s missing 

The board found that Hawker manuals warn pilots to be “prepared for unacceptable stall behavior” but do not clearly describe what that behavior looks like or how to recover from it. Emergency and abnormal procedures contain no specific guidance for handling an uncommanded roll or spin during a stall test. 

Investigators also identified inconsistencies between the Structural Repair Manual, Pilot’s Operating Manual, and Airplane Flight Manual, raising concerns about FAA oversight of previous revisions. 

The NTSB concluded that operational pilots, who are trained to avoid stalls entirely, may be ill-equipped to handle a full aerodynamic stall when it occurs unexpectedly during testing. 

What the NTSB wants next 

The board is calling on Textron Aviation to establish manufacturer-authorized training and experience requirements for stall test pilots, develop detailed stall test plans and recovery procedures, and revise manuals to clearly explain the risks posed by wing surface anomalies and light ice. 

The FAA is urged to ensure those changes are properly incorporated into approved manuals. NBAA is asked to alert its members immediately, warning that stall test flights carry risks beyond normal line operations. 

Until those changes are made, the NTSB warned, post-maintenance stall test flights will continue to expose crews to hazards they may not fully understand or be prepared to manage.

Captain Brandon Fisher, who safely landed the Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 9 on January 5, 2024, following the door plug blowout, filed papers in Oregon’s Multnomah County Circuit Court on December 30, 2025, seeking $10 million in damages.

The lawsuit represents the first time that a member of the Alaska Airlines flight crew has launched legal proceedings and follows action already taken by cabin crew members and passengers on the flight.

The lawsuit says that Captain Fisher and First Officer Emily Wiprud “should have been hailed as heroes” but instead Boeing “attempted to shift blame, intentionally and falsely claiming” that the pilots “made mistakes that contributed to the incident”.

“Boeing’s actions have had a dramatic and life-altering impact on Captain Fisher. Captain Fisher brings this suit to hold Boeing and its complicit subcontractor, Spirit AeroSystems accountable for what they have done to him and the danger that their actions posed to the public,” read the lawsuit.

Specifically, the lawsuit highlights Boeing’s “scapegoating” during the post-accident investigation.

The lawsuit described a statement by Boeing in a federal court pleading filed on March 11, 2024, as “reprehensible and inaccurate”.

Captain Fisher’s lawsuit says in Boeing’s response to a lawsuit brought by Elna Berry and other passengers, the company claimed that it “should not be held responsible for injuries because its products were improperly maintained or misused by persons and/or entities other than Boeing”.

“Boeing knew this statement was false at the time it was made but made it anyway as part of its often-used post-accident strategy to blame pilots for incidents caused solely by its own actions,” alleges the lawsuit.

The lawsuit also highlighted website articles in the following days that reported on Boeing’s statement.

“It was clear Boeing’s words were directed at Captain Fisher in attempt to paint him as the scapegoat for Boeing’s numerous failures,” alleges the lawsuit.

Having flown Boeing aircraft during his entire Alaska Airlines career, the lawsuit says that the attempts to blame him felt like a “deep, personal betrayal”.

The lawsuit singles out March 27, 2025, as an important moment after a letter from the FBI said that he “may have been the victim of criminally negligent conduct by Boeing”.

The lawsuit says that since the incident Captain Fisher has “endured profound physical and mental repercussion” and has himself been sued by two passengers.

Among the lawsuit’s complaints are personal injury, negligence, strict products liability, breach of warranty, emotional distress and defamation.

What the NTSB investigation found

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) found that the door plug separated from the aircraft because four bolts that would secure the panel from moving upward vertically had not been in place.

In June 2025, the NTSB said that the probable cause for the door plug separation was “due to Boeing’s failure to provide adequate training, guidance, and oversight necessary to ensure that manufacturing personnel could consistently and correctly comply with its parts removal process, which was intended to document and ensure that the securing bolts and hardware that were removed to facilitate rework during the manufacturing process were properly reinstalled”.

The agency also said a contributing factor was the “FAA’s ineffective compliance enforcement surveillance and audit planning activities, which failed to adequately identify and ensure that Boeing addressed the repetitive and systemic nonconformance issues associated with its parts removal process”.

AeroTime has contacted Boeing for comment.

To read Captain Fisher’s lawsuit in full visit the court’s website.

The renewed effort, which began on December 31, 2025, is being carried out by marine robotics company Ocean Infinity under a previously announced 55-day operational agreement. The search is focused on a targeted area of the southern Indian Ocean identified by Malaysian authorities as having a higher probability of locating the aircraft’s wreckage, based on updated satellite data, drift modeling, and analysis of debris recovered in past years. 

Malaysia’s Ministry of Transport said the mission builds on new technical assessments that were not available during earlier search phases. Exact coordinates of the search zone have not been publicly released, though officials have said the area covers roughly 5,800 square miles of seabed. Ocean Infinity has not disclosed details about the timing or daily scope of operations. 

The company is operating under a “no find, no fee” agreement with the Malaysian government, meaning it will only be compensated if the aircraft is located. Under the terms previously outlined by the transport ministry, the payment would be made only if wreckage is found within the defined search area. 

Ocean Infinity has searched for MH370 on multiple occasions. An initial privately funded effort in 2018 covered a large swath of the southern Indian Ocean but failed to locate the wreckage. A more recent attempt began in early 2025 but was suspended in April after unfavorable weather conditions limited operations. The current mission marks the first time the company has returned to the search area since those weather-related delays. 

Flight MH370 disappeared on March 8, 2014, less than an hour after departure, after losing contact with air traffic control while cruising over the South China Sea. Military radar data later showed the aircraft deviated sharply from its planned route and continued flying for several hours before its fuel was likely exhausted. Despite one of the largest and most expensive searches in aviation history, the aircraft has never been located. 

Over the years, several pieces of debris confirmed to be from the aircraft, including parts from the Boeing 777-200ER, have washed ashore along the coastlines of Africa and islands in the Indian Ocean. However, no debris field or fuselage section has been found, leaving the precise circumstances of the aircraft’s loss unresolved. 

Families of the passengers and crew have continued to press for answers, urging authorities not to abandon the search. Speaking to The Guardian, Danica Weeks, whose husband was on board MH370, said she hopes the renewed mission will finally bring “clarity and peace” after more than a decade of uncertainty. 

While investigators have explored a range of possible scenarios, no definitive explanation for the aircraft’s disappearance has been established. Malaysian officials have said the latest search reflects a continued commitment to providing answers, even as the mystery surrounding MH370 remains one of aviation’s most enduring and complex cases. 

Families of the deceased and officials gathered for a memorial service at Muan International Airport (MWX) on December 29, 2025, in an effort to commemorate the victims, comfort the bereaved and reaffirm commitments to identifying the cause of the crash.

The ceremony began at 09:03, local time, the exact time that the Jeju Air Boeing 737-800 collided with an embankment during an emergency landing.

The main remembrance service featured floral tributes and the screening of a memorial video along with speeches by attendees and a video message from South Korean President Lee Jae Myung.

“I know no words can fully offer comfort. As the president entrusted with protecting the lives and safety of the people, I offer my deepest apology,” said President Lee Jae Myung.

#SouthKorea President Lee Jae Myung offered his deep apologies Monday over the fatal Jeju Air plane crash that claimed 179 lives a year ago, pledging a credible probe into key questions surrounding the tragic crash. #JejuAirPlane
By Lu Xinghai pic.twitter.com/cIQRJpdnPH

— CCTV Asia Pacific (@CCTVAsiaPacific) December 29, 2025

In a separate statement on December 29, 2025, President Lee Jae Myung vowed to support the strengthening of the independence and expertise of the Aviation and Railway Accident Investigation Board (ARAIB).

He also promised to hold those responsible for the crash accountable and said that the best way to honor the victims was to ensure such tragedy never happens again.

Two people onboard the Jeju flight survived the air accident which saw the aircraft land on its belly and overshot the runway before crashing into a localizer structure.

On December 22, 2025, the Korean National Assembly voted to approve an independent cross-party investigation into the country’s worst ever aviation disaster.

The special committee will comprise 18 members, including nine from the Democratic Party of Korea, seven from the People Power Party, and two from non-negotiating groups.

A preliminary report released in January 2025, pointed to bird strikes as the likely cause of the deadly crash on December 29, 2024.

In July 2025, the Railway Accident Investigation Board said in an interim report that the Jeju Air crash may have resulted from the pilot mistakenly shutting down the wrong engine after a bird strike.

With the right engine already powerless due to the bird strike, shutting down the left engine caused a complete loss of thrust, leaving the crew with no available power.

The committee investigation will look into the cause of the crash and where the responsibility lies for the disaster.

The Jolly Green Giant has become somewhat of an icon among residents in West London and those arriving and departing from Heathrow mainly due to the mystery behind its purpose.

Over the years the firefighter training rig has prompted debate about what it’s for with some describing it as a rusty, abandoned aircraft with no windows.

On December 22, 2025, Heathrow Airport confirmed that the green firefighter training rig had reached the end of its life and had been dismantled after years of being set on fire.

In a video, Heathrow’s Project Manager, Azad Batth, explained that a plan was launched to provide the airport fire service with a new modern training simulator.

The new rig has the fuselage of an Airbus A380, the world’s largest commercial jet, with one side of the rig resembling the superjumbo and the other a Boeing 787 Dreamliner.

“Its purpose built to meet the demands of modern firefighting needs. It provides a number of firefighting scenarios, much improved over the previous rig. It has external and internal fires, for example engine, landing gear, running fuel spill, cockpit and overhead locker that will allow the airport fire and rescue to carry out training scenarios,” said Batth.

He added: “This ensures that firefighters maintain their skills and are adhering to the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) mandated training requirements.”

According to Batth, the new training rig was built in Derby and has been transported to Heathrow in sections by road.

Each section is around four meters in diameter and can be up to 14 meters in length, with some parts weighing up to 14 tons.

Azad Batth, Project Manager in Heathrow's Infrastructure Solutions team, gives us the inside scoop on the new fire training rig plane making its way from Derby to Heathrow – piece by piece!

This plane simulator mimics an A380, the largest aircraft that Heathrow operates, and… pic.twitter.com/watA7w1OLG

— HeathrowNews (@HeathrowNews) December 22, 2025

“The planning that has been involved to get those sections here has been meticulous. It has involved a number of agencies such as the Highways Agency, the Police and other airport stakeholders,” said Batth.

He added: “The rig will be used by the airport fire and rescue to maintain the competencies, and it will ensure our airport stakeholders, airlines and our passengers remain safe.”

The plan to launch an independent investigation was approved by 245 votes to one on December 22, 2025, with the probe set to start immediately for a period of 40 days, with the possibility of extension.

The independent special committee will comprise 18 members, including nine from the Democratic Party of Korea, seven from the People Power Party, and two from non-negotiating groups.

A preliminary report released in January 2025, into had pointed to bird strikes as the likely cause of the deadly crash on December 29, 2024.

In July 2025, the Railway Accident Investigation Board (ARAIB) said in an interim report that the Jeju Air crash may have resulted from the pilot mistakenly shutting down the wrong engine after a bird strike.

With the right engine already powerless due to the bird strike, shutting down the left engine caused a complete loss of thrust, leaving the crew with no available power.

The committee investigation will look into the cause of the crash and where the responsibility lies for the disaster.

The probe will also ask whether the risk of bird strikes at the airport was underestimated and whether any of the aircraft engines or any other parts were defected.

Another area of investigation will be the design, construction, and management of the Muan Airport concrete localizer structure.

Significantly, the probe will also determine whether there were attempts by government agencies to downplay or cover up the incident during the investigation.

Families of the victims have long raised opposition to the government investigation and called for an independent probe.

Two people onboard the Jeju flight survived the air accident which saw the aircraft land on its belly and overshot the runway before crashing into the localizer structure.

According to NBC News, court documents filed on December 17, 2025, saw the government accept its role in the death of 67 people that were killed in a collision as the American Eagle jet approached Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA).

“The United States admits that it owed a duty of care to Plaintiffs, which it breached, thereby proximately causing the tragic accident,” said the court filing.

The admittance came in response to the first lawsuit filed by the family of one of the victims of the January 2025 crash.

According to the Associated Press, the lawsuit said the air traffic controller violated visual separation procedures, and Black Hawk pilots failed to “maintain vigilance so as to see and avoid” the commercial jet.

American Airlines, which owns American Eagle, and PSA Airlines, which was operating the American Eagle flight on the night of the crash, were also said to have played a role in the crash.

The Associated Press also reported that the government denied any air traffic controllers, or FAA officials or Army representatives were negligent.

Attorney Robert A. Clifford, who is representing the family of the victim, said: “The United States admits the Army’s responsibility for the needless loss of life in the crash of an Army helicopter and American Airlines Flight 5342 at Reagan National Airport, as well as the FAA’s failure to follow air traffic control procedure.”

The FAA has previously said there were 85 recorded incidents between October 2021 and December 2024 in which planes and helicopters came dangerously close to one another while operating in the same Washington airspace.

Other factors believed to have contributed to the crash include the Black Hawk flying at a higher altitude than permitted and the use of visual separation.

The two aircraft collided over the Potomac River in Washington on January 29, 2025, as the PSA Airlines-operated flight, with 64 people onboard, was just half a mile away from landing at Reagan Washington National Airport.

Within the Black Hawk helicopter were three military crew members conducting a ‘check ride’, an exam that a pilot must pass to undertake certain flight duties.

On December 18, 2025, in respnse to the court fillings, the NTSB said: “The NTSB investigation into the Jan. 29, 2025, midair collision in Washington, DC, is ongoing. Recent court filings by the Department of Justice are related to civil litigation, not the NTSB investigation. The NTSB’s safety investigation is independent, and its findings, probable cause and recommendations will not be guided by DOJ determinations.”

On December 17, 2025, EASA published documents regarding A319, A320 and A321 aircraft that require forward fuselage skin panel checks following the panel issue coming to light.

EASA said the reason for the inspection was due to an Airbus supplier identifying a quality issue in production, resulting in “potential deviations from the specified thickness of various fuselage panels” delivered to the aircraft manufacturer.

“This condition, if not detected and corrected, in combination with certain repair conditions, could affect the structural integrity of the aeroplane,” said EASA.

As part of an Airbus Alert Operator Transmission (AOT) on December 16, 2025, inspection instructions for the affected panels were issued, but the EASA AD would legally enforce compliance.

The AD would require for each affected part a one-time general visual inspection and a full panel thickness measurement within six months of the effective date.

EASA said that if any crack is identified on an affected panel before the next flight, contact Airbus for approved repair instructions

Additionally, if any thickness out of the drawing tolerances is identified within 6 months after the AD effective date, then Airbus should be contacted for approved repair instructions.

According to Reuters, panels on 177 aircraft currently in service would be included within the inspection order and 451 in various stages of production at Airbus.

The panel issue arose in early December and led to Airbus trimming its delivery projections for the year from around 825 deliveries to 790.

EASA’s proposed AD will be closed for consultation on January 14, 2026.

The crash took place on December 15, 2025, approximately 2.7 kilometers southwest of the runway 33 threshold at Licenciado Adolfo López Mateos International Airport (TLC) in Toluca, Mexico. 

The aircraft involved was a Cessna 650 Citation III, registered as XA-PRO, and operated by Jetpro SA, a company that provides executive jet rentals and aviation consulting services. 

Initial local reports indicated that seven bodies were discovered within the wreckage of the aircraft before the confirmed death toll increased to 10.  

Among the victims are three children, all under the age of 10, who are believed to be from the same family, as well as five adult passengers and two pilots. 

The aircraft took off from Acapulco International Airport (ACA) at around 11:55 local time for a short-scheduled flight to Toluca’s Lic. Adolfo López Mateos International Airport (TLC). 

FlightAware data shows that the aircraft was expected to arrive in Toluca at approximately 12:31 local time, with a planned flight duration of about 29 minutes. 

However, after receiving clearance to land, the crew reported that they were initiating a go-around. According to ADS-B data, the aircraft then entered a descending left turn before crashing. 

Local authorities reported that the crash resulted in a significant fire, leading to mass evacuations. Video footage shared online captures plumes of thick black smoke, rising from the site of the crash. 

Mexico State Civil Protection Coordinator Adrián Hernández said the aircraft had seemingly attempted to land on a soccer field but had collided with the metal roof of a nearby warehouse that contained fuel and gas tanks. 

An investigation into the accident is currently underway, with investigators reportedly concentrating on the possibility that an engine issue caused the crash. 

On December 10, 2025, Homendy held a combatant press conference and wrote to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees to vehemently oppose sections of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would allow military aircraft to operate without ADS-B.

ADS-B is an advanced surveillance technology that provides an aircraft’s location to air traffic control and other aircraft pilots.

In Homendy’s letter she wrote that provisions in the NDAA would “roll back broadcast requirements to the very conditions that existed at the time of the [PSA Airlines-Black Hawk] accident”.

Following the fatal accident in January 2025 when a PSA Airlines regional jet collided with a US Black Hawk the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Department of Transportation entered into an agreement requiring military aircraft within the DC airspace to broadcast their positions ADS-B Out.

The NDAA doesn’t fix what failed on January 29th.
Same risks. Same gaps.
Different bill.#SaferSkiesForAll pic.twitter.com/wkX0FERqWU

— FamiliesofFlight5342 (@famofflight5342) December 10, 2025

“We should be working together in partnership to prevent the next accident, not inviting history to repeat itself by recreating the same conditions that were in place on January 29th,” Homendy said.

Homendy added that the new rule proposal was a “significant safety setback” that the NTSB was not consulted on.

“It’s a safety whitewash. If it sounds like I’m mad, I am mad. This is shameful,” said Homendy during her press conference.

The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, released a joint statement criticizing the inclusion of a provision in the NDAA “widening a loophole for military helicopters”.

“As drafted, the NDAA protects the status quo, allowing military aircraft to keep flying in DC airspace under different rules and with outdated transmission requirements. This comes as Pentagon data shows a spike in military aircraft accidents since 2020,” wrote Chairman Ted Cruz and Ranking Member Maria Cantwell.

The Senate Commerce Committee has been working towards establishing the Rotor Act, a bipartisan bill that closes the “dangerous exemption” that allows military aircraft to operate in domestic skies without communicating their position.

In a statement, members of the Armed Services Committees said they “care deeply about and are fully committed to ensuring aviation safety”.

Homendy said that the NTSB investigation into the DCA crash that killed 67 people is partly focused on “overall limitations and gaps in the traffic awareness and collision avoidance technologies such as ADS-B” to both the Black Hawk and PSA Airlines aircraft.

In a major blow to Airbus on December 3, 2025, the company downgraded its target of around 825 deliveries this year to 790, citing a “recent supplier quality issue on fuselage panels impacting its A320 Family delivery flow”.

According to Reuters, the fuselage panel flaw involves affected parts having the wrong thickness following manufacturing processes carried out by Sofitec Aero.

The media outlet also reported on December 3, 2025, that the defect had been discovered on more panels than previously thought.

Reuters also said that a presentation shown to airlines stated that 628 aircraft needed to be inspected, including 168 already in service. Over 240 are in assembly lines, according to the news website.

Additionally, the Air Current reported that any repairs could take three to five weeks.

In a statement passed to Reuters, Airbus said: “We confirm the population of aircraft potentially impacted is both in production and in service.”

The quality issue affecting fuselage panels came to light earlier this week following a torrid week for Airbus. On November 28, 2025, airlines were also ordered to apply precautionary software updates to the type’s elevator aileron computers after Airbus and EASA flagged a vulnerability that required immediate attention.

Despite the revision to delivery figures, Airbus said that it would maintain its financial guidance as provided at the nine-month 2025 results.

“The Company still targets an EBIT Adjusted of around € 7.0 billion and Free Cash Flow before Customer Financing of around € 4.5 billion,” a spokesperson for Airbus said.

Even without the fuselage panel issue, it was looking increasingly unlikely that Airbus would hit its target of around 820 commercial aircraft deliveries this year.

Although Airbus is yet to confirm its final deliveries and orders for November 2025, it’s believed around 72 aircraft were received by its customers.

This would bring the total number of deliveries to 657, requiring more than 160 aircraft to be delivered in December 2025. The current December record stands at 138 aircraft, set in 2019.

Jose Alejandro Zamora Yrala appeared at Southwark Crown Court in London on December 1, 2025, ahead of his planed trial after the UK’s Serious Fraud Office launched an investigation in October 2023.

The Serious Fraud Office said that between 2019 and 2023, Zamora Yrala “defrauded customers by falsifying documentation that related to the origin and status of CFM56 engine parts”.  

CFM International’s CFM56 engines are used to power Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 planes and are operated widely by airlines.  

AOG Technic’s customers included airlines, maintenance repair operators and engine parts suppliers.      

In October 2023, CFM International said the company had identified 126 engines suspected of being fitted with falsely documented parts. 

At the time it was understood that the “majority of the parts involved are non-serialized items like bolts, nuts, washers, dampers, seals and bushings,” with CFM unaware of any fraudulent documentation associated with life-limited parts. 

Aircraft were grounded while airlines conducted checks on planes that may be affected after regulators including the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) advised owners, operators, maintenance organizations, and distributors to inspect their records.  

“Planes in the UK and across the world were grounded in 2023 after the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority, the United States’ FAA and EASA issued safety alerts to airlines that may have bought or installed AOG’s parts,” said a spokesperson for the Serious Fraud Office.    

Airlines caught up in the scandal included Delta Air Lines, American Airlines, Southwest Airlines, TAP, Ryanair, WestJet and Virgin Australia. 

The Serious Fraud Office has been working with Portuguese authorities into the supply of suspected fraudulent safety certifications and parts. The Portuguese investigation remains ongoing. 

“This significant and audacious fraud threatened trust in the aviation industry and risked public safety on a global scale. I’m extremely proud that we’ve acted swiftly to secure this conviction and wish to thank law enforcement partners in Portugal for their speedy and critical assistance,” Emma Luxton, Director of Operations at the Serious Fraud Office. 

On December 6, 2023, the Serious Fraud Office announced it has arrested an individual during a dawn raid at a property after launching a criminal investigation into AOG Technics.

Zamora Yrala will appear at Southwark Crown Court on February 23, 2026, for sentencing.     

The EAD, issued on November 28, 2025 and effective November 29, 2025 at 23:59 UTC, requires operators of affected aircraft to replace or modify each impacted Elevator Aileron Computer, known as ELAC B L104, with a serviceable ELAC B L103+ before further passenger operations. Limited ferry flights of up to three cycles, without passengers, are permitted only to reposition aircraft for maintenance.

What the fix actually involves

Airbus’ Alert Operators Transmission (AOT) states the issue is limited to ELAC B hardware fitted with software standard L104, which the manufacturer says may be vulnerable to data corruption in exposure to solar flares.

Depending on aircraft configuration, the AOT allows either uploading the L103+ software standard or physically replacing the ELAC units with serviceable equipment, a split that helps explain why most aircraft can return to service quickly, while a smaller subset may require more time and spares availability.

Operators report limited disruption as updates roll out

On November 29, 2025, French transport minister Philippe Tabarot said Airbus had corrected the issue on “more than 5,000 aircraft” between November 28 and the early hours of November 29. This represents most of the roughly 6,000 A320 family jets initially flagged as requiring immediate software modification or replacement.

Multiple major operators said the required change was largely executed over a short time window, with some airlines expecting only minor delays rather than widespread cancellations. Lufthansa Group, for example, said it did not expect cancellations due to the precautionary action, while other carriers issued similar operational updates.

Elsewhere, airlines with large A320 Family exposure warned of a longer tail of disruption. Avianca said it would face significant operational disruptions over the next 10 days and temporarily closed ticket sales for travel dates through December 8 to facilitate reaccommodation.

In India, local reporting citing DGCA updates suggested the software upgrades were being executed at scale across domestic A320 family fleets, with operators working to complete compliance within the mandated timeframe.

Some operators, however, continue to face challenges. Colombia’s Avianca said more than 70 percent of its fleet was affected and warned of ongoing disruption over the next ten days. The airline suspended ticket sales until December 8, 2025.

The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) published an Emergency Airworthiness Directive (EAD) on November 28, 2025, requiring operators to replace or modify a specific Elevator Aileron Computer (ELAC B L104) before the aircraft’s next flight. The directive follows an Alert Operators Transmission issued by Airbus the same day.

JetBlue incident reportedly triggered the investigation

The directive reportedly stems from an incident on October 30, 2025, involving a JetBlue A320-200, registration N605JB, operating flight B6-1230 from Cancun (CUN) to Newark (EWR). While cruising at FL350 about 70 nautical miles southwest of Tampa (TPA), the aircraft experienced an inflight upset described by the crew as a flight-control problem. The aircraft descended rapidly, levelled briefly around 20,000 feet, and then continued descending for a precautionary landing in Tampa.

According to initial reports, at least three people on board sustained injuries, including head injuries, during the upset. Passengers requiring treatment were taken to local hospitals, while others were assessed at the airport. JetBlue dispatched a replacement aircraft, which later diverted to La Guardia (LGA) before continuing to Newark, arriving with significant delay.

Airbus’s preliminary assessment identified a malfunction of the ELAC installed on the aircraft as a possible contributing factor. Regulators warn that such a malfunction, if uncorrected, could in extreme cases trigger uncommanded elevator movement severe enough to risk exceeding the aircraft’s structural limits.

Mandatory replacement before next flight

EASA has designated all A319, A320 and A321 variants equipped with the affected ELAC as “Group 1” aircraft. For these, airlines must remove and replace the computer with a serviceable version (ELAC B L103 or higher) before the aircraft can return to passenger service. The directive allows a short ferry flight of up to three cycles, without passengers, solely to reposition the aircraft for maintenance.

Aircraft that do not feature the affected hardware are prohibited from being modified back into a configuration that would reintroduce the older ELAC standard.

Airbus links vulnerability to solar-radiation data corruption

Airbus said its analysis indicated that intense solar radiation may, under specific conditions, corrupt flight-control data processed by the affected ELAC standard. The company has identified a significant number of in-service A320 Family aircraft as potentially susceptible and requested immediate precautionary action from operators.

Airbus acknowledged that the required work will cause operational disruption but said safety remains its overriding priority.

Short-term disruptions expected across global fleets

While the number of affected aircraft has not been publicly disclosed, the broad applicability of the directive means airlines are expected to face near-term scheduling challenges as ELAC replacements are carried out. The A320 Family remains the most widely used single-aisle fleet globally, and the “before next flight” requirement is likely to create pressure on maintenance capacity in the coming days.

Airbus said it is working closely with operators and regulators to ensure the fleet remains safe to fly.

The investigation’s early findings appear to confirm that the accident began with a structural failure during takeoff. According to airport surveillance video and flight data, the left engine and its pylon separated from the wing just after rotation. The engine, a GE CF6 mounted on the No. 1 (left) position, broke free with its pylon assembly intact and traveled up and over the fuselage before falling to the ground beside the runway. A fire ignited on the detached engine as it tumbled, and a second fire broke out at the pylon’s attachment point on the wing. 

The airplane briefly became airborne, climbing no higher than 100 feet above ground level, according to flight tracking data. It cleared the blast fence beyond the end of Runway 17R, but the left main landing gear struck the roof of a UPS warehouse located just south of the airport boundary, the report said. The MD-11 then descended into a storage yard and two additional buildings, including a petroleum recycling facility, before coming to rest roughly 3,000 feet southeast of the initial impact point. Most of the structure and cargo were consumed by fire. 
 
Airport surveillance images included in the preliminary report show a dramatic and revealing sequence in the first seconds of flight. As the MD-11 rotates for takeoff, the left engine and its pylon can be seen breaking away from the wing, then arcing upward over the fuselage with flames trailing behind. A second fire then erupts at the point where the pylon tore free from the wing, burning intensely as the aircraft tries to climb. The visuals make clear that the engine did not detach downward or separate cleanly — it broke away with enough force to travel up and over the airplane, consistent with a structural failure in the pylon assembly, rather than for some other reason such as an uncontained engine failure. 

Investigators are now focusing attention on the pylon structure that held the engine to the wing. The NTSB’s structures group documented that both the forward and aft lugs of the left pylon’s aft mount had fractured. The lug fractures showed evidence of fatigue cracking on several surfaces, along with areas of overstress failure indicating a final, sudden break. The NTSB noted the spherical bearing inside the aft mount was also found with its outer race fractured circumferentially, leaving the bearing’s ball exposed. Portions of the left-wing clevis and the pylon attachment hardware remained connected to a wing fragment found in the debris field near the runway. 

The right engine and pylon separated from the wing during the accident sequence, but were found together at the site. Unlike the left side, the right pylon remained attached to the wing clevis. Investigators recovered fragments of engine fan blades from the No. 1 engine along the runway, but the NTSB has not cited any evidence of an engine failure before separation. 

Both the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and flight data recorder (FDR) were recovered and contained usable data. The CVR held just over two hours of audio, including the entire period of the accident. The FDR recorded parameters for 24 flights over roughly 63 hours, including the accident flight. 

Maintenance history reviewed by investigators shows that the aircraft had accumulated 92,992 hours and 21,043 cycles. Required visual inspections of the left pylon aft mount had last been completed in October 2021. The NTSB said UPS performed required maintenance on the pylon components in October 2025, including routine lubrication on the parts that connect the engine pylon to the wing. Two cycle-based special detailed inspections — one for the pylon aft mount lugs and another for the wing clevis — were not yet due and had not been performed. 

The NTSB also noted similarities between this incident and a DC-10 crash in the late 1970s. In the preliminary report, investigators said the circumstances echo key elements of a 1979 American Airlines Flight 191 accident in Chicago, when a DC-10 lost its left engine and pylon during takeoff. In that case, the engine separated along with part of the wing’s leading edge, causing the aircraft to roll left and crash shortly after liftoff.

Following the accident, UPS voluntarily grounded its MD-11 fleet on November 7 at Boeing’s recommendation. The FAA then issued an emergency airworthiness directive on November 8 prohibiting further flight of MD-11 and MD-11F aircraft until inspections and corrective actions could be completed. A second emergency directive, issued on November 14, expanded the grounding to include DC-10 series aircraft due to their similar pylon design. 

On October 14, 2025, passengers were boarding an SAS Airbus A320neo at Oslo Gardermoen Airport (OSL) in Norway when smoke was detected coming from a customer’s hand luggage.  

Quick thinking cabin staff put on smoke hoods as the aircraft was evacuated, and a halon extinguisher was deployed in an attempt to put out the fire that had developed.  

According to Norway’s Accident Investigation Authority, crew members brought the suitcase out of the aircraft and airport staff took over. 

The incident report stated that after the first attempt to extinguish the flames, the fire restarted. 

Those that were taken to hospital were said to have been suspected of inhaling toxic fumes, but thankfully all were discharged within 48 hours. 

A preliminary report by the Accident Investigation Authority was published on November 18, 2025, around four weeks after the incident.  

Investigators said that the A320neo, registered SE-RUR, had been due to fly to Bergen Flesland Airport (BGO). 

Around 50 people had boarded the plane when smoke was spotted, in what investigators described as a “serious aviation incident”. The aircraft has since been operating as per normal 

Several airlines have taken steps to limit the threat from lithium batteries catching fire in the cabin. Vietnam Airlines, Vietjet Air and Emirates have all banned the use of power banks on flights. 

There have been an increasing number of incidents in which batteries have reportedly caused fires on planes with pilots forced to initiate emergency landings. 

On November 15, 2025, the FAA stated that all MD-10 and DC-10 aircraft are required to undergo inspection and if needed, repairs. 

“This action expands last week’s directive after new analysis showed these aircraft share key design features with the MD-11,” explained the FAA.  

AD 2025-23-53 was sent to owners and operators of the “Boeing Company Model MD-11, MD-11F, MD-10F, MD-10-30F, DC-10-10, DC-10-10F, DC-10-15, DC-10-30, DC-10-30F (KC-10A and KDC-10), DC-10-40, and DC-10-40F planes”. 

A previous Airworthiness Directive was issued on November 8, 2025, to all McDonnell Douglas MD-11 and MD-11F operators after UPS Flight 2976 crashed shortly after takeoff from Louisville Muhammad Ali International Airport (SDF), killing 14 people, including all three crew and 11 on the ground. 

The directive formalized a step already taken by the two largest MD-11 operators, UPS and FedEx.  

The FAA was prompted to issue the directive after the left-hand engine and pylon detached from the plane during takeoff. 

“The cause of the detachment is currently under investigation. This condition could result in loss of continued safe flight and landing,” said the FAA. 

Explaining the latest Airworthiness Directive, the agency said it was “issuing this emergency AD because the agency has determined the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design”. 

According to the FAA, the updated directive affects 10 additional US registered planes. Flightradar24 identified eight affected aircraft that had flown in the last two months.  

These included four aerial firefighting DC-10s, two aircraft operated by Omega Air, one by Orbis Flying Eye Hospital, and one by TAB Cargo.  

An ongoing investigation into the UPS crash is being conducted by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). 

Authorities identified the victims as Alexander Wurm, 53, and his daughter Serena Wurm, 22, of Ignite the Fire Ministry, an evangelical Christian organization based in South Florida. The pair were enroute to Montego Bay, Jamaica, on a mission to deliver aid to communities affected by Hurricane Melissa. 

The crash occurred around 10:15 a.m. local time in the Windsor Bay neighborhood of Coral Springs, about eight miles northwest of FXE. The twin-engine turboprop went down in a residential lake shortly after departure, striking a fence and scattering debris across nearby backyards. 

According to an air traffic control recording of the flight, there was no indication of trouble as the pilot responded normally to ATC instructions to climb to 4,000 feet and turn right to a heading of 120 degrees. The pilot read back each clearance until the controller’s final transmission, during which an ATC altitude alert tone can be heard in the background. Moments later, the controller advised the pilot of the nearest airport and said, “I can see you descending.” The pilot did not respond.

Surveillance video obtained by local news outlets showed the airplane clipping part of a fence and hitting the water, sending up a large splash. One of the aircraft’s wheels landed near a backyard pool. Video posted online also appeared to show the moment of impact, with water and debris flying into the air. 

Emergency crews from Coral Springs Fire Rescue, along with Broward County Sheriff’s Office dive teams, responded within minutes. They searched the lake for several hours before locating the wreckage and confirming that both occupants had died. No injuries were reported on the ground. 

According to Coral Springs Fire Department Deputy Chief Mike Moser, multiple 911 calls were received from residents reporting a loud boom moments before the crash. Officials said recovery operations continued into Tuesday as investigators worked to remove the wreckage. 

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are investigating the accident. Flight-tracking data show the aircraft, registered as N30HG, took off from Runway 27 at FXE around 10:14 a.m. and crashed roughly one minute later. 

Weather reports from nearby airports indicated partly cloudy skies, moderate winds, and cloud bases around 2,000 feet, with towering cumulus clouds in the area. Visibility was reported to be greater than six miles. 

The aircraft, a 1976 Beechcraft King Air B100, was registered to International Air Services Inc. of Carson City, Nevada. Records show the airplane was configured for cargo and passenger transport, typical of aircraft used in humanitarian and charter operations. 

It was not clear what type of relief supplies were loaded aboard the King Air or what its takeoff weight may have been when it departed FXE.

In a statement, Ignite the Fire Ministry described Alexander and Serena Wurm’s final flight as an act of service. “Evangelist Wurm is the founder of Ignite the Fire Ministry, dedicated to empowering youth through missions and evangelism across the Caribbean,” the organization said. “Together, their final journey embodied selflessness and courage, reminding us of the power of service and love.” 

The NTSB typically releases a preliminary report within two to three weeks, providing factual details about the aircraft’s condition, pilot qualifications, and weather data. 

The order, issued as Emergency Airworthiness Directive 2025-23-51, comes four days after UPS Flight 2976, operated by the MD-11F registration N259UP, crashed shortly after takeoff from Louisville Muhammad Ali International Airport (SDF), killing 14 people, including all three crew and 11 on the ground.

According to the FAA, inspections and any corrective actions must be completed “before further flight.” The agency warned that the condition identified after the crash could “compromise the aircraft’s ability to remain under control and land safely.”

UPS and FedEx ground their MD-11 fleets

The directive formalizes a step already taken by the two largest MD-11 operators. UPS and FedEx had grounded their combined fleets of around 50 aircraft after Boeing, which inherited the program through its merger with McDonnell Douglas, advised a precautionary halt.

UPS operates 26 MD-11s, and FedEx operates 28, representing approximately 9% and 4% of their respective fleets. Both carriers stated that they are transitioning their operations to Boeing 767 and 777 freighters, although some delays are expected. Western Global Airlines, the only other US operator, has already parked most of its aircraft.

First flown in 1990, the MD-11 ended production in 2000 and now serves mainly as a cargo aircraft. Around 100 remain active worldwide, mostly with UPS and FedEx.

The tri-jet has a history of challenging handling characteristics and several high-profile accidents, including FedEx Flight 80 in Tokyo and Lufthansa Cargo Flight 8460 in Riyadh. Both FedEx and UPS had already planned to retire the type in favor of newer, more efficient freighters, a process that may now accelerate.

Cargo disruption expected

The grounding removes a key share of long-haul cargo capacity during the holiday shipping peak. UPS and FedEx say they can reroute shipments, but network disruptions are likely until inspections are complete.

All MD-11s will remain grounded until operators meet FAA requirements. The NTSB’s investigation will determine whether further actions are needed across the aging fleet.

Investigators focus on engine separation

Preliminary findings suggest the left engine and its pylon detached during takeoff. Video shows the aircraft climbing briefly before rolling left and crashing into nearby buildings, triggering a major fire.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has recovered the flight recorders, and early analysis indicates a continuous cockpit warning bell before impact. Investigators are also reviewing recent maintenance at ST Engineering in Texas, where structural repairs were carried out weeks before the crash.

A UPS cargo jet crashed and exploded in flames shortly after takeoff from Louisville Muhammad Ali International Airport (SDF) on November 4, 2025, killing at least nine people and injuring 11 others, according to Kentucky officials. The McDonnell Douglas MD-11 freighter, operating as UPS Flight 2976 to Honolulu, caught fire moments after liftoff and crashed near the company’s massive Worldport hub. 

Fire and impact near Worldport hub 

According to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the widebody freighter went down at approximately 17:15. local time on November 4, 2025, after departing Runway 17R. The aircraft climbed only briefly, reaching no more than 200 feet, before rolling left and crashing in an industrial area beyond the runway. The impact triggered a massive explosion and fire, sending black smoke towering over the airport. 

Authorities said the aircraft was carrying about 25,000 gallons (94,600 liters) of jet fuel at the time of the crash, which fueled the extensive post-impact fire that engulfed nearby buildings and vehicles.

Footage circulating on social media shows the MD-11 already ablaze as it accelerated down the runway, its left engine trailing flames. Witnesses reported seeing “sparks or fire” from the left engine moments before the aircraft left the ground. 

The jet became airborne for only a few seconds before crashing off the end of the runway, igniting multiple structures near UPS’s facility. Emergency crews rushed to the scene as fuel-fed fires spread through the debris field. 

Casualties and emergency response 

During a late-evening press conference on November 4, 2025, Louisville Mayor Craig Greenberg confirmed four fatalities on the ground and said officials believe the total number of deaths will rise to at least seven once recovery operations conclude.

“We still have first responders actively searching the scene right now,” Greenberg said. “There are more than a hundred firefighters from across the region still working to make it safe and to locate any additional victims.” 

Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear earlier described the incident as “heartbreaking,” noting that the death toll was expected to increase. Eleven people were taken to hospitals with injuries, according to city officials. 

Louisville Fire Department Chief Brian O’Neal said the blaze was now “almost entirely contained” but that crews were continuing a grid-by-grid search across the crash area, which spans nearly a city block. He urged residents near the site not to touch any debris and to report it via an online form being set up by city authorities. 

O’Neal also confirmed that no hazardous cargo was onboard and that fuel and oil leaks from nearby storage tanks had been contained after several minor secondary explosions. A shelter-in-place order remains in effect within a one-mile radius while air-quality monitoring continues. 

Louisville Muhammad Ali International Airport will remain closed overnight but is expected to reopen on November 5, 2025. Officials advised travelers to check with airlines for cancellations or delays. Louisville’s public schools will remain closed on November 5, 2025, the mayor said. 

Investigation and NTSB deployment 

Mayor Greenberg announced that a 28-member National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) team will arrive in Louisville by 10:00 local time on November 5, 2025, to begin the investigation. The NTSB will lead the inquiry under the federal Family Assistance Act, which coordinates support between the agency and UPS for the families of victims.

The FAA confirmed the aircraft involved was MD-11 F N259UP, built in 1991 and operated by UPS since 2006. Investigators will analyze flight data and cockpit voice recorders, maintenance logs, and operational records to determine the cause. 

UPS issued the following statement: “At approximately 5:20 pm ET tonight, UPS Flight 2976 from Louisville, KY, to Honolulu, an MD-11 with three crewmembers onboard, was involved in an accident in Louisville. At this time, we have not confirmed any injuries/casualties. UPS will release more facts as they become available, but the National Transportation Safety Board is in charge of the investigation and will be the primary source of information about the official investigation.” 

Aircraft and operational background 

The MD-11, a three-engine derivative of the DC-10, is known for its demanding handling characteristics during takeoff and landing. While the model has been phased out by many passenger carriers, it remains a workhorse of the global air-cargo industry, including fleets operated by UPS and FedEx. 

Louisville’s Worldport is UPS’s global logistics hub, processing hundreds of flights daily. The crash caused a temporary shutdown of all airport operations and multiple diversions. By late evening on November 4, 2025, firefighters continued to cool the wreckage and monitor air quality across the surrounding neighborhoods. 

The weather at the time of the crash was clear with calm winds. The NTSB stated that an initial briefing is expected before noon on November 5, 2025, with a preliminary report to follow within approximately 10 days. 

The US Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts confirmed on October 27, 2025, that Praneeth Kumar Usiripalli, 28, was arrested after Lufthansa flight 431 was diverted to Boston Logan International Airport (BOS). 

It is alleged that on October 25, 2025, Usiripalli stabbed a 17-year-old male passenger in the shoulder area and then stabbed a second 17-year-old male passenger in the back of the head. 

According to official documents following meal service, the first teenager was sleeping lightly in a middle seat when he allegedly awoke to see Usiripalli standing over him. The suspect then used his right hand to strike the teenager in the left clavicle area with a metal fork. 

Usiripalli then allegedly lunged towards the second teenager, seated to the right of the first victim, and struck him in the back of his head with the fork. The second teenager suffered a laceration to the rear of his head. 

Court documents said: “When flight crew members attempted to subdue Usiripalli, he allegedly raised his hand, formed a gun with his fingers, put it in his mouth and pulled an imaginary trigger. Immediately afterwards, Usiripalli allegedly turned toward a female passenger to his left and slapped her with his hand. Usiripalli also allegedly attempted to slap a flight crew member.”  

Usiripalli was previously admitted to the US on a student visa but presently does not have lawful status in the country. 

In a statement Lufthansa said: “The diversion was necessitated by the behavior of an unruly passenger, who was taken into custody by local authorities upon arrival. Consequently, the onward flight to Frankfurt did not continue as scheduled. The safety and well-being of our passengers and crew are always Lufthansa’s highest priority.”

The suspect was charged with one count of assault with a dangerous weapon with intent to do bodily harm while traveling on an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the US. 

Usiripalli could face a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, up to three years of supervised release and a fine of up to $250,000.  

On October 22, 2025, the Finnish flag carrier announced that it had been informed by the original seat cover manufacturer that the “impact of washing on the fire protection of the seat covers had not been verified in the required manner”. 

Finnair subsequently pulled the eight affected aircraft from service, resulting in the cancellation of around 70 flights, affecting the travel plans of around 11,000 customers.   

According to Finnair, it was originally alerted to the issue on October 13, 2025, and expects the eight A321s to be back in service by the end of the month. The first aircraft has already resumed operations. 

Pekka Korhonen, SVP Technical Operations at Finnair, said: “We are deeply sorry for the inconvenience and disruption this has caused our customers. The safe operation of our flights is the foundation of everything we do. Once we received information that the impact of washing on the fire protection of the seat covers had not been verified in the required manner, it was clear that the aircraft had to remain on the ground until the issue was resolved.” 

The airline has said that the affected seat covers were manufactured by a long-standing Finnair partner, based on specifications provided by the original seat manufacturer.  

“The covers have been washed in accordance with the information received from the original seat manufacturer,” a spokesperson for Finnair explained. “Seats are typically washed every two years. Washing is a standard cleaning method for aircraft seats and is used across the rest of Finnair’s fleet.” 

New seat covers from multiple suppliers are now being installed to allow the aircraft to return to service. In the meantime, Finnair has leased two aircraft with crew to operate part of its network.  

The aircraft, registered N17327, was operating flight UA1093 from Denver (DEN) to Los Angeles (LAX) on October 16, 2025, when it was struck by an unidentified object at an altitude of around 36,000 ft (10,900 m). The crew diverted to Salt Lake City (SLC), where the aircraft landed safely. One pilot sustained a minor arm injury, and passengers later continued their journey on a replacement aircraft.

Initial reports suggested the damage could have been caused by space debris or a meteorite, an unprecedented scenario that prompted an investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 

WindBorne CEO: “Extremely concerning and unacceptable”

In a statement released on October 21, WindBorne said it began investigating the event after learning of a possible connection on the evening of October 19, and now believes the “foreign object debris” (FOD) was “likely a WindBorne balloon.”

WindBorne added that it was “grateful that to our knowledge there were no serious injuries and no loss of pressurization” as a result of the impact.

WindBorne cofounder and CEO John Dean said on X that telemetry data from the company’s balloon network suggested one of its vehicles likely intersected with United flight 1093’s path over Utah.

He said WindBorne immediately reviewed its data and contacted authorities: “We learned about UA1093 and the potential that it was related to one of our balloons at 11 p.m. PT on Sunday and immediately looked into it.”

Dean described the outcome as “extremely concerning and unacceptable,” citing visible spallation on the inside of the cockpit windshield that caused minor injury to a pilot. “The system is designed to not pose a risk to human life in the worst-case event of a collision, but I’m not okay with any incident resulting in injury,” he wrote.

Operational and design changes underway

WindBorne said it has conducted more than 4,000 launches and works in coordination with the FAA, filing NOTAMs for every balloon it deploys. Each balloon weighs 2.4 pounds (1.1 kg) at launch and becomes lighter during flight, in line with FAA Part 101 and ICAO weight limits designed to ensure safety at altitude.

Following the incident, the company said it had already rolled out software changes to minimize time spent between 30,000 and 40,000 ft, where most commercial aircraft cruise, and is accelerating plans to integrate live flight-data avoidance to automatically steer clear of aircraft even at non-standard altitudes.

Dean added that WindBorne is also developing new hardware designs to reduce impact force and concentration, while continuing to coordinate with both the FAA and NTSB.

The NTSB and FAA have not yet confirmed the cause of the incident. The United aircraft diverted to Salt Lake City (SLC) after the strike and landed safely. One pilot sustained a minor arm injury, and passengers were later transferred to a replacement aircraft. 

WindBorne says United 737 MAX likely struck its weather balloon

WindBorne Systems has said that one of its high-altitude weather balloons was likely involved in the incident that damaged a United Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 8 on October 16, 2025.

Telemetry data suggested one of the company’s balloons may have struck the aircraft at 36,000 feet.

Read the full update here

A United Airlines flight suffered a cracked windshield after suffering an impact from possible space debris as it flew a domestic US flight. The crew managed to land the aircraft and there were no serious injuries among any of the 140 passengers and crew. This could be the first incident of space debris hitting an aircraft, according to authorities.

The flight involved a United Boeing 737 MAX 8 on October 16, 2025. The aircraft, registered as N17327, was operating flight UA1093 from Denver (DEN) to Los Angeles when the incident unfolded. According to the Aviation Herald, was en route between the two airports flying at 36,000ft (10,900m) around 180 nautical miles southeast of Salt Lake City in Utah.

The aircraft was then struck by an unidentified object on the first officer’s main windshield, showering the cockpit with glass fragments. Luckily, the outer layer of the multilayered windshield was only damaged, and the crew elected to divert to Salt Lake City Airport (SLC) as a precautionary measure. The crew initially descended to 26,000ft before continuing their descent and landing safely on runway 16L at Salt Lake City about 50 minutes after leaving their cruising altitude.

Passengers aboard US 1093 were transferred to a replacement Boeing 737 MAX 9 to continue their flight and made it to Los Angeles with a delay of around six hours.

Photos posted on social media show damage to the exterior of the aircraft’s windshield, with the co-pilot’s side completely shattered on the outer layer and an impact area on the upper right-hand corner. There are also scorch marks on the windshield, suggesting this was possibly caused by space debris or a meteorite. Meanwhile, internal shots show a pilot’s bloodied arm.

United Airlines 737 MAX pilot injured after the windshield cracked at 36,000 while flying from Denver to Los Angeles on Thursday.

Reports have suggested the possibility of the aircraft being hit by falling space debris or a small meteorite, though this remains unconfirmed.… pic.twitter.com/8qNg6aA0uE

— Breaking Aviation News & Videos (@aviationbrk) October 18, 2025

Based on images of the damage to the windshield taken after the incident, many have speculated that the damage was likely caused by impact with a solid object rather than a simple malfunction with the windshield itself. While foreign object debris (FOD) or bird strikes often occur at significantly lower altitudes in and around airports, a commercial aircraft being struck by debris while flying as high as 36,000ft is almost unprecedented.

While the airline and the authorities are not ruling out other possible causes, suspicions are focusing on the space debris or meteorite theories. It is plausible that the windshield could have suffered an electrical arcing malfunction, which resulted in the scorch marks seen in the photos. There is another theory that the aircraft encountered a hailstorm, although, at such a high altitude, such an occurrence would be rare.

However, should it be concluded that it was indeed a piece of space debris striking the aircraft, then it would be the first incident of its kind with space debris hitting a commercial airliner.

United Airlines Boeing 737 MAX hit by suspected space debris midair at 36,000 ft – the first incident of its kind in aviation history pic.twitter.com/SzFZnF4nOX

— non aesthetic things (@PicturesFoIder) October 20, 2025

According to Flightradar, the aircraft remained on the ground in Salt Lake City for three days, undergoing repairs before re-entering service and operating a flight from Salt Lake City to Chicago as US 3864. During its time on the ground, investigators will have been focusing on the damage caused to the airframe and what exactly might have caused it.

According to ch-aviation, the aircraft involved, N17327, is only around 22 months old, having been delivered to United in December 2023. It is configured to seat up to 166 passengers across two cabin classes, with 16 in business class and 150 in economy class.

In the past, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has said that the risk of a piece of space debris impacting a commercial airliner was minimal, adding that there was a one-in-a-trillion chance of a passenger receiving an injury from such an occurrence.

As reported by the Times of India, the country’s aviation safety regulator, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), has asked Air India to reinspect the emergency power source system known as the RAT (Ram Air Turbine) for stowage integrity in all aircraft whose power conditioning module (PCM) was replaced in the recent past.

A Ram Air Turbine is an emergency backup system in aircraft that deploys to provide hydraulic and electrical power when primary power sources (the aircraft engines) fail. It works by using the aircraft’s forward motion to spin a small turbine, which drops from the underside of the fuselage, and provides power to critical flight control systems and avionics, allowing pilots to remain in control of vital aircraft systems in the event of an emergency.

The RAT is designed for emergencies like a dual-engine failure or total electrical system failure and was seen deployed when AI flight 171 suffered a dual-engine flameout and subsequently crashed upon takeoff in Ahmedabad, India, in June 2025.

However, the advisory was primarily driven by an incident that took place on October 4, 2025, when Air India flight AI117, operating from Amritsar (ATQ) to Birmingham (BHX), experienced automatic deployment of the RAT at approximately 500 feet during descent. The aircraft landed safely, and all onboard systems reportedly functioned normally throughout the flight, according to the airline.

According to a DGCA advisory, “Air India has been advised to review the work package of ‘D’ Check for the actions required in view of the change of PCM module, for any discrepancies.” The regulator explained that this system is rarely used in day-to-day operations and typically activates only when both engines fail or a major systems failure occurs—making its deployment a serious event.

However, Air India has clarified that despite the uncommanded activation of the RAT during the latter stages of flight AI117 on October 4, 2025, all onboard electrical and hydraulic parameters were reported to be normal on the aircraft at the time of the incident.

On October 6, 2025, following the AI117 incident in Birmingham, the Federation of Indian Pilots (FIP) requested the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to inspect the electrical systems on all Boeing 787 aircraft operating in India.

In a letter to the DGCA, FIP President GS Randhawa noted that the Aircraft Health Monitoring (AHM) system on the Boeing 787 had detected a fault in the Bus Power Control Unit (BPCU), which may have triggered the RAT deployment. “The Aircraft Health Monitoring system picked up a fault of the Bus Power Control Unit, which may have caused the auto deployment of RAT,” Randhawa said.

The BPCU is a critical component that manages an aircraft’s electrical power distribution, and any malfunction could disrupt power management and activate backup systems. The FIP said the incident highlights potential systemic electrical vulnerabilities in Boeing 787 aircraft. The federation referenced multiple past incidents and stressed the need for thorough checks of all B787 aircraft in the country.

Following that letter, India’s Civil Aviation Minister Ram Mohan Naidu said, “The DGCA is already on the job. And once we get to know more details, we are going to reach out to the necessary stakeholders to further see what the necessary things are that we need to do so that these things don’t happen.”

Besides Air India, DGCA has spread its investigation wider, and has asked aircraft manufacturer Boeing to provide a comprehensive report outlining the preventive measures to be implemented with respect to the uncommanded RAT deployment incident.

The regulator has also asked Boeing to provide detailed information regarding similar uncommanded RAT deployments that have occurred globally on Boeing 787 series aircraft in recent years, to discover whether there are patterns in the circumstances surrounding those deployments.

The affected flight was Ryanair flight FR3418 on October 3, 2025, operated by the company’s Malta-based subsidiary, Malta Air. The flight was scheduled to operate from Pisa Airport (PSA) in Italy to Glasgow-Prestwick Airport in Scotland (PIK). The aircraft involved was a Boeing 737-800 registered as 9H-QBD. According to ch-aviation, the aircraft is 10.3 years old and is configured to accommodate 189 passengers in a single-class layout.

The flight departed from Pisa Airport at 17:28 local time, over an hour after its scheduled departure time. The flight took off and headed northeast, routing over Switzerland, France, and up the spine of the UK towards Prestwick Airport. According to The Guardian, as the flight approached Scotland, amber weather warnings were in place for all airports in the north of the UK as Storm Amy battered the country with high winds and heavy rain.

Despite the adverse weather warnings, FR3418 began the approach sequence for a landing at Prestwick.  According to data obtained from Flightradar 24, the aircraft made a single approach and landing attempt at 19:04 local time before heading south and circling the airport. At 19:34, the aircraft made a second attempt at landing but aborted that attempt, too. After a further 20 minutes of circling, the crew elected to head to Edinburgh Airport (EDI), its nominated alternative airport, to try to land there.

At 20:09, the aircraft made an aborted landing attempt at Edinburgh. However, with the high winds proving to be too much of a challenge at Edinburgh, too, the crew decides to abandon plans to land in Scotland and head to Manchester Airport (MAN)  across the border in England, where the winds were forecast to be lighter.

By this stage, and with three landing attempts behind it as well as circling time, the aircraft’s fuel reserves were running low. On approach into Manchester, the crew issued an emergency call declaring a fuel emergency and requesting a priority landing. The flight touched down at Manchester Airport with just 220kg of fuel remaining on board – 100kg in the left tanks and 120kg in the right

The AAIB is investigating

According to The Aviation Herald, this fuel level amounted to just six minutes of flying left in the tanks, which is unlikely to have been a sufficient amount should the aircraft have had to make a missed approach (go-around ) at the airport. The UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) has now launched an investigation into the incident.

According to a Ryanair spokesperson, “Ryanair reported this to the relevant authorities. As this is now the subject of an ongoing investigation, which we are cooperating fully with, we are unable to comment.”

With the flight landing well below its minimum safe fuel level, the AAIB has confirmed it has opened an investigation into the “serious incident”. One professional pilot told The Guardian that this incident was “as close to a fatal accident as possible.”

Under normal aviation regulations as well as internal Ryanair rules, aircraft must have sufficient fuel upon landing that would have permitted another 30 minutes of flying time. Flight FR3418 clearly had far less than this amount. Aircraft that are still airborne and whose fuel level falls below this, as calculated by the onboard computers, are mandatorily required to declare a fuel emergency.

Having eventually landed in Manchester Airport at 20:51, almost three hours after their original arrival time in Scotland at 18:00, passengers were then bused to Prestwick Airport, arriving at the airport ten hours later than they were due. Other Ryanair flights on the same evening abandoned attempts to land at Prestwick and diverted to other UK airports where Ryanair maintains a presence.

The lawsuit, filed in US District Court for the Southern District of Florida, alleges that corrosion-related defects in the aircraft’s GE CF34-3B engines led to the dual-engine failure that forced the jet to attempt an emergency landing on Interstate 75 near Naples. The Challenger struck a sound barrier and burst into flames. 

The complaint names GE Aerospace as the primary defendant, arguing that the company knew for years about corrosion issues within the CF34 engine family but failed to adequately warn operators or issue effective maintenance guidance. Bombardier, Learjet, Duncan Aviation, and Turbine Engine Specialists are also named as defendants. 

Engine corrosion under scrutiny 

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) continues to investigate the February 2024 accident, but its preliminary report cited signs of corrosion within several engine components. According to the filing, attorneys for Hop-A-Jet claim GE’s variable guide vane system was prone to internal corrosion that could cause “hung starts” or even in-flight power loss. 

Court documents reference earlier CF34 incidents involving commercial and business jets dating back to 2018. In one event, GE attributed a hung start to salt-induced corrosion and issued a service bulletin, but the lawsuit argues the advisory was too narrow and failed to alert operators of broader risks. 

Hop-A-Jet’s attorneys allege that GE later revised maintenance contracts to limit corrosion coverage while continuing to “conceal known defects” in the CF34 series. 

In a statement to local media, GE Aerospace expressed sympathy for the victims and said it is cooperating with investigators. “Safety is our first priority,” the company said, adding that its technical teams continue to support the NTSB’s work. 

The Challenger 604, registered to a Hop-A-Jet subsidiary, was flying from Columbus, Ohio, to Naples Municipal Airport on February 9, 2024. While descending for landing, the crew reported losing power in both engines and told air traffic controllers they would not reach the runway. 

Witness video captured the Challenger descending over moving traffic before skidding onto the highway, striking a barrier, and erupting in flames. 

Both pilots were killed. The flight attendant and two passengers escaped with injuries after the flight attendant guided them out through the baggage compartment door amid the flames. 

Claims of missed warning signs 

According to the lawsuit, the aircraft had experienced multiple “hung starts” in January 2024 and received troubleshooting assistance from GE Engine Services. The engines were later returned to service after maintenance checks showed no fuel contamination or mechanical anomalies. 

Hop-A-Jet contends that both Bombardier and contracted maintenance shops had opportunities to detect and address the problem during prior inspections but failed to do so. The suit claims that video borescope inspections performed by Learjet, Duncan Aviation, and Turbine Engine Specialists “missed indicators of dangerous conditions” inside the engines. 

The company is seeking unspecified damages for the loss of the aircraft and the deaths of its crew members. 

The case is likely to draw close attention across the business aviation and regional airline communities. The CF34 family powers hundreds of Challenger jets and regional aircraft worldwide.  

GE Aerospace and Bombardier have not commented further. The NTSB’s final report on the Florida crash has not yet been released. 

Putin acknowledges Russian responsibility

Speaking alongside Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, on October 9, 2025, Putin said that Russian anti-aircraft missiles were fired in response to Ukrainian drone activity near Grozny, Chechnya, at the time of the tragedy.

“The two missiles that were fired did not directly hit the plane but exploded, perhaps by self-destruction, about ten meters away,” Putin said. “That is why the destruction occurred, not by combat elements but by debris from the missiles.”

The Russian leader added that Moscow would provide compensation to the victims’ families and conduct a full investigation into the chain of decisions that led to the incident. Aliyev thanked Putin for “personally following this case” and described the admission as a “positive development” in relations between the two countries.

The December 2024 crash

The aircraft, an Azerbaijan Airlines Embraer E190 registered 4K-AZ65, was operating flight J28243 from Baku-Heydar Aliyev International Airport (GYD) to Grozny Airport (GRV) when it crashed in western Kazakhstan on December 25, 2024. The jet was carrying 62 passengers and five crew members.

According to initial reports, the flight had attempted to land in Grozny before being redirected to Kazakhstan, where it ultimately went down. Thirty-eight people were killed, and 29 survived.

Debris by design: how anti-aircraft missiles work

Investigations by Azerbaijani authorities have pointed to the Russian Pantsir-S1 air defense system as the source of the missiles involved. Fragments reportedly recovered from the wreckage matched components of the Pantsir’s 57E6-E missile, a weapon widely deployed by Russian forces for short- to medium-range air defense.

Putin’s explanation that the aircraft was hit only by “debris” actually aligns with how the Pantsir’s missiles are engineered to function. The 57E6-E carries a high-explosive fragmentation warhead that detonates when a proximity fuze senses a target nearby, scattering a cloud of high-velocity metal fragments designed to shred an aircraft’s fuselage and disable vital systems.

This same principle is what destroyed Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine in 2014, though in that case a much larger Buk missile was involved. In both incidents, the lethal effect came not from a direct hit but from the shrapnel cloud designed to obliterate an aircraft flying within its radius.

Diplomatic fallout

The disaster triggered a sharp diplomatic crisis between Moscow and Baku. Azerbaijan temporarily closed the local offices of a Russian state media outlet and detained several Russian nationals, while Russia made arrests among the Azerbaijani diaspora.

The meeting between Putin and Aliyev on October 9, 2025, was their first since the crash, signaling a possible thaw in relations after months of tension.

The Sacramento Fire Department confirmed in a statement that the Airbus H130 helicopter, registered as N414RX, went down shortly after taking off from UC Davis Med Center at approximately 19:00 local time on eastbound Highway 50, just west of 59th Street in Sacramento. 

The crashed aircraft belongs to REACH Air Medical Services, a company that offers emergency air medical transport for critically ill and injured patients. 

When emergency crews arrived, they found three victims, all of whom were in the helicopter during the crash, in critical condition, according to the Sacramento Fire Department. 

Sacramento Fire Captain Justin Sylvia informed reporters at the scene that the injured included a nurse, a paramedic, and a pilot. One victim was rescued after being trapped underneath the helicopter. 

“The captain immediately sequestered the help of just civilians that were standing around. “They were able to lift part of that helicopter out and get that victim out,” Sylvia said. 

He also mentioned that there was a fairly large debris field, noting it was “extremely lucky” that there were not more casualties. 

The Sacramento Fire Department added that no vehicles were involved in the crash, only the helicopter. The department’s video footage on X shows the helicopter upside down across several lanes, surrounded by debris. 

In a statement on Facebook, REACH Air Medical Services acknowledged the accident involving its helicopter and expressed that it is “keeping all those impacted in [the company’s] thoughts and prayers”. 

“We are in the process of determining the details of this situation, as well as the condition of the REACH crew involved, who were all taken to area hospitals,” the company said. “We will continue to provide information as it becomes available. There was no patient on board.” 

The crash caused traffic disruptions, with eastbound lanes temporarily blocked, according to Officer Michael Harper, a California Highway Patrol spokesman. As of October 7, 2025, no traffic restrictions are reported in the area. 

The exact cause of the crash remains under investigation, but authorities said that they will investigate, cautioning against drawing early conclusions. 

The aircraft concerned, operated by Endeavor Air on behalf of Delta Connection, was facing scrapping after the incident involving it and a Delta Airbus A350-900 jet. However, upon further inspection, the airline decided to repair the aircraft rather than write it off and declare it as scrapped.

The incident that saw the CRJ, registered as N302PQ, lose its tail, occurred on September 10, 2024, when the regional jet was holding short of the runway at Atlanta for departure to Lafayette (LFT). Meanwhile, the Airbus A350 was operating a scheduled flight (DL295) to Tokyo on the day of the incident. The widebody jet was taxiing for take-off when its wing tip hit the tail of the CRJ, completely removing it and leaving it lying on its side on the tarmac. The damage assessment classified the damage caused to the CRJ aircraft as a “major structural failure.”

The Tokyo-bound flight had 221 passengers aboard, while the CRJ had 53 passengers on board heading to Lafayette, Louisiana. No one was hurt on either aircraft, although both flights had to be canceled as a result of the collision, with the A350 also suffering wing-tip damage. Fortunately, only one flight attendant suffered minor injuries as a result of the collision.

Two Delta Airlines aircraft were involved in a collision on the taxiway at Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport in Atlanta, Georgia.

A Delta airlines Airbus A350-941 aircraft (N503DN) clips vertical stabilizer off the Delta Connection Bombardier CRJ-900LR plane (N302PQ),… pic.twitter.com/lscFm6T7vu

— FL360aero (@fl360aero) September 10, 2024

After a year of being rebuilt in a hangar at the airport, the aircraft is finally back in the air. Having been extensively and meticulously rebuilt by Delta aircraft engineers instead of being scrapped, the airline has saved itself a valuable airframe while also demonstrating the company’s focus on long-term fleet sustainability, albeit at a no doubt vast cost to the aircraft’s insurers.

Delta’s decision to rebuild rather than write off the jet reflects a growing industry trend to extend aircraft lifecycles through advanced repair technologies that are now available to aircraft mechanics. The Delta said that the decision to repair it was also based on the fact that the plane could still have over 20 years of service life remaining if adequately repaired and certified.

The engineers not only removed the remnants of the previous vertical stabilizer damaged by the A350 but also attached a completely new tail section and conducted detailed airframe and systems inspections before recertification by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

According to FLightradar24, the repaired aircraft then first flew with its new tail on September 20, 2025, conducting a test flight as flight EDV5558. This test flight lasted one hour and 38 minutes. Following the successful completion of the test flight on September 24, 2025, the aircraft was ferried from Atlanta to Macon-Middle Georgia Regional Airport (MCN) in Georgia for further work to prepare the aircraft for its entry back into service with Endeavor Air.

Aviation photographer Brian Uretsky recently captured and posted the first images of the repaired jet back in operation. It can be noted that the new tail was yet to be painted at the time the photo was taken, which may be another reason why it has been transferred to Macon for such work to be performed.

The preliminary findings from the National Transportation Safety Board found that the CRJ regional jet had stopped approximately 56ft (17m) short of the runway threshold, closer than standard holding position requirements. The Airbus A350’s captain, focused on maneuvering traffic to the left, subsequently failed to notice the CRJ on his right, resulting in the tail strike.

Delta Air Lines, along with its partner Endeavor Air, will certainly be pleased to have one of its damaged CRJs back in service. In January 2025, the airline lost another aircraft completely in a landing accident at Toronto-Pearson Airport in Canada, resulting in that aircraft being written off. More recently, on October 2, 2025, two more Endeavor Air CRJs received substantial damage when they collided on a taxiway at New York-La Guardia Airport. The damage to both aircraft is still being assessed, and neither airplane has flown since.   

The flight concerned was DL59 on Sunday, October 5, 2025. The aircraft operating the flight was an Airbus A330-900neo with registration N411DX, which features a special commemorative ‘Team USA’ external colour scheme. The flight was carrying 259 passengers at the time of the incident.

According to Flightradar24, the aircraft took off from London Heathrow at 10:00 local time for the seven-hour flight to Boston Logan International Airport (BOS). The aircraft headed west away from London. By 10:38, the plane was off the west coast of Cornwall, UK, and had reached an initial cruising altitude of 36,000ft (11,100m). 

As reported by travel website PYOK, at that point, fumes reportedly started to fill the cockpit as the plane began its oceanic crossing. The pilots elected to make an immediate return to London and requested assistance from air traffic controllers. Onboard the plane, many passengers had little idea why they were turning back, with the crew telling them that an “unidentified mechanical issue” had occurred

Under such circumstances, standard operating procedures call for cockpit crews to wear oxygen masks so that they are not overwhelmed by fumes as the plane makes its return.

The aircraft subsequently made a 180-degree turn and headed back to Heathrow, following a similar track back to the airport. The flight eventually landed on runway 27L at 10:35 local time, upon which it was surrounded by airport fire and rescue vehicles. After further inspection and having been given the all clear by airport fire officials, the passengers were disembarked and taken by bus back to the terminal.

While it is normal for aircraft laden with fuel for such a long flight to ‘dump’ fuel before landing to reach the maximum landing weight before arrival, if possible. This helps to avoid damaging the airframe or the landing gear in the case of an overweight landing. However, given the urgency of the situation, the crew decided to make a priority landing.

In a statement issued by the airline, a spokesperson for Delta said, “Delta flight 59 from London-Heathrow to Boston on October 5, 2025, landed safely after returning to LHR due to reports of smoke in the aircraft. The flight will operate tomorrow, and Delta’s customer team is assisting customers with accommodations and rebooking. We apologize to our customers for the delay, but safety for our customers and crew will always be Delta’s top priority.”

At the time of writing, N411DX is currently being ferried empty back to Boston as DL9909.

Linked to other APU issues?

The incident comes just days after it was revealed that the Atlanta-based carrier was replacing hundreds of auxiliary power units (APUs) on its fleet of Airbus A320 aircraft as part of a concerted attempt to prevent so-called contaminated air events. On September 25, the Wall Street Journal revealed that Delta had been working on a secret program since 2022 to replace the APUs on some of its single-aisle Airbus aircraft.

The APU is a small additional engine that is used to provide additional power for certain systems when the aircraft is parked at an airport. These include lighting, air conditioning, heating, and power to start the engines. Located in the tail of the aircraft, the APUs are generally switched off after the main engines are running.

Some campaigners argue that the Airbus A320 series has a known design flaw that increases the risk of cabin air becoming contaminated with dangerous pollutants such as engine oil fumes from the APU. It is also known that older APUs are more susceptible to contributing to fume events. Therefore, replacing these older units with more modern ones should mitigate the risk, hopes the airline.

The APU replacement program may not, however, reduce the risk of bleed air contamination. Most aircraft supply air to the cabin by ‘bleeding’ a small amount of air that is sucked into the aircraft engine and feeding it into the air conditioning system. Because the air is being bled off the engines, it can be contaminated with oils and lubricants from the engines once they are vaporized by the hot engine.  

Although fume events do not cause long-term effects for passengers or crews, airlines have faced numerous legal claims in recent years from those who claim to have been affected by such events. Claimants in such cases allege that the fume event has caused “permanent and serious injury.” Airlines, meanwhile, continue to defend such cases, stating there is no causal link between the two.

The new platform, called the NOTAM Management Service (NMS), went live on September 29, 2025, and is now distributing alerts to early adopters. US Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said the rollout was completed months ahead of schedule, calling it proof of the government’s commitment to modernizing the national airspace system. 

“This is the promises made, promises kept administration,” Duffy said in announcing the deployment. “We are bringing our aviation system into the 21st century at lightning speed to enhance safety in our skies. The new NOTAM system is an important proof point of how we can quickly and effectively modernize our skies under the leadership of President Trump.” 

Longstanding concerns 

NOTAMs provide critical safety information to pilots and dispatchers, such as temporary runway closures, airspace restrictions, or obstacles near airports. More than 4 million are issued each year. For decades, however, pilots have complained that NOTAMs are difficult to decipher and cumbersome to search. 

The system’s shortcomings came into sharp focus in 2010 when then-Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma landed his Cessna on a closed runway in Texas that was undergoing construction. Workers scrambled to get out of the way, and the FAA later cited Inhofe for disregarding safety information that had been published in a NOTAM. The incident underscored how critical alerts often went unnoticed in pages of dense text. 

In response, Congress directed the FAA to overhaul the system in a subsequent FAA reauthorization bill, setting the stage for today’s modernization. 

Failures add urgency 

The push to update the technology accelerated after a string of outages in recent years. The most serious failure came in January 2023, when the legacy US NOTAM System (USNS) crashed after contractors deleted key files, leading to a nationwide ground stop that delayed more than 11,000 flights. It was the first such stoppage since the terrorist attacks of September 2001 and highlighted the fragility of the aging infrastructure. 

The FAA says the new NMS is cloud-hosted, designed for resilience, and built with a modern architecture that supports near-real-time data sharing. The agency promises the system will make it easier for pilots, airlines, and air traffic controllers to share information, while also running more smoothly and reliably than the outdated systems it will replace. 

“We built a brand-new NOTAM service from the ground up in record time,” said FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford. “It is resilient, user-friendly, and scalable, and will significantly improve airspace safety and efficiency.” 

The FAA said the NMS will run in parallel with the legacy system for several months while testing and validation continue. By February 2026, the agency plans to retire the outdated USNS, with the final migration of more than 12,000 global users scheduled for late spring 2026. At that point, the NMS will become the single authoritative source for all safety notices. 

In December 2021, the FAA officially changed the name from “Notices to Airmen” to “Notices to Air Missions” in a move by the administration of former President Joe Biden to use gender-neutral terminology. Under the Trump administration, the name has since been changed back to “Notices to Airmen.” 

For many in the cockpit, what matters most is not what the system is called, but whether it works. Pilots have long argued that the old notices were cluttered with indecipherable codes and buried key safety information in walls of text. The FAA says the NMS has been built with user input in mind and will present information in a clearer and more reliable way. 

According to early reports, both aircraft were mobile at the time of the incident. Delta Connection flight DL5047, operated by an Endeavor Air CRJ registered as N480PX, had just landed from Charlotte Douglas International Airport (CLT) at 21:53 and was taxying to its allocated parking stand. Meanwhile, another Endeavor-operated CRJ was operating DL5714 to Roanoke, Virginia, and was maneuvering on the apron, preparing to depart.

According to preliminary Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reports, the right wing of DL5714 struck the nose section of DL5047. The impact severed portions of the wing assembly of the first jet while causing major damage to the forward fuselage of the second aircraft.

https://t.co/UexRGeaX3o pic.twitter.com/zzVV5MyCid

— FL360aero (@fl360aero) October 2, 2025

While no passengers were injured as a result of the collision, one cabin crew member sustained minor injuries and received on-site medical attention before being transported to a local medical facility.

Eyewitness accounts quickly appeared on social media, including one from a CBS News producer who was aboard DL5047. They reported experiencing a sudden jolt after landing – “We’d just landed and were taxiing to the gate when struck by another Delta regional jet,” they said, according to CBS News.

Another passenger told the outlet that the Charlotte flight made a hard landing and veered quickly off the runway as the pilot applied the brakes, which coincided with the collision.

Following the collision, the crew of DL5047 reported a compromised windshield, prompting an immediate halt to its taxying and causing the cancellation of the flight itself. Passengers disembarked via the forward stairs and were transported back to the terminal building. Visibility was reported to be fair at the time of the incident, with no adverse weather noted at the airport at the time.

Details confirmed by Delta

Delta Air Lines confirmed the incident via social media, stating: “We are working closely with authorities to understand what happened. Delta will work with all relevant authorities to review what occurred, as the safety of our customers and people comes before all else. We apologise to our customers for the experience.”

New York Port Authority Police and Airport Emergency Services responded within minutes to the collision. The airport fire services also scanned for fuel leaks from the ruptured wing, but none were detected.

The FAA, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), and Port Authority have since launched a joint investigation into the collision. Early indicators point to a taxiing miscommunication, possibly involving progressive taxi instructions from the ground controller to the crews of both jets.

#Now #US Two @Delta regional jets have collided while taxiing at #LGA La Guardia airport in #NewYork. No casualties reported so far. Developing… pic.twitter.com/HGZiXheNbF

— Mexico Times (@mexicotimes) October 2, 2025

Both aircraft were operated by the same company, Endeavor Air, that operates under the Delta Connection brand. It was this carrier that operated another CRJ that crashed upon landing in Toronto in January 2025, substantially damaging that aircraft beyond repair. Both aircraft in this latest incident remain on the ground in LA Guardia, awaiting further damage assessment.

The incident came just hours after more than 50 industry and labour groups, including the International Air Transport Association (IATA), warned that a potential US government shutdown could worsen aviation staffing shortages and delay training for air traffic controllers.

It also adds to a string of recent mishaps at LaGuardia. In March 2025, a Delta jet’s wing clipped the runway during a landing attempt, forcing a go-around and triggering a separate FAA investigation.    

A power bank (sometimes referred to as a battery pack or external power source) is a portable, rechargeable device primarily designed to provide power to other electronic devices such as smartphones, tablets, laptops, and cameras.

Under the new rules, Emirates customers are still permitted to carry one power bank onboard by following specific conditions. However, the power banks may not be used while in the aircraft cabin, neither to charge devices from the power bank, nor to be charged themselves using the aircraft’s power source. 

Emirates issued a statement on September 30, 2025, reminding passengers of the impending ban and stating, “Emirates provides in-seat charging on all aircraft; however, it still recommends that customers fully charge their devices before flying, especially on longer duration flights.”

Under the new rules, the following specific conditions are being applied under the new power bank guidelines, as follows –

• Emirates customers may carry one power bank that is under 100 Watt Hours.
• Power banks may not be used to charge any personal devices onboard.
• Charging a power bank using the aircraft’s power supply is not permitted.
• All power banks accepted for transport must have capacity rating information available.
• Power banks may not be placed in the overhead stowage bin onboard the aircraft and must now be placed in the seat pocket or in a bag under the seat in front of you.
• Power banks are not permitted in checked luggage (existing rule).

Why is Emirates making this change?

After a comprehensive safety review, along with a string of high-profile events involving the process of thermal runaway causing power banks to overheat, Emirates has decided to take “a firm and proactive stance to mitigate risk when it comes to power banks onboard.

There has been a significant growth in customers using power banks in recent years, resulting in an increasing number of lithium battery-related incidents on board flights across the wider aviation industry.”

More about thermal runaway in power banks  

Power banks primarily utilize lithium-ion or lithium-polymer batteries, and their function is as a portable battery pack designed to recharge devices on the go. The batteries contain lithium ions suspended in an electrolyte solution. The ions flow through the electrolyte, travelling back and forth between two electrodes as the battery charges and discharges.

However, if the battery is overcharged or damaged, it may result in ‘thermal runaway.’ Thermal runaway in batteries is a self-accelerating process where heat generation within a battery cell exceeds its ability to dissipate heat, leading to a rapid and uncontrollable temperature increase. This can result in dangerous consequences like fire, explosion, and the release of toxic gases. 

Most phones and sophisticated lithium battery-powered devices have an internal trickle system that slowly adds current into the battery to prevent overcharging, but many basic power banks may not have this safeguard, increasing the risk. All power banks, regardless of origin or brand, are now subject to the new rules on board all Emirates services.

Emirates says that the new regulations will significantly reduce risks associated with power banks by prohibiting their use on board the aircraft. “Storing power banks in accessible locations within the cabin ensures that, in the rare event of a fire, trained cabin crew can quickly respond and extinguish the fire,” said the airline’s statement.

“Safety is one of Emirates’ core values, and a cornerstone of all operations and practices. Emirates is committed to maintaining and improving levels of safety on an ongoing basis, safeguarding customers and staff at all times,” the statement concluded.

The incoming flight was about to land at runway 18R/36L, popularly known as “Polderbaan runway”, when the crew reported an unidentified flying object in its proximity. 

Security forces searched the area with the support of a helicopter, but were unable to locate neither the suspected drone nor those operating it. 

Some Dutch media outlets such as news channel NOS and dronewatch.nl, a Dutch site which tracks developments in the drone industry, have reported that the object sighted at Schiphol airport may have been a balloon.  

In support of the balloon theory are audio recordings of communications between pilots and air traffic control in which the pilots of two other aircraft report the presence of what looks like a balloon. However, other pilots that also sighted the object differ in its description. At least another pilot, in addition to the Transavia one, also refers to it as a drone. 

The affected runway was reopened at around 1pm on the same day, thus minimizing disruption to the airport, one of Europe’s busiest. 

The incident occurred amidst a heightened state of alert across northern Europe after a series of reported drone sightings in the vicinity of airports and military bases. On September 23, 2025, Copenhagen (CPH) and Oslo (OSL) airports were shut down for several hours after unidentified drones were spotted. The following day it was turn of Aalborg airport (AAL) in northern Denmark, to close down for the same reason. Other drone sightings were reported at several military facilities around the Baltic area, as well. 

While most details of these overflights remain unknown, the Danish government as well as numerous defense analysts have pointed at a possible Russian connection and have pointed at the fact that several Russian and Russian-linked ships had been near Danish waters at the time of the incidents. 

The incident unfolded as Qantas flight QF141 headed from Sydney Airport (SYD) to Auckland International Airport (AKL) on September 26, 2025. The flight was being operated by one of the airline’s 76-strong fleet of Boeing 737-800s, registered as VH-VZE. The aircraft is currently 17.3 years old, according to Planespotters.net.

The flight had departed Sydney at 07:25, 15 minutes behind schedule for the two-hour and 30-minute flight across the Tasman Sea to Auckland. However, as the aircraft approached its destination, the crew of the Boeing 737 made a mayday call and requested an emergency landing after receiving intermittent indications about a potential fire in the cargo hold, the airline said in a statement.

After being given a priority approach and landing at Auckland, the aircraft touched down normally at 11:47 local time. The airport fire and rescue department was dispatched to the aircraft, where an inspection was carried out. Auckland Airport said in a statement that emergency services were placed on standby earlier in the morning on September 26 for an inbound aircraft that had reported issues.

Following the external inspection of the aircraft by the emergency responders, it was determined that there was no active fire in the cargo hold of the aircraft and that passengers were safe to leave the aircraft via steps, rather than via the emergency slides. Qantas later announced that the fire alert received by the crew was a false alarm.

The airline added that preliminary investigations showed there was no fire in the front cargo hold, and the company’s engineers would inspect the aircraft to determine the cause of the incident. “The airfield is now returning to normal, but there may be some slight delays for departing and arriving flights,” added the airport authority.

Qantas flight lands safely at Auckland after mayday call https://t.co/Gt7xnimsLt pic.twitter.com/NdG9yOQGDw

— Alma Angeles (@AlmaANET25) September 26, 2025

A passenger, Troy Balzan, told the NZ Herald that he was travelling from Sydney to Auckland for an international sports fixture. He said he was waiting for the water from the fire appliances to come on and the emergency slides to be deployed, but that never happened.

“They just said there was a smoke alarm that had gone off in the cargo bay, and we’re just taking precautions and things. They were very good about it all, kept us informed, and we landed  safely.”

Couple Fuschia Bituniwaidranu and Mitchell Greenaway also told the NZ Herald they were nervous as the plane arrived in Auckland. “The pilot announced that there was a blinking light on this dashboard that signalled heat,” Bituniwaidranu said. “They had an alert that there was some sort of smoke or heat coming from somewhere.

At the time of writing, the aircraft involved remains on the ground at Auckland Airport, with the return leg to Sydney being cancelled as a result of the fire incident.     

A Rossiya Airlines Sukhoi Superjet 100-95B, registered as RA-89112, was getting ready for a flight to Pulkovo Airport (LED) in St. Petersburg when it collided with a Hainan Airlines Airbus A330, registered as B-1098, around 20:30 local time. 

While maneuvering, the Airbus A330 hit the rudder wing of the Sukhoi Superjet, causing damage to its tail, the Russian airline confirmed in a statement, seen by Russian media outlet LiveJournal. Reportedly, passengers who witnessed the incident said that the rudder “was torn off on the taxiway.”  

At the time of the incident, there were 84 passengers and five crew members on the Sukhoi Superjet and 264 passengers on the Airbus A330. The Federal Air Transport Agency, which oversees Russian civil aviation, reported that no injuries occurred due to the collision. 

The flight to St. Petersburg was delayed by nearly three hours. However, passengers on this flight were safely taken off and moved to another aircraft to continue their journey. A representative from Rossiya Airlines confirmed that all passengers reached their destination. 

Meanwhile, the Airbus A330 was grounded and sent for a technical inspection following the collision. Taxiway traffic at Sheremetyevo Airport was temporarily limited, but as of September 25, 2025, the airport returned to normal operations. 

Afgan officials said the youngster, who reportedly originates from Kunduz city in northern Afghanistan, was discovered wandering around on the tarmac at Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International Airport (DEL) after the plane landed from Kabul (KBL) on September 22, 2025.

The scheduled passenger flight (flight number RQ4401) was operated by one of Kam Air’s fleet of four Airbus A340-300s with registration marks YA-KME. According to data obtained from Flightradar24, the aircraft departed from Kabul Airport at 07:56 local time and landed one hour and 37 minutes later in Delhi at 10:33 local time.

Upon being discovered wandering around the tarmac in Delhi, the boy was detained by Indian security personnel before being taken in for questioning. He was reportedly subsequently deported on the return Kam Air flight back to Kabul (RQ4402), which departed Delhi at 12:47 the same day. According to local reports, the boy told officials in India that he had made the trip “out of curiosity.”

The boy advised the Indian authorities questioning him that he had hidden himself in the central landing gear compartment of the plane. The A340 has a pair of wheels on a single bogie located over the central fuselage between the wings to support the weight of the belly of the aircraft. It is in this wheel well that the boy alleges he hid.

However, The Indian Express newspaper reported that the 13-year-old wanted to travel to Tehran in Iran rather than Delhi, but had hidden in the wrong aircraft on the apron in Kabul. It was only when the airplane landed in India that he realized this was the case.

According to the newspaper, the boy sneaked into Kabul airport, trailed a group of passengers, and stowed away in the aircraft’s rear wheel well. Upon further inspection of the aircraft’s wheel wells at Delhi Airport, airport staff also discovered a small, red-coloured audio speaker belonging to the boy.

There have been numerous recent incidents of stowaways hiding on flights in recent years, often using the wheel well as their hiding place of choice. However, more often than not,  such stowaways rarely survive the trip and are still alive when the plane reaches its destination. Often, such people are either escaping persecution in their home country or are seeking a better life elsewhere.

Most who attempt such journeys are either crushed by the landing gear upon retraction, the lack of oxygen, or succumb to hyperthermia due to the extremely low temperatures that large jet aircraft fly at. Even if they survive the journey, many stowaways die as they fall from the wheel well as the gear is lowered before landing.

However, this particular incident has called into question the boarding procedures and security at Kabul Airport and just how the teenager managed to access the wheel well of the A340 undetected.

Marine One is the callsign used by the US Marines’ VH-3D Sea Kings that are used for ferrying the US president to and from the White House in the US capital, as well as on other trips and visits.

As reported by CBS News, the individual concerned, named by the authorities as Jacob Samuel Winkler, 33, was spotted by a uniformed Secret Service officer, shirtless and talking to himself while standing on the sidewalk near the White House on the date in question. Following a verbal challenge from the officer, who also shone a torch in Winkler’s direction, Winkler was reported to have retaliated by flashing a red laser beam in the direction of the officer’s face.

According to the officer’s police statement, Marine One flew directly overhead the two men. The officer’s statement added that Winkler looked up at the helicopter and subsequently aimed the laser pointer directly at the departing helicopter. “This action placed Marine One at risk of an airborne collision,” the Secret Service officer wrote

Winkler was subsequently arrested by the officer at the scene, assisted by other police personnel. Officers also discovered Winkler to be in possession of a small knife upon carrying out a search.

At the time of the incident, President Trump was on his way to give an address to the American Cornerstone Institute at Mount Vernon, the former Virginia estate of former President George Washington.

Following his arrest and being restrained by handcuffs, Winkler stated on multiple occasions that, “I should apologize to Donald Trump,” and “I apologize to Donald Trump,” according to the statement. On Monday, September 22, 2025, Winkler was slapped with a felony charge of directing a laser pointer at an aircraft and endangering the aircraft itself.

This specific felony carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison, should Winkler be found guilty at any future court hearing. Online court records don’t list any attorney representing Winkler at the hearing.

The officer noted in their statement that Winkler’s actions could have temporarily blinded or disoriented the pilot, putting Marine One at risk of colliding with another aircraft or crashing back into the ground. However, it has not been disclosed whether anyone on the helicopter, including the president himself, noticed the laser at any point.

According to reports, the White House has not provided an official statement regarding the event or subsequent arrest.

“This behavior endangers Marine One and everyone on board,” said US  Attorney Jeanine Pirro in a statement as reported by Associated Press. “If you engage in this act, you will be identified and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Following his arrest, Winkler told the authorities that he regularly points the laser “at all kinds of things,” like stop signs, and didn’t know he couldn’t direct the beam at Marine One, according to legal papers filed following the incident.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) states that lasers pose a “serious safety threat” to aircraft because they can incapacitate pilots. The agency has recorded 5,913 laser-related incidents so far in 2025 (averaging around 28 per day) and almost 13,000 in the whole of 2024.

On September 22, 2025, the French Minister of Transport Philippe Tabarot said that a collision between the two aircraft was “narrowly avoided” during the incident on September 21, 2025.  

“I immediately requested that an investigation be opened by the Bureau d’enquêtes et d’analyses (BEA) to shed full light on the precise circumstances of this event,” said Minister Tabarot.

According to data from flightradar24, the easyJet A320, registered OE-IJZ, was lined up on runway 04R ready for departure to Nantes Atlantique Airport (NTE).  

At around the same time, the Nouvelair A320, registered TS-INP, was approaching Nice after flying from Tunis Carthage International Airport (TUN).  

Shortly after 21:30, local time, the Nouvelair plane passed above the waiting easyJet aircraft and was forced to initiate a go around.  

According to French website Actu Nice, an eyewitness reported that the Nouvelair A320 was “three meters above” the easyJet aircraft at the time.  

“The altitude reported by the Nouvelair flight as it passed over the easyJet A320 was 50 feet,” said flightradar24.  

BEA investigators were dispatched to Nice Côte d’Azur Airport following the incident to gather evidence on how the incident occurred.  

After completing its go around, the Nouvelair A320 landed on runway 04L, which had been used exclusively by arriving aircraft all evening, according to flightradar24.  

Media reports have said that the easyJet A320 “severely shook” when the Nouvelair flight passed above. 

Speaking to Le Figaro, a passenger on the easyJet plane said: “We saw the head pilot leave the cockpit, he was crying, and his hands were shaking.”  

The easyJet flight returned to the apron around 23:45 where passengers and crew disembarked. The flight was subsequently cancelled.  

According to The Connexion, weather conditions may have contributed. They were described as “stormy” with “thick fog”. 

The Nouvelair A320 left Nice for Tunisia on September 22, 2025, while the easyJet plane is due to leave Nice for Nantes at around 20:40 on September 23, 2025.  

Published on September 16, 2025, SAFO 25003 highlights that compliance with crewmember instructions is vital in life-threatening scenarios. The FAA stressed that even brief delays caused by retrieving personal items can significantly reduce survival chances in situations involving fire, smoke, or structural damage.

Risks from non-compliance

The FAA noted that investigations and operational data have repeatedly identified this behavior as a recurring hazard. Passengers who attempt to retrieve bags can obstruct aisles and block emergency exits, damage evacuation slides, and create trip and fall hazards in low-visibility environments. Most critically, these actions delay evacuation times beyond survivability thresholds. According to the agency, any delay caused by luggage retrieval can drastically affect survival rates in rapidly deteriorating conditions.

Real-world examples

The problem has been highlighted in several major incidents. In May 2019, Aeroflot Flight SU1492 caught fire after returning to Moscow’s Sheremetyevo Airport. Video footage showed passengers evacuating with bags in hand while smoke and flames spread through the cabin. The accident claimed 41 lives out of the 78 on board, and investigators concluded that delays during the evacuation likely contributed to the high fatality count.

Another case was British Airways Flight 2276 in Las Vegas in September 2015. A Boeing 777 suffered an uncontained engine failure and fire during take-off. Although all 170 people survived, photographs and crew reports confirmed that some passengers attempted to take their cabin luggage with them. The evacuation took several minutes, far longer than the normally required 90 seconds, underlining how even a small number of non-compliant passengers can hinder an evacuation.

Both accidents underscored that the long-standing safety instruction to “leave everything behind” is not just a formality but a matter of life and death.

FAA recommendations

The FAA urged operators to strengthen pre-flight safety briefings with clear and standardized messaging that leaves no room for exceptions. It also recommended that airlines use their Safety Management Systems to identify hazards and track passenger behavior, and that cabin crew receive assertive training for evacuation commands. The agency further encouraged operators to invest in visual and multilingual communication materials in airports and on board to normalize expected behavior, and to promote collective responsibility with messages such as “Help everyone get out safely—leave your bags.”

Although compliance with the SAFO is voluntary, the FAA said the measures could significantly reduce evacuation times and save lives in critical emergencies.

According to reports, President Trump and the First Lady Melania Trump were forced to make an unscheduled stop at Luton Airport (LTN) after the Sikorsky VH-92 Patriot helicopter experienced a technical problem.  

Earlier in the day on September 18, 2025, President Trump had been meeting with the UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer at Chequers, a country retreat for the British leader, where they discussed world events.  

After the unscheduled stop at Luton Airport, President Trump and the first lady boarded another helicopter to complete their journey to Stansted Airport (STN). 

“Due to a minor hydraulic issue, and out of an abundance of caution, the pilots landed at a local airfield before reaching Stansted Airport. The president and first lady safely boarded the support helicopter,” said Karoline Leavitt, the White House Press Secretary.  

.@POTUS and @FLOTUS are greeted by Their Royal Highnesses The Prince and Princess of Wales pic.twitter.com/UfDpVK8C0t

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) September 17, 2025

President Trump is not the first US leader to have been involved in a midflight scare, which is perhaps unsurprising considering how much they travel by air.  

Here are some of the other inflight incidents in which other US presidents have been caught up: 

President Joe Biden – 2012

In 2012, US President, and then Vice-President, Joe Biden, was flying on a Boeing 757 government aircraft when it was struck by birds.  

The plane landed safely, and there was no official emergency declared. However, Biden was required to switch planes to complete his journey.  

President George W. Bush – 2023

In 2023, former US President George W. Bush was forced to make an emergency landing after the smell of smoke was reported in the aircraft cockpit. 

The Gulfstream 4 was diverted to Louisville, Kentucky, but later continued to Dallas following safety checks.  

President Bill Clinton – 2003

In June 2003, President Clinton was traveling in Air Force One when it was involved in a “near miss” with a UPS Boeing 747 cargo plane near Ireland.  

The pilot of the presidential plane was warned of the danger and took evasive action to avoid a potential midair crash. 

President Ronald Reagan – 1984

In 1984, President Ronald Reagan was flying to Washinton DC on Air Force One when the aircraft lost cabin pressure due to a relay failure in an air vent. 

The pilot reduced the aircraft’s altitude from 21,000 feet to 9,000 feet before continuing the flight to the US capital. 

President Barack Obama – 2012

In 2012, President Barack Obama was travelling to a campaign event on Air Force One and coming into land in Toledo, Ohio.  

There were clouds at 400 feet with foggy and misty conditions, resulting in the pilot pulling up during the landing and executing a go-around.  

President Bill Clinton – 1996

In 1996, President Clinton was flying from New Mexico to South Carolina when the aircraft was hit by heavy turbulence during thunderstorms.  

According to reports at the time, passengers and meals were thrown around the cabin and a Secret Service agent suffered a cut to his hand.  

Commenting on the turbulence afterwards, President Clinton said: “I was holding on, I was holding on. It was certainly a character builder, wasn’t it?” 

The June 12, 2025, crash occurred shortly after the aircraft, a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner, had departed Ahmedabad International Airport in India en route to London-Gatwick Airport, killing 260 people. There was one sole survivor.

In a complaint filed on September 16, 2025, in Delaware Superior Court, the families claim that the locking mechanism for the switch on the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner could be turned off inadvertently or could even be missing, causing a reduction in fuel supply to the relevant engine with a resulting loss of thrust required for take-off.

The aircraft’s fuel switches have become a focus for investigators after a preliminary inquiry found that fuel to both engines was cut off just moments after the plane left the ground.

Focus on the fuel cut-off switches

The claim adds that Boeing and Honeywell (the companies that installed and manufactured the switch, respectively) knew about the risk that the switch could be moved to the cut-off position inadvertently, but took no action in this regard.

Even after the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) warned airlines in 2018 of a risk of locking mechanisms that had disengaged uncommanded on several Boeing aircraft, no follow-up or remedial action was taken by the defending parties.  

While the FAA urged in 2018 that operators inspect the fuel switches’ locking mechanism to ensure that it could not be accidentally moved, thereby cutting off fuel supply. However, such checks were not made mandatory by Boeing at any point.  

By putting the switch directly behind the aircraft’s thrust levers, “Boeing effectively guaranteed that normal cockpit activity could result in inadvertent fuel cut-off,” the complaints documents state. “What did Honeywell and Boeing do to prevent the inevitable catastrophe? Nothing.”

According to the lawsuit, the companies also failed to warn airlines that the switches required inspection and repair and did not supply replacement parts to enable their customers to install them. It adds that Boeing and Honeywell “sat idly” behind a gentle advisory that merely recommended inspecting the switches, said the families, who are represented by a Texas-based law firm.

The claim is seeking unspecified damages for the deaths of four passengers – Kantaben Dhirubhai Paghadal, Naavya Chirag Paghadal, Kuberbhai Patel, and Babiben Patel, who were among the 229 passengers on the Dreamliner when it crashed.

Twelve crew members and 19 people on the ground were also killed. The claimants bringing the action on behalf of their deceased family members are citizens of India or the United Kingdom, and live in either one of those countries, according to a report in The Hindu Business Line.

No comment from Boeing, Honeywell

Boeing, based in Arlington, Virginia, declined to comment on Wednesday. Honeywell, based in Charlotte, North Carolina, have both so far not provided any comment on the legal claim. Instead, both organizations pointed to India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau’s (AAIB) preliminary investigation report into the crash.

Both companies are incorporated in Delaware. The lawsuit appears to be the first launched in the United States over the crash. Although the crash happened in India, the choice of the US as the forum for the lawsuit is entirely normal, given that both defendants are US-based.

So far, Indian, UK, and American investigators have not conclusively determined the exact cause of the crash, although they said after the publication of a preliminary report that their attentions were focused on the fuel cut-off switches and why they were both moved to the cut-off position, as remarked by one of the pilots and captured on the aircraft’s cockpit voice recorder.

According to sources close to the ongoing investigation, the full report into the crash, along with findings and recommendations, is due to be published in 2026.

In a statement published on X, Tusk said that the drone was seen in an area on Parkowa Street and nearby Belweder Palace, which serves as one of the official residences used by the President of Poland and a guest house for visiting foreign leaders. 

“Two Belarusian citizens were detained. The police are investigating the circumstances of the incident,” Tusk said. 

A spokesman for the State Security Service, Colonel Bogusław Piórkowski said that the drone was detected around 19:00 local time on September 15, 2025. 

“Officers of the State Protection Service, on duty at the Belvedere, noticed a flying drone and notified their superiors. The officers captured two people and handed them over to the police,” Piórkowski told private broadcaster TVN24. 

Piórkowski said that there is a “no-fly zone” for drones over Belweder Palace, adding that “it is not possible to legally fly over such government buildings in Warsaw and in the SOP protection zone.” 

Additionally, he informed the Polish state news agency PAP that no shots were fired during the incident. Piórkowski also noted that the drone returned to its operators in emergency mode and was secured by the officers. 

Commenting on the incident, Minister of Development Funds and Regional Policy Katarzyna Pelczynska-Nalecz advised against jumping to early conclusions. 

“I know that in such matters it is not worth drawing sharp, radical conclusions, if you do not know what happened,” Pelczynska-Nalecz said. “The impression is that this is not something that flew in (from beyond our border), but something that these citizens let go on the spot [within Poland’s territory]”. 

Growing airspace violations in NATO territory 

The incident comes during a time of heightened regional tensions following a number of airspace violations involving NATO member countries over the past few weeks. 

On September 13, 2025, two NATO F-16 fighter jets were deployed after a Russian drone entered Romanian airspace. In response, the two F-16s from the 86th Air Base tracked the Russian drone and were later supported by two German Eurofighters to monitor the situation. 

On the night of September 9–10, 2025, at least 19 Russian drones violated the airspace of Poland, an incident Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski called a “test” for the Alliance.  

In the context of heightened regional tensions, NATO initiated the Eastern Sentry operation on September 12, 2025, to “further strengthen its posture to shield and protect all Allies.” The operation coincides with the joint Russian-Belarusian Zapad 2025 military exercises currently taking place in Belarus. 

According to the FAA, inspectors documented “hundreds” of quality-system violations at Boeing’s 737 factory in Renton, Washington, and at Spirit AeroSystems’ 737 fuselage plant in Wichita, Kansas. The agency also alleges Boeing presented two aircraft that were not airworthy for FAA certificates and failed to follow its own quality procedures. Boeing has 30 days to respond to the proposed penalties.  

The agency further said a Boeing employee pressured an Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) unit member to sign off a 737 MAX to keep deliveries on schedule, even though the ODA designee had determined the aircraft did not meet standards.

The FAA said it used its “maximum statutory penalty authority” for the proposed fines.  

Reuters, which first reported the proposed penalty, also noted that the FAA found widespread quality issues at both the Boeing and Spirit facilities and that the enforcement action includes allegations of interference with safety officials’ independence.

The proposed fines follow months of heightened scrutiny after Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 suffered a door-plug panel blowout shortly after takeoff on January 5, 2024. In June, 2025, the National Transportation Safety Board released its executive summary on the accident, concluding that the blowout was the result of “multiple system failures.”

Investigators found that four bolts meant to secure the mid-exit door plug were not reinstalled during production after rework was performed. The NTSB said Boeing failed to provide adequate training, oversight, and documentation, allowing the lapse to go unnoticed.

The Safety Board also faulted the FAA, saying its audits and enforcement were not effective in catching persistent nonconformance issues. NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy stressed that the accident never should have happened and pointed to Boeing’s safety culture and the FAA’s oversight gaps as central factors.

Meanwhile, regulatory pressure on Boeing’s production system remains in focus. Earlier this week, FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford said the agency has not decided whether to lift the cap limiting 737 MAX output to 38 jets per month, a restriction imposed in early 2024 after the Alaska incident. The FAA continues to perform its own airworthiness inspections on every 737 MAX and 787 before delivery, a departure from the usual practice of delegating those tasks to manufacturers. 

But Brown’s departure is at the center of a pending lawsuit that challenges the White House’s authority to remove an NTSB member without cause. The Senate confirmed Brown to a full term during Democrat Joe Biden’s time as president, but Trump fired him on May 5, 2025, with no reason given. Brown, who is the former Democratic mayor of Jacksonville, Florida, and has no aviation experience, filled one of the non-technical seats on the Board.  
 
Upon his firing, Brown was immediately barred from his office, computer equipment, and staff, according to a legal filing by Democracy Forward, which represents him in his lawsuit. The filing argues that the statute governing the NTSB permits removal only for cause — defined in law as inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. On August 8, 2025, Brown’s lawyers asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to issue a final ruling in his favor and reinstate him to the Board.  
 
Brown’s lawyers argue that Congress created the NTSB to conduct accident investigations and issue safety recommendations based on expertise and evidence, insulated from political pressure. Allowing presidents to remove members at will, his lawyers argue, would weaken that intent and could erode public trust in the aftermath of high-profile accidents.  

DeLeeuw’s background, meanwhile, suggests a nominee with direct operational safety experience. In addition to flying the 787, he has held senior safety roles at American Airlines. NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy has voiced support for the nomination, saying DeLeeuw could contribute positively to the Board’s work, according to Reuters.

For now, the nomination raises practical questions that could intersect with the legal challenge. If the court rules that Brown’s removal violated the law, it might complicate the seating of a replacement. If the court upholds the removal, the seat would be open for the Senate to fill with DeLeeuw. For now, both processes move in parallel: the lawsuit in federal court and the nomination in the Senate.  

What comes next is straightforward: the Senate Commerce Committee will review DeLeeuw’s record and decide whether to send his nomination to the full Senate for a confirmation vote. Separately, the court will decide whether Brown should be reinstated. Until those outcomes are clear, the NTSB remains in an unusual position: fulfilling its transportation safety mandate while dealing with the question over which candidate ultimately will be permitted to serve on the Board. 

In a statement, published on September 11, 2025, Sprūds said the airspace will be closed starting from September 11, 2025, at 18:00 local time for at least one week, until September 18, 2025. 

“There is no immediate threat, but the army is on high alert during the comprehensive national defense Namejs exercises,” Sprūds said.  

The Namejs exercises, held regularly in Latvia since 2014, are currently taking place from September 2 to October 8, 2025, as part of the country’s ongoing national defense training. 

According to the defense minister, the action “will allow for full control of the restricted airspace zone and will make it easier to spot unauthorized flying objects.” 

Additionally, Sprūds said that closing the airspace will “free the restricted airspace zone for NATO Baltic Air Policing mission fighters” and “allow for increased testing of acoustic airspace surveillance systems, drone and anti-drone simulations, and the deployment and training of additional mobile combat units.” 

In an interview on LTV Rīta panorāma on September 11, 2025, seen by the Baltic News Network (BNN), the Commander of the Latvian National Armed Forces (NBS) Kaspars Pudāns cited the risk of continued Russian provocations, such as the drone violations that occurred in Poland on the night of September 9–10, 2025, as the main motive for the move. 

“On land, the likelihood of unexpected provocations is much lower. In the airspace, it’s different – there’s a different dynamic and speeds, which is why it could make sense there,” Pudāns said. 

Pudāns said shutting down the airspace would redirect civilian aircraft, enabling faster decision-making. 

He stated that the NBS has maintained strong collaboration with civil aviation, and that in the event of a threat, closing the airspace would only require a few minutes, according to the BNN report. 

Not the first NATO ally to close airspace 

Latvia is not the first NATO ally to shut its airspace along its eastern borders.  

Following the incursion of multiple Russian drones on September 10, 2025, Poland’s Air Navigation Agency (PAZP) introduced air traffic restrictions along the borders with Belarus and Ukraine, in effect until December 9, 2025.  

The measures include a 24-hour ban on civilian drones and a nighttime ban on all other flights, with exemptions granted only for military operations. 

On August 21, 2025, Lithuania temporarily closed airspace along part of its border with Belarus. 

The country’s airspace security was tightened after several incursions in July 2025, when two Russian-designed Gerbera drones violated its airspace. One drone crashed near the border, another flew over the capital Vilnius before eventually crashing inside a military training ground while carrying an explosive payload of two kilograms. 

Both Latvia and Lithuania have closed airspace before the start of Russia’s large-scale Zapad military exercises, scheduled to begin on September 12, 2025. 

Estonia is currently the only Baltic state that has not set new airspace restrictions along its eastern border. Nevertheless, the Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has filed an official protest with Russia after a military helicopter breached its airspace on September 7, 2025. 

According to Tallinn, a Mi-8 helicopter from the Russian Federation entered Estonian territory close to Vaindloo Island and stayed in its airspace for approximately four minutes. Estonia’s Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna described the violation as “yet another serious and regrettable incident.” 

The FAA Safety Alert for Operators (SAFO) urges airlines to take immediate steps to tighten procedures, review crew training, and communicate more clearly with passengers about how to safely handle electronic devices. The FAA says thermal runaway events — when a battery overheats uncontrollably and can ignite — remain a major hazard in passenger compartments and cargo holds. 

“Operators should consider lithium battery hazards in their safety risk management processes,” the FAA wrote in SAFO 25002. The agency called on US air carriers to update firefighting protocols, refresh crew training, and expand publicity campaigns so passengers understand what to do if a device poses a potentially dangerous condition in flight. 

The timing of the alert reflects a rise in reported lithium battery fire incidents. According to FAA data cited by Reuters, US airlines and cargo operators have logged about 50 smoke, fire, or overheating events involving lithium-ion batteries in 2025. Several cases forced flight diversions or caused passenger injuries. 

One recent example came on August 5, 2025, when a passenger’s cellphone overheated on an American Airlines flight from Dallas to Madrid. Smoke filled part of the cabin, the FAA said, and the passenger was injured, while damage to the aircraft floor delayed the flight. Less than a month earlier, a laptop overheated on a flight from Chicago to Portland, Oregon. The crew moved the device into a bag in a lavatory, but the situation grew serious enough that the pilots diverted to Casper, Wyoming. 

Lithium batteries are now so common, powering everything from smartphones to e-cigarettes to medical devices, that airlines face a constant challenge in mitigating risks. Most incidents involve passenger electronics in the cabin. Others stem from cargo shipments that contain undeclared or poorly packaged batteries. In January 2024, FedEx workers in California discovered flames in a package that had arrived from Seoul. Investigators later determined it contained five lithium-ion batteries shipped without proper declaration.  

The latest SAFO outlines three main areas where airlines should act. First, carriers must update their safety risk assessments under federal regulations to account for where passengers stow devices, especially in places like overhead bins where a fire may not be detected quickly. Second, flight crews must understand how lithium battery fires differ from other cabin fires. Halon fire extinguishers, which are effective for use on many types of flames, cannot stop a runaway battery from overheating. The FAA stresses that cooling with water is essential to prevent re-ignition. Finally, the alert directs airlines to boost passenger awareness, using announcements, safety cards, and websites to explain why lithium batteries should remain accessible during flight and what to do if one begins to overheat. 

Industry experts note that while cabin crews train regularly on battery fire scenarios, passengers often remain unaware of the dangers.

“Many people still don’t realize how serious a smoking laptop or phone can be,” said aviation safety consultant John Cox, quoted in a 2023 USA Today report on battery fires. “The key is rapid recognition and immediate action.” 

The FAA has been tracking lithium battery events since 2006 and maintains a public database of incidents. The numbers show a steady climb as the devices have become more powerful and more prevalent. Regulators worldwide have already banned spare lithium batteries from checked baggage, requiring them to be carried into the cabin where crews can intervene. 

For now, the FAA is pressing airlines to raise their vigilance. “Thermal runaway can occur without warning,” the agency said in its alert. “Effective mitigation requires preparation, training, and clear communication with passengers.” 

The agency has not proposed new regulations, but the tone of the SAFO suggests mounting concern inside the FAA about the hazards batteries can pose. With dozens of serious events this year alone, regulators appear determined to keep the pressure on airlines, manufacturers, and passengers to reduce the risk of in-flight fires.

First incident near Polatycze 

Early on September 8, 2025, the local police department, Policja Bialska, announced in a statement that the duty officer at the Terespol police station received a report from border guard officers regarding debris from an unidentified flying object that had reportedly crashed overnight. 

“We notified the authorities and the District Prosecutor’s Office in Biała Podlaska about the incident,” police said. 

Agnieszka Kępka, Prosecutor of the District Prosecutor’s Office in Lublin, confirmed in a statement seen by local news outlet WP Wiadomości that the drone crashed in a cornfield approximately 300 meters from the border crossing in Biała Podlaska County, Lublin. Kępka added the device was unarmed and bore Cyrillic markings.  

The prosecutor’s office said it has also secured the first CCTV recordings, which are currently being analyzed. Kępka said she hopes that residents “will be able to provide some information regarding the flight trajectory or other circumstances”.  

On August 8, 2025, Polish journalist Wojciech Sumlinski shared on X that the drone had crashed 30 kilometers away from his home in Polatycze, close to Terespol. He also mentioned that he is beginning to “get used to drones crashing only in open fields”. 

Second drone near Majdan-Sełce 

A second incident was reported on September 6, 2025, when another drone was discovered near the village of Majdan-Sełce in Lublin Voivodeship, approximately 500 meters from residential buildings. 

The District Prosecutor’s Office in Zamość said that the drone was made of lightweight material resembling foam and carried neither explosives nor contraband. Forensic experts have taken custody of the wreckage for further examination. 

Local officials raised concerns that the aircraft went undetected by surveillance systems. Henryk Karwan, governor of the Lublin region, acknowledged the gap and said authorities hoped to establish the drone’s origin, with initial suspicions pointing to Ukrainian rather than Belarusian airspace. 

Official assessments 

Authorities in both cases said the drones were not military. “The drone did not contain any elements that would indicate it was a military or combat drone,” Prosecutor Agnieszka Kępka said about the Polatycze incident. 

“It did not have any military characteristics,” the spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense said about the Majdan-Sełce incident. Authorities suggest instead that it was a smuggling drone, though no contraband was found aboard. 

However, pictures shared by TVN24 strongly suggest that the unidentified object in Majdan-Sełce is a Russian-made “Gerbera” decoy drone, used to overload air defense systems during attacks on Ukraine. 

A similar scenario played out on July 10, 2025, when a drone found near the border with Belarus was initially believed by the authorities to be a smuggling drone, but turned out to be one of Russia’s Gerbera UAV. 

Other recent NATO airspace incidents 

The discovery of drones in Polatycze and Majdan-Sełce comes amid a series of similar episodes along NATO’s eastern borders. 

In July 2025, two Russian-designed Gerbera drones entered Lithuania. One crashed near the border and another flew over the capital Vilnius before eventually crashing inside a military training ground while carrying an explosive payload of two kilograms. Both incidents involved Gerbera-type drones resembling the Iranian-made Shahed loitering munitions. 

On August 20, 2025, an unidentified object fell from the sky and detonated in a cornfield in the village of Osiny, eastern Poland, damaging nearby buildings.  

More recently, two incursions of Polish airspace by drones occurred overnight from September 2 to 3, 2025, during a large-scale Russian strike against Ukraine. 

The incidents coincide with preparations for the joint Russian-Belarusian exercise Zapad 2025, set to begin on September 12, 2025, raising fears of further drone-related violations along NATO’s eastern flank. In response, Lithuania has imposed a temporary flight ban along part of its border with Belarus, citing security concerns. 

Joseph David Emerson, 46, of Pleasant Hill, California, admitted to one count of interfering with flight crew members stemming from the October 22, 2023, incident that forced Horizon Air Flight 2059 to divert to Portland, Oregon. The jet, operated by Alaska’s regional subsidiary, had been en route from Everett, Washington, to San Francisco. Emerson, at the time a captain with Alaska Airlines, was commuting home after spending the weekend with friends in Washington. 

According to court documents, the disturbance began as the jet cruised over the Oregon coast. Emerson had been conversing casually with the crew when his demeanor suddenly changed. He tossed his headset aside, told the pilots, “I’m not okay,” and reached overhead to pull the red fire control handles for both engines. Those levers, if fully engaged, would have cut off fuel and hydraulics to the engines, while twisting them would have discharged halon fire extinguishers and shut the engines down completely.  

One pilot grabbed Emerson’s wrists, and after a brief struggle, the crew managed to stop him. The other pilot disengaged the autopilot, declared an emergency, and diverted the flight to Portland. Once subdued, Emerson left the cockpit at the crew’s insistence, and the pilots locked the door behind him. 

The situation remained tense in the cabin once Emerson left the cockpit. Flight attendants said he walked into the aisle, saying he had been “kicked out of the flight deck” and told them, “You need to cuff me right now or it’s going to be bad.” Flight attendants placed him in wrist restraints and moved him to the back of the aircraft. During the descent into Portland, Emerson reached for an emergency exit handle, but a flight attendant intervened and stopped him. Witnesses recalled him telling flight attendants that he had “messed everything up” and “tried to kill everybody,” according to court filings. 

The aircraft landed safely in Portland, where police boarded and arrested Emerson without further incident.  

In interviews after his arrest, Emerson told investigators he had not slept in more than 40 hours and believed he was experiencing a nervous breakdown. He admitted to using psychedelic mushrooms for the first time two days before the flight, saying he felt like he was trapped in a dream and that pulling the handles might wake him up.

“Although I was sitting in the jump seat and interacting with the flight crew, I believed I was dreaming and felt an overwhelming need to wake up,” he later told prosecutors. “In an effort to wake up from my ‘dream,’ I knowingly pulled the dual fire extinguisher handles for the aircraft engines while the aircraft was flying.” 

Emerson, who was fired by Alaska Airlines, has since spoken publicly about his struggles with depression, which he said worsened after the death of a friend. In media interviews, he explained that he was afraid to seek help for fear of losing his medical certificate. His case has reignited debate within the airline industry about how pilot mental health is monitored and supported. 

Initially, Emerson faced both federal and state charges. Along with the federal interference count, Oregon prosecutors charged him with more than 160 counts, including attempted murder for each passenger aboard. He pleaded not guilty at the time. Under a plea deal, he has now pleaded guilty to the federal charge and no contest to state reckless endangerment charges. According to ABC News, the agreement also includes a lifetime ban on flying. 

As part of the federal plea deal, Emerson agreed to pay restitution to victims, prosecutors said. He faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, a $250,000 fine, and three years of supervised release. Sentencing is scheduled for November 17, 2025. 

The events unfolded on the afternoon of September 7, 2025, as the aircraft came into land at St Maarten’s Princess Juliana Airport (SXM) in the Dutch Antilles. The flight, operating under flight number WJA2276, was being operated by the carrier’s Boeing 737-800 with registration C-GWSR, a 16.6-year-old example of the twin-engine narrowbody.

WestJet flight 2276 departed Toronto at 08:41 local time for the five-hour flight to St Maarten. There were 164 passengers and crew on board. The flight was uneventful, and videos posted on social media show the aircraft on final approach into the famed Caribbean airport. These were taken at around 13:29 local time as the aircraft prepared to land.

WATCH: Scary moments at St. Maarten minutes ago— WestJet Boeing 737-8 (C-GWSR) suffers a hard landing, causing the right main gear to collapse.

Flight #WS2276 was landing from Toronto,YYZ when the incident unfolded.

: SHOWMECaribbean pic.twitter.com/5H4159xeF8

— Turbine Traveller (@Turbinetraveler) September 7, 2025

The landing appears to be unfolding normally until the right main gear makes contact with the runway. Videos taken from inside the cabin show the impact of the right main gear, with some passengers clearly shocked at the force of the impact. Another video shows the aircraft sliding along the runway surface on its right engine nacelle before coming to rest. The pilot managed to keep the aircrfat on the runway with the use of the rudder.

The crew can then be heard asking the air traffic controller at the airport to dispatch the airport fire and rescue tenders to the aircraft.

Here's the video captured from the cabin of WestJet Boeing 737-800 (C-GWSR) flight #WS2276 landing at Sint Maarten Princess Juliana Int'l Airport. https://t.co/J4O3tKzNoh pic.twitter.com/6NcQqwGMM0

— Turbine Traveller (@Turbinetraveler) September 7, 2025

The 164 passengers were subsequently evacuated via the emergency slides, while the fire service sprayed fire-retardant foam over the right engine and wing. The passengers were subsequently taken to the terminal. With its single runway blocked, the airport was subsequently closed to all inbound and outbound traffic while the disabled WestJet aircraft was recovered.

“We are relieved to report there were no injuries, though three people were taken for medical examination, out of an abundance of caution,” said an airport statement. The airport said it was working “with local partners and heavy equipment providers to remove the aircraft from the runway safely.”

The Prime Minister of St Maarten, Dr Luc Mercelina, commended the “swift response” by emergency responders and said that “every measure is being taken to ensure that the airport resumes safe operations as soon as possible. The safety and security of travelers, our aviation personnel, and the general public remain our highest priority,” he added.

Un #Boeing 737-800 de #WestJet -Vol WS2276 en provenance de #Toronto au #Canada a eu un gros problème à l'atterrissage à #SaintMartin. Les 164 passagers sont saufs. #bondamanjak pic.twitter.com/l9wUHNzhSh

— bondamanjak/gilles dégras (@gillesdegras) September 7, 2025

In a WestJet statement, the airline said it was awaiting confirmation of the exact nature of the incident and was fully cooperating with the authorities. “Our teams are focused on supporting our guests and crew, ensuring their safety and care remain our highest priority,” added the statement.

According to data obtained from ch-aviation, the aircraft was first delivered to WestJet in February 2009 and is leased from Nomura Babcock and Brown Aircraft Leasing. The aircraft is configured to seat 174 passengers in a single-class configuration. As of the time of writing, the aircraft remains on the ground in St Maarten awaiting inspection and repair.

The tragedy occurred on March 9, 2015, during the filming of the survival reality show scheduled to air via French broadcaster TF1. Among the victims were sailor Florence Arthaud, Olympic swimming champion Camille Muffat, and Olympic boxer Alexis Vastine. 

Findings of the investigation 

According to the final report of Argentina’s Civil Aviation Accident Investigation Board (JIAAC), two Eurocopter AS350 B3 helicopters, registered LQ-CGK and LQ-FJQ, collided in flight while flying in close proximity near Villa Castelli, La Rioja province. Both helicopters were destroyed, and all on board were killed instantly. 

Investigators found no evidence of technical malfunction. Instead, the report pointed to a combination of human and organizational factors: 

• Risky proximity flight: The helicopters were flying close together for aerial filming without formal procedures or training for such maneuvers. 

• Visual limitations: Pilots likely lost visual contact due to blind spots and glare, leaving no time for evasive action. 

• Regulatory gaps: The aircraft were operated as ‘public aircraft’, exempt from stricter commercial aviation safety standards, despite being used for a private production. 

• Operational pressures: Delays in filming and pressure to capture specific footage may have contributed to a hazardous operating environment. 

The investigation led to safety recommendations urging Argentina’s aviation authorities to tighten oversight of provincial aviation operations, implement standardized procedures, and require formal risk assessments for aerial filming or similar non-routine flights. 

Prosecutors’ arguments 

The Paris prosecutor’s office stated that Adventure Line Productions and its security manager “committed errors of a nature to incur criminal liability,” notably failing to brief both pilots together to ensure the planned flight maneuvers were fully understood, and not enforcing compliance with existing aeronautical safety rules. Prosecutors have requested that other individuals initially charged in the case now be dismissed. 

The UK Airprox Board, the body which investigates such incidents (known in aviation parlance as air proximity warnings or ‘airprox’ events) in the UK, is reported to have taken place on April 8, 2025, in the airspace surrounding RAF Mildenhall in Suffolk, home to several squadrons of US Air Force (USAF) Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker air-to-air refuelling tanker aircraft.

The Airprox Board reported that, following its investigation, it had concluded that a KC-135 military aircraft came close to colliding in mid-air with a JS1 glider that was flying in the vicinity of the RAF base, although not within the zone of restricted airspace that surrounds the air base itself.

According to the report, the USAF Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker had been performing training circuits at RAF Mildenhall when it started its descent into the airbase at about 13:39 local time on April 8, 2025. The tanker was on a wide downwind leg of a circuit for the easterly runway at Mildenhall between the towns of Chatteris and Ely in Cambridgeshire when the incident occurred.

The aircraft encountered a glider in the area near the gliding site at Chatteris Airfield as it prepared to land at the airbase just to the south. According to the Airprox Board, the two aircraft came into such close proximity to one another that the vertical separation between the two was said to have been “about 49ft (15m) with the glider passing directly above the Boeing, with the space between the two reduced to a bare minimum”, as described in the report.

The Airprox Board said “providence had played a major part” in the fortuitous outcome and rated the risk of collision as Category A – the highest category possible. The KC-135 Stratotanker weighs about 44 tonnes when empty compared to the 0.7-tonne glider – a discrepancy which gave the Airprox Board “serious concern.”

Details of the incident

While flying the approach for runway 10 at RAF Mildenhall, the USAF crew reported a “very close call with a glider aircraft”. They were routing inbound to Mildenhall from a holding position, and air traffic controllers at nearby RAF Lakenheath had relayed generic information for multiple unidentified aircraft in the vicinity of Mildenhall.

The KC-135 crew noted that on fair weather days, gliders regularly operated in that area, and they had four crew members looking outside to increase the ability to sight the traffic. The glider happened to be just above their visibility for their approach, and tough to see in the conditions. It was moving right-to-left in their windscreen, and the pilot flying the KC-135 saw it first. The two aircraft were at a similar altitude and on a converging path towards it. The USAF pilot flying aggressively manoeuvred to 30 degrees of bank to the right and narrowly avoided it, coming within 100ft (30m) horizontally.

“Had they not seen the aircraft and manoeuvred accordingly, there was a good chance they would have collided with the glider,” stated the Airprox Board report. “They were able to manoeuvre back and intercept the glideslope and continue the approach afterwards. It was an incredibly unsafe location for any aircraft not talking to a control authority to be flying in, especially one that has restricted manoeuvring capabilities.”

It was later noted by the pilot that they had been in instrument conditions at the time of the Airprox, having just descended out of the bottom of the cloud. As they transitioned from looking in to looking out, the glider appeared. The crew of the KC-135 was surprised to see the glider so close to the base of the cloud. The pilot assessed the risk of collision as ‘High’.

According to the report, the glider pilot had been on a cross-country flight but had not informed air traffic control (ATC) of their presence or location. The glider pilot said they did not feel the need to do so because they claimed they did not fly into RAF Mildenhall or nearby RAF Lakenheath’s airspace zones, although they did fly near them. They had also turned their transponder off to conserve battery, which “denied an important safety barrier to mid-air collision”, the report said.

The panel ruled, therefore, that the glider pilot had no situational awareness of the whereabouts of the larger plane nor its proximity beneath them.

Providence played a major part

While the evasive manoeuvre carried out by the KC-135 crew may have felt necessary at the moment it saw the glider, the Airprox Board determined that, given the rate of closure between the two aircraft and the distances involved, the manoeuvre is unlikely to have played a major part in the two aircraft avoiding each other.

The Airprox Board determined that blame could be placed upon each of the pilots of the respective aircraft for the events that unfolded on April 8, 2025. The crew of the KC-135 had not informed air traffic controllers that their vision was impaired by the weather or the level of cloud cover in the area at the time. They also refrained from asking for additional help in navigating the plane away from the potential conflict upon receiving radar information about it. The pilot was, therefore, deemed to have only had generic situational awareness of the presence of converging aircraft at the time of the near-miss.

The glider pilot, meanwhile, was criticised for failing to contact air traffic control of their whereabouts, flight information, or intentions in a busy air traffic zone, and had failed to use their transponder, which could have warned both air traffic controllers and the KC-135 crew of the glider’s position and direction of travel.

Conclusions of the investigation

Both pilots were told they shared an equal responsibility for collision avoidance.

“Members [of the Airprox Board] noted that the JS1 pilot had not seen the KC135 and the KC135 pilot had not seen the JS1 in time to have materially improved matters,” the report said. The panel ruled, therefore, that the glider pilot had no situational awareness of the whereabouts of the larger plane nor its proximity beneath them.

“The board agreed that providence had played a major part in the KC135 and JS1 having avoided each other and that there had been a serious risk of collision,” concluded the report.

The accident occurred at approximately 10:40 local time on August 31, 2025. According to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the aircraft involved were a Cessna 172 and an Extra Flugzeugbau EA300, and there were two people on board each aircraft.  

The Morgan County Sheriff’s Office said one person was killed one was hospitalized, and two others suffered injuries. 

Both aircraft were attempting to land at the airport simultaneously when the crash happened.  

ADS-B data indicated that the Cessna 172 was approaching the runway directly, while the Extra Flugzeugbau was making a left base-to-final turn to the same runway, according to information from the Aviation Safety Network (ASN). 

Witnesses stated they saw the two aircraft collide before falling to the ground. Both aircraft caught fire upon impact. In video footage shared on X smoke can be seen rising from the wreckage. 

“We extend our deepest condolences to the family and friends of the victim in this tragic event,” the Morgan County Sheriff’s Office said in a Facebook post. “This is an active investigation and the names of the parties involved are not being released at this time.” 

Emergency responders arrived promptly, and the airport was temporarily closed. The FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) announced that they have begun an investigation into the crash. 

The aircraft involved was a Dassault Falcon 900LX (registration OO-GPE), operated by Luxaviation Belgium. It was conducting flight AAB53G from Warsaw Chopin Airport (WAW) to Plovdiv when the disruption occurred.  

The incident, confirmed by the Commission, forced the crew to rely on manual navigation before landing safely. 

European officials suspect the interference was deliberate and linked to Russia, adding to growing concerns about electronic warfare across European airspace. 

Safe landing after signal loss 

Von der Leyen’s visit to Bulgaria was part of a broader Eastern European tour aimed at reinforcing the EU’s solidarity with member states near Russia and Belarus. 

Her trip included stops in Latvia, Finland, Estonia, and Poland, and will conclude in Lithuania. In Bulgaria, she toured a munitions plant producing ammunition for Ukraine and emphasized the country’s growing role in Europe’s defense industry. 

According to the Financial Times, the disruption disabled satellite navigation signals in the airport’s airspace. Bulgarian air traffic controllers switched the aircraft to a ground-based approach. 

The Kremlin rejected the accusations, calling them “incorrect.” Bulgarian aviation authorities confirmed the jamming and reported a sharp increase in GPS interference and spoofing in recent years. 

A pattern of interference 

This incident adds to a growing pattern of GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) disruptions that have intensified since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has identified four key hotspots for interference: the Baltic Sea region, eastern Finland, the Black Sea, and the Eastern Mediterranean. 

The impact has already been felt by airlines. In April and May 2024, Finnair suspended flights to Tartu, Estonia after repeated jamming incidents prevented safe approaches. 

In March 2024, a RAF Falcon 900LX carrying UK Defense Minister Grant Shapps also encountered GPS jamming near the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad. 

Why GPS jamming is a growing risk 

While modern aircraft can navigate without GPS using inertial navigation systems, satellite-based positioning remains critical for approaches and landings, particularly at airports without an Instrument Landing System (ILS). 

Persistent interference raises the risk of operational delays, diversions, and heightened safety concerns, particularly in Eastern Europe and other conflict-adjacent regions. 

Aviation stakeholders are increasingly exploring alternative navigation technologies to reduce reliance on GNSS. Among them are quantum-based positioning systems, which utilize Earth’s magnetic field for orientation, and stellar navigation systems, such as Sodern’s Astradia, which tracks the positions of fixed stars to provide accurate positioning even when satellite signals are disrupted. 

On August 29, 2025, the Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand (CAAT) announced that it had banned Nok Air from operating international routes and expanding its network, following the airline’s failure to meet safety standards. This move comes amid ongoing compliance checks with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Air Chief Marshal Manat Chavanaprayoon, Director-General of CAAT, confirmed that the airline must suspend all international operations and refrain from expanding its routes, both domestic and international, until it addresses the safety deficiencies identified during CAAT’s review.

The suspensions placed on Nok Air are reported to be part of a broader effort to ensure full compliance with ICAO standards across Thailand’s aviation sector, as the ICAO audit of Thailand’s aviation safety system is currently underway, taking place from August 27 to September 8, 2025.

Safety concerns flagged

Air Chief Marshal Manat revealed that the CAAT had identified deficiencies in Nok Air’s operations, both in terms of incidents related to personnel and operational performance during the period from 2023 to 2025. The rate of incidents over the past two to three years was described as “significant”, including occurrences such as engine in-flight shutdowns, runway excursions, hard landings, and tail strikes.

“Particularly concerning is the engine in-flight shutdown incidents, where the root cause has not yet been determined”, said the CAAT. “An investigation and analysis of the data are required to assess the danger, evaluate the outcomes, and accurately evaluate the risks, enabling the implementation of risk mitigation processes and the development of appropriate recommendations,” it added.

Additionally, the CAAT is reported to be concerned regarding the significant number of resignations from pilots, flight instructors, and appointed aviation inspectors from the company, which it says “reflects various internal issues, including organisational safety culture, employee morale, and workforce issues.”

“This has increased the risk of personnel lacking the necessary knowledge, experience, and expertise for flight operations. The company has not yet determined the root cause of these incidents or effectively resolved the operational inefficiencies in its flight operations system,” added the CAAT. Manat stated that the airline must resolve these issues within one week before the suspension can be lifted, allowing the airline to resume international flights and expand its routes as usual.

The airline’s response

Wutthiphum Jurangkool, the current CEO of Nok Air, clarified that while the airline has not operated international flights since June 2025, it continues to operate domestic services under CAAT’s strict oversight. He also addressed the issues raised by CAAT regarding the airline’s maintenance practices, stating that Nok Air “adheres to the maintenance manual approved by CAAT and international standards, with safety audits from the IATA Operational Safety Audit (IOSA). Furthermore, Nok Air maintains close coordination with CAAT and relevant agencies, including Boeing, to ensure the highest level of safety.”

Regarding the employee retention issues flagged by the CAAT, Wutthiphum commented that despite competitive pressures in the region, Nok Air maintains a sufficient and qualified workforce, providing training to meet CAAT and ICAO standards for all personnel, including flight inspectors, pilots, crew members, and ground staff.

“Nok Air remains committed to upholding the highest safety standards and improving service quality across all operations. The airline thanked passengers for their continued trust and assured them that domestic services are operating as scheduled, fully compliant with CAAT regulations and international safety standards,” he concluded.

About Nok Air

Based at Bangkok’s Don Muang International Airport (DMK) in the country’s capital Nok Air first began scheduled passenger operations in 2004. Named after the ‘Nok bird.’ (or the Nok hualon, also known as the Bare-faced Bulbul) and known for its unique featherless pink face, the carrier currently operates a fleet of 14 Boeing 737-800s, with two of these listed as ‘in storage.’ The average fleet age is 11.3 years.

Up until June 2025, the airline operated 21 routes to 21 destinations across three countries.

The jet was the MiG-23UB registered N23UB, a two-seat trainer built in 1981, flying in the United States under a special Experimental Airworthiness Certificate for air show exhibition. Powered by a single Tumansky R27F2M-300 afterburning turbojet rated at 23,000 pounds of thrust (around 102 kilonewtons), the airframe had logged 1,697 hours at its most recent AAIP inspection on July 17, 2023, with five hours since that check. 

Investigators concluded the jet suffered a partial loss of engine power for reasons that could not be determined. Both pilots ejected at low altitude and were seriously injured. There were no injuries on the ground. 

A low ejection with little margin 

The display profile called for a sweeping “banana pass”. As the front-seat pilot advanced the throttle for afterburner, the Tumansky R27F2M-300 did not respond. Attempts to re-select the afterburner brought no change. With energy bleeding away, the crew turned back toward the airport, trading height for speed and managing the angle of attack to avoid a stall. However, the available thrust was not enough to keep the MiG-23 flying. 

The rear-seat pilot announced an emergency and configured the aircraft for slower flight, selecting a 16-degree wing sweep and later deploying takeoff flaps as the speed dropped below 200 knots (approximately 370 kilometers per hour). When it became clear that the projected path would leave airport property, he initiated ejection at about 350 feet (around 107 meters).  

A video of the incident shows both parachutes opening just above the treetops before the pilots come down in a nearby lake. The aircraft struck a residential area about 1.7 miles (around 2.7 kilometers) south of runway 27. The wreckage trail measured about 600 feet (around 183 meters), and the fuselage with the engine came to rest beside an apartment building. 

The seats installed in this MiG-23 were not zero-zero capable, meaning that they were not designed for use from ground level at zero airspeed. The flight manual links minimum safe ejection height during a descent to the rate of descent, using a simple rule of five times the vertical speed. At 350 feet (around 107 meters), that only covers a 70 feet per minute descent, about 0.36 meters per second, and the actual sink rate was likely higher. Investigators judged the timing to be appropriate, noting that an earlier decision could have reduced injuries, while any delay would have increased the risk.  

The manual allows ejections in level flight up to 270 knots (around 500 kilometers per hour) without height limits, requires at least 100 feet (around 30 meters) above ground between 500 and 620 knots (around 926 to 1,148 kilometers per hour), and at least 3,300 feet (around 1,006 meters) between 620 and 650 knots (around 1,148 to 1,204 kilometers per hour). 

What the wreckage showed 

Photographs and on-scene evidence pointed to an engine that was still rotating under some power at impact. Fan blades showed hard-body strikes and multiple tip fractures around the circumference, with scoring on the spinner. The traces were consistent with residual thrust, although investigators could not quantify exactly how much. 

The Tumansky R27F2M-300 is a Soviet-designed turbojet, and there is no independent facility in the United States with the specialized tooling and experience to perform a full teardown. Without that work, the investigation relied on statements, photographs and maintenance records. That limitation prevented the NTSB from isolating a single failure mode behind the loss of thrust. 

The people and the machine 

The aircraft involved in the accident, MiG-23UB N23UB, was built in 1981 and operated under an Experimental certificate for air show exhibition. The pilot in command reported about 21,296 total hours, including 42 hours on type, and is a former US Naval aviator. The rear-seat pilot, a lieutenant colonel in the US Air National Guard, reported about 15,000 hours, including 12 hours on type.  

Weather conditions were visual, with 10 miles (around 16 kilometers) visibility, wind from 330 degrees at 10 knots (around 19 kilometers per hour), and a temperature of 27 degrees Celsius. Willow Run is situated at an elevation of 715 feet (approximately 218 meters), with runway 5/23 measuring 7,543 feet (approximately 2,300 meters) and runway 9/27 measuring 5,001 feet (approximately 1,524 meters). 

Investigators noted a prior power-loss event on the same airframe in 2018. Maintenance at the time identified a leaking fuel control unit, which was replaced. In his current statement, the pilot suggested the accident sequence might instead relate to the exhaust nozzle actuation system, but without a teardown, the NTSB could not verify that hypothesis. 

The NTSB’s conclusions 

Low-level display profiles offer limited opportunities to recover energy when thrust is unavailable, especially in aircraft equipped with seats that lack zero-zero capability. The NTSB’s findings emphasize the importance of making prompt decisions regarding ejection in these situations.  

Additionally, the report highlights the challenges faced by privately-owned legacy jets. When there is a lack of resources for overhaul and teardown, both maintenance and accident investigations can be hindered, resulting in some causes remaining unresolved. 

The SNCTA, the majority union of French air traffic controllers, announced on August 26, 2025, that fresh industrial action will take place on September 18, 2025.  

The union insists that DGAC officials had failed to enter into a dialogue regarding worker’s grievances over pay and anger resulting from the way the sector is governed.  

Air traffic controllers are calling for their salaries to reflect the rise in inflation during 2024 and demanding an annual meeting to discuss its impact.  

“For several years, the governance of air traffic control has been characterized by mistrust, punitive practices, and degrading managerial methods,” said a union statement. 

News of a fresh strike will cause concern for European airlines, after a two-day strike by ATC staff in July 2025 caused flight cancellations and delays. 

In a report published by Eurocontrol following the July strikes, the organization claimed that an average of 3,713 flights were delayed and 1,422 flights cancelled each day.  

Ryanair was the most severely affected, followed by easyJet and Air France. The highest share of flights delayed by the strikes was Volotea on 34%, followed by Air France (33%), easyJet (25%), Ryanair (21%) and Vueling (20%). 

The Ryanair CEO has been highly critical of French ATC strikes, describing industrial action by union members as “recreational”. 

The Air China Boeing 777-300ER departed Heathrow Airport on August 25, 2025, shortly after 22:40, and flew for over five hours before making an unscheduled stop at Nizhnevartovsk Airport (NJC) in Siberia.  

According to Russian state news agency TASS, the Air China Boeing 777, registered B-2033, made a successful “emergency landing” while travelling to Beijing.  

“While flying from London to Beijing, the crew of an Air China Boeing 777-300 decided to land at an alternate airfield in Russia. The preliminary cause was a malfunction of one of the engines,” said a spokesperson for Rosaviatsia, the Federal Agency for Air Transport in Russia. 

TASS reported that Rosaviatsia confirmed that there were 15 crew members and 250 passengers onboard the aircraft.  

“Thanks to the professionalism and coordinated work, Boeing 777-300 successfully landed at Nizhnevartovsk airfield 60 minutes after sending the PAN signal,” the agency spokesperson added. 

It is understood that a replacement aircraft will arrive at Nizhnevartovsk Airport to take passengers on to China. 

According to the Russian news website, local air traffic controllers assisted flight CA856 with information regarding where to land.  

It is rare for an aircraft departing the UK to land in Russia due to geopolitical tensions and restrictions on aircraft travelling through Russian airspace. 

An unnamed person told Baza that “airport services were on high alert for the unexpected guest”. 

“It’s not every year that such a flight from the UK arrives in Nizhnevartovsk,” they added. 

The incident unfolded as Delta flight DL1893 from Orlando to Austin was nearing the end of its journey on approach into the Texas airport. The flight was being operated by Boeing 737-800 registered as N3740C, which, according to ch-aviation, is 24.7 years old. The flight had departed from Orlando International Airport (MCO) at 13:11 local time on August 19, 2025, for the two-hour and 15-minute flight to Austin.

As the aircraft approached Austin, the crew lowered the flaps in preparation for landing. However, as videos posted on social media illustrated, the lower section on the left-hand outer trailing edge flap became detached from the flap mechanism at its outboard end. The loose flap section was retained on the wing by the hinge fixing on the inboard end of the flap track mechanism and remained in place as the aircraft made its final approach.

BREAKING: #Delta Flight 1893's left wing flap reportedly detached mid-air but landed safely at Austin-Bergstrom #Airport with 68 on board. The FAA is investigating the #incident to ensure safety standards are met.@CBSNews pic.twitter.com/AYRdwPBZbT

— Chloe Smith (@ChloeSmith1728) August 20, 2025

The aircraft eventually touched down on Austin’s runway 18R around 15 minutes later at 14:27 local time and taxied without further assistance to its allocated parking stand. According to a posting by the Federal Aviation Administration, the aircraft “landed and a post-flight inspection revealed that the trailing edge of the left-hand wing flap was bent upward.”

The aircraft has presumably been taken out of service for repairs, as data from Flightradar24 shows that the aircraft remains on the ground in Austin and has not flown since the incident flight.

A Delta airplane that landed at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport on Tuesday was taken out of service for repairs after crews and passengers spotted a damaged wing flap.

FULL STORY: https://t.co/hDqgRgM0Ts pic.twitter.com/7n1OkWyHUz

— CBS Austin (@cbsaustin) August 20, 2025

Although seemingly serious to the untrained eye, the event is unlikely to have been classified as a major risk to the safety of the passengers and crew onboard DL1893. While flaps provide lift to the aircraft at relatively low speeds on take-off and landing, aircraft of this type and size can land without flaps in the event of an emergency, such as a hydraulic failure. Indeed, the fact that the flap section stayed attached to the airframe and did not detach completely means that it will have still been of some use to the pilots flying the aircraft.

Second event in two months

The incident is the second involving a Delta Boeing 737 and the detachment of wing flaps in just two months. At the start of July 2025, the FAA began an investigation after a section of the trailing edge wing flap was found on the driveway of a private home in North Carolina. The section of flap had seemingly detached from a Boeing 737-900ER, which had recently landed at Raleigh-Durham International Airport (RDU) following the completion of a passenger flight from Atlanta (ATL).

The unexpected appearance of a section of flap on a driveway caused the homeowner to call the emergency services via 911. Local reports at the time stated that a call was received by call handlers at around 08:30 on the morning of July 2, 2025, which told of a portion of the wing being found on the driveway.

Local police attended the property and later confirmed that the article had indeed come from an aircraft as it prepared to land at the airport. Further investigation soon discovered the source of the part as the Delta Air Lines jet, which had landed safely and without further incident.  

According to the Associated Press, flights were stopped on August 18, 2025, between 10:45 and 12:00, and were followed by some minor disruptions to travel while operations returned back to normal.  

According to the news publication, the FAA confirmed there was no fire in the tower and staff were unsure what caused the alarm to activate. 

During the pause the FAA released a statement to NewsNation saying that it was “pausing flights heading to Reagan Washington National Airport due to a fire alarm in the air traffic control tower”. 

A later statement by the FAA said: “The FAA is slowing flights into Reagan Washington National airport due to volume after inbound flights were paused because a fire alarm was activated in the air traffic control tower. The tower is back to being fully operational.”   

Operations and efficiency at Washington Ronald Reagan National Airport are currently under the microscope after a PSA Airlines regional jet collided with a US Black Hawk in January 2025, killing 67 people.  

The Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy has made it his personal mission to improve safety at US airports and modernize the tech systems staff rely on to prevent accidents.  

The aircraft concerned, a 5.7-year-old Airbus A320 registered as N365FR, was at its parking stand preparing for departure to New York-LaGuardia Airport (LGA) on August 16, 2025, as Frontier Airlines flight 3134, a flight that was due to take around one hour and twenty minutes to complete. According to the website PYOK, flight 3134 had already boarded passengers when eyewitnesses caught the moment that the ground air supply hose was sucked into the engine.

This is how a Frontier Airlines Airbus A320-251N aircraft (N365FR) left engine ingested a ground air-conditioning hose at Charlotte Douglas International Airport.

The incident took place when the aircraft was on the gate and getting prepared for the flight F93134 from Charlotte… pic.twitter.com/tvidoknXXE

— FL360aero (@fl360aero) August 17, 2025

This type of equipment is often used at airports in place of running aircraft auxiliary power units (APUs) to provide additional air conditioning to parked aircraft while they sit on their parking stand before their next flight. During the warmer summer months, ground power air conditioning units are an essential piece of ground equipment that supplies cooled air into the aircraft cabin while the engines are switched off and the aircraft is not running its own air conditioning systems.

The cooled air is supplied from large hoses that connect to a special port in the underbelly of the aircraft. When these tubes are not in use, they are supposed to be securely stowed either at the base of the airbridge at the parking stand or in a dedicated storage box located close to the aircraft itself.

With the aircraft engine damaged by the unplanned ingestion, the crew elected to disembark all the passengers who had boarded, while the airline decided on the best course of action to take to get the passengers to their final destination. It became clear that the engine would have to undergo further inspection, so the airline managed to source another aircraft in the form of Airbus A321neo N715FR to operate the service instead. While the original flight had been scheduled to depart at 09:55 local time, the passengers eventually escaped Charlotte at 19:06, according to data from Flightradar24.

Videos shared by passengers and reported by PYOK captured the hose disintegrating as it spun within the engine’s outer fan blades, with one passenger remarking, “That engine’s fried.” Eyewitness accounts and footage highlighted the severity of the event, showing the shredded hose entangled in the engine fan, with the remnants strewn across the airport tarmac. Airport personnel responded to the aircraft quickly, securing the aircraft and ensuring that there were no injuries occurred among any of the passengers or crew prior to disembarking the aircraft itself.

Frontier Airlines Airbus A320 Incident at Charlotte Douglas International Airport
On August 16, 2025, a Frontier Airlines Airbus A320-251N (N365FR) experienced an incident at Charlotte Douglas International Airport when its left engine ingested a ground air-conditioning hose. The… pic.twitter.com/UjTbJNSAo7

— aircraftmaintenancengineer (@airmainengineer) August 17, 2025

Frontier Airlines issued a statement apologizing to the affected passengers for the inconvenience and commending the airport staff for a swift response to the incident. The airline is reportedly conducting a thorough investigation to determine the cause of the incident and to establish what lessons can be learned to prevent similar occurrences from happening in the future. Investigators will be particularly keen to establish if any lapses in operating procedures, ground equipment handling, or an engine malfunction may have contributed to the incident.

As at the time of writing, the damaged A320 remains out of service at Charlotte Airport as airline engineers assess the condition of the engine and whether it will need to be removed from the wing for a more detailed inspection.

.

The low-cost airline issued a statement on August 13, 2025, claiming that the disruptive individual had been convicted at Edinburgh Sheriff Court. 

According to Ryanair, the passenger flew from Edinburgh to Lanzarote on July 5, 2024 , and was one of three disruptive customers.  

In a statement Ryanair said the passenger’s “inexcusable behavior” forced the flight to turnback to Edinburgh, causing six crew members and 178 passengers to “suffer unnecessary disruption”. 

“The Edinburgh Sheriff Court issued this passenger with a Community Payback Order and sentenced him to 225 hours of community service,” said a Ryanair spokesperson.  

Ryanair welcomed the court’s decision which it said reaffirms the airline’s zero tolerance policy on “passenger misconduct”. 

The airline said it will continue to “combat unruly passenger behavior on aircraft for the benefit of the vast majority of passengers who do not disrupt flights”. 

According to The Scotsman, the unruly passenger was sentenced at Edinburgh Sheriff Court on August 5, 2025.  

“We welcome the Community Payback Order of 225 hours community service issued to this passenger by the Edinburgh Sheriff Court, which demonstrates just one of the many consequences that passengers who disrupt flights will face as part of Ryanair’s zero tolerance policy, and we hope this action will further deter disruptive behavior on flights so that passengers and crew can travel in a comfortable and respectful environment,” added the Ryanair spokesperson. 

A Delta Air Lines Boeing 757-200 aircraft, operating flight DL1830, was pushing away from the gate around 10.30 local time, ahead of its departure for La Aurora International Airport in Guatemala City (GUA), when the tip of one of its wings hit a parked aircraft. 

No injuries were reported as a result of the incident. All 192 passengers and six crew members onboard DL1830 had to disembark and wait for the airline to assign another aircraft to operate this service. The Guatemala-bound flight finally departed four hours after the original scheduled time. 

The other aircraft, the details of which are not known, also belonged to Delta Air Lines and was reportedly empty at the time of the incident. 

This is the latest in a series of wing clipping incidents in the United States over the course of the last few months.  

In May 2025, two Alaska Airlines B737 aircraft clipped wings at Seattle-Tacoma Airport (SEA) and, a few months earlier, in November 2024, a similar incident took place at Boston Logan International Airport (BOS) when an American Airlines Boeing 777 struck the wing of a Frontier Airlines Airbus A321.  

In line with this, the UAE flag carrier announced that starting October 1, 2025, passengers will no longer be allowed to use power banks in-flight. Under the new rules, passengers may carry one power bank with a capacity of up to 100 watt-hours, but it must remain switched off throughout the flight. Charging power banks using the aircraft’s power outlets will be prohibited. Additionally, power banks must be stored in the seat pocket or under the seat in front of passengers, and storing them in overhead bins or checked baggage will no longer be allowed.

Emirates stressed that these measures aim to enhance passenger safety by enabling cabin crew to quickly respond to any battery-related emergencies.

“Storing power banks in accessible locations within the cabin ensures that in the rare event of a fire, trained cabin crew can quickly respond and extinguish the fire,” the airline said in an official statement.

The concern stems from the nature of power banks themselves, which use lithium-ion or lithium-polymer batteries that carry the risk of overheating due to a process called thermal runaway. This happens when a battery generates heat faster than it can dissipate, potentially causing fires, explosions, and the release of toxic gases. While many smartphones have built-in protections to prevent overcharging, some power banks lack these safety features, increasing the risk onboard.

The new policy comes after a recent incident on August 5, 2025, when a KLM flight KL792 from Sao Paulo (GRU) to Amsterdam (AMS) faced an emergency after a passenger’s power bank caught fire mid-flight, filling the cabin with smoke. The cabin crew quickly responded, putting out the fire and securing a safe landing for the flight with no injuries reported.

In light of such events and growing safety concerns, other airlines in Asia, including Singapore Airlines, EVA Air, Thai Airways, AirAsia, China Airlines, Tigerair Taiwan, Cathay Pacific and Hong Kong Airlines, have also tightened restrictions on carrying and using power banks during flights.

The accident occurred around 11:00 local time on August 7, 2025, on the Missouri side of the Mississippi River, near the Melvin Price Locks and Dam, just across the river from Alton, Illinois, north of St. Louis. 

The helicopter involved in the crash was a Hughes 369D registered as N173AL, a lightweight and versatile aircraft that is often used for utility and aerial tasks. The model features a five-blade main rotor and is commonly employed for power line maintenance tasks. 

A witness who was fishing at the time of the crash said that the helicopter and its crew were working on the aerial marker balls on the powerline when it struck one and plummeted onto the barge, catching fire immediately upon impact. 

The witness recorded the crash and shared the video on X. The footage shows a fire sending thick black smoke into the air. 

Cpl. Dallas Thompson from the Missouri State Highway Patrol informed local reporters that first responders had cleared the area because the crash had caused a power line to fall into the water, but it was later determined that the line was not live. 

The fire on the barge was reported to have been swiftly put out and no one aboard the barge was injured. Commercial shipping on the Mississippi River was temporarily stopped in the area following the crash. 

The helicopter was helping with repairs to a tower when the crash happened. The work was being carried out by a contractor and its subcontractor from Ameren Illinois, a regulated electric and natural gas delivery company. 

“We are saddened by today’s tragic incident. Our thoughts and heartfelt condolences are with the victims’ families and colleagues. We will cooperate with the investigation,” an Ameren spokesperson said in a statement after the crash. 

Firefighters, medical teams and police rushed to the crash site. Emergency responders from a local fire department accessed the wreckage by boat. 

Both the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) will investigate the crash. An NTSB investigator is scheduled to arrive at the crash scene on August 8, 2025. 

According to ANA, the airline is the first in the industry to roll out BlueWX’s game-changing technology and comes at a time when there are increasing concerns about turbulence.  

ANA said on August 7, 2025, that the partnership with BlueWX “marks a significant step forward in enhancing flight safety, passenger comfort and operational reliability”. 

The turbulence prediction model, developed using deep learning techniques and a decade of turbulence data, has an 86% accuracy rate and comes to the market following years of extensive testing.  

“For airlines, turbulence prediction is a long-standing challenge. At ANA, we have successfully developed this capability in collaboration with BlueWX, utilizing the latest AI and deep learning techniques. The implementation of this new system will ensure a more reliable and comfortable air travel experience for all our passengers,” said Hiroyuki Kometani, ANA’s Executive Vice President of Operation Division. 

ANA and Keio University have been working on the prediction system since 2019 and together founded BlueWX in July 2023. 

“As turbulence exacerbates due partly to ongoing global warming and becomes a major safety concern for the air transport industry, we are honored to start providing our leading-edge, AI-powered turbulence prediction for ANA flight operations,” said Kaz Watanabe, CEO of BlueWX.  

Trials of the system began in 2021 with ANA pilots expressing strong support for its continued use. The pilots cited accuracy against flight reports and greater effectiveness in real-world operations compared to traditional methods. 

In recent years, episodes of turbulence have led to serious injuries and was suspected of leading to the death of a British man in 2024.  

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has indicated that turbulence accounts for 30 to 50% of aviation incidents. 

“Beyond safety concerns, turbulence also leads to economic losses, including damage to cargo and equipment, as well as flight delays and cancellations from unscheduled inspections that ensure safety during subsequent operations,” said a spokesperson for ANA. 

BlueWX plans to bring its AI-driven weather forecasting solutions to more airlines over the coming years in a bid to improve flight safety and operational efficiency across the aviation industry. 

Lithuanian Minister of National Defense Dovilė Šakalienė confirmed this information to the Baltic News Service agency (BNS) on August 1, 2025. 

“We confirm that the drone has been found. More information will be provided very soon,”  Šakalienė said. 

According to the Lithuanian Armed Forces, the unmanned aircraft looks like the Russian drone “Gerbera”. This drone is designed to trick air defenses by imitating the look of the Iranian-made Shahed loitering munition, which Russia frequently uses to strike Ukrainian cities.  

“Initial information indicates that it is a “Gerbera”, but this fact will be further clarified as the aircraft was discovered with another drone,” Lithuanian Armed Forces confirmed in a statement. 

The reason for the drone entering Lithuanian airspace remains unclear. One initial theory suggested it could have been a provocation, especially as Belarus gets ready for the joint Russian-Belarusian military exercise ‘Zapad 2025’.  

However, the Lithuanian Armed Forces later indicated that the most probable reason is that the drone was disoriented by Ukrainian air defenses. 

The drone entered Lithuania’s airspace early in the morning of July 28, 2025. Local residents were the first to report about the drone to officials after being disturbed by the noise, although later the Lithuanian Armed Forces mentioned that they had already detected the flying object while it was still in Belarusian airspace. 

This marks the second time in a month that a drone has entered Lithuania from Belarus. In early July 2025, another Gerbera drone crashed near the border shortly after crossing into Lithuanian territory. 

Senator Maria Cantwell, the ranking Democrat in the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, posted the comments on July 30, 2025, as the NTSB heard evidence about helicopter routes around Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA). 

Two of the biggest issues discussed at the NTSB hearing centered around the altitude of the Black Hawk helicopter on the night it collided with the American Eagle Bombardier CRJ700 and appeals by air traffic control staff to move helicopter routes away from DCA. 

The NTSB had previously made it known that there were discrepancies surrounding the altitude the Black Hawk was flying at during the time of the crash on January 29, 2025.  

On day one of the hearing a video animation showing the movements of the PSA Airlines aircraft and Black Hawk before the crash was played indicating that the helicopter flew above the 200 feet route altitude limit along a section of the Potomac River.  

However, NTSB investigators said that the helicopter’s barometric altimeters showed crew members that it was flying 80 to 130 feet lower than its actual altitude. 

“There is a possibility that what the crew saw was very different than what the true altitude was,” said NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy. 

According to Reuters, further tests on other Black Hawk helicopters by the NTSB revealed discrepancies of between 80 and 130 feet from the actual altitude the aircraft were flying.

Army officials giving evidence said that discrepancies of up to 100 feet were not a cause of worry for the helicopter type and that the main concern was the vertical separation distances approved around DCA. 

Army representatives at the hearing asked why more was not being done to alert its pilots to potential altitude discrepancies and stepping up testing. 

In response to this area of evidence Senator Cantwell said that the US Army helicopter’s altimeters being “off by over 100 feet” meant “pilots couldn’t follow altitude restrictions even when trying to”. 

Helicopters around DCA

According to Reuters, evidence was also brought forward at the hearing that in 2022 members of an FAA air traffic working group urged helicopters to be moved away from DCA. 

They wanted “hot spots” established but the issue was not carried forward because it was “too political”, the news outlet reported. 

“Today’s NTSB hearing on the January 29 tragedy is revealing a string of systemic failures by the Army & FAA. Management scoffed at a safety proposal from air traffic controllers at DCA to move the helicopter route where the crash happened,” said Senator Cantwell. 

Today’s NTSB hearing on the January 29 tragedy is revealing a string of systemic failures by the Army & FAA. Management scoffed at a safety proposal from air traffic controllers at DCA to move the helicopter route where the crash happened.@SenatorCantwell comments: pic.twitter.com/0JcvZGt5OU

— Senate Commerce, Science, Transportation Committee (@commercedems) July 30, 2025

She added: “The NTSB hearing revealed the conflicts on the DCA routes were so clear that an air traffic control working group suggested changing them. What caused the FAA’s oversight to be so flawed that they couldn’t fix this problem before the tragedy occurred?” 

The passenger jet and Black Hawk collided over the Potomac River in Washington on January 29, 2025, just half a mile away from Reagan Washington National Airport.  

All 64 people onboard the PSA Airlines-operated flight were killed along with three military crew members on the US helicopter.  

Day two of the three-day NTSB hearing begins on July 31, 2025, in Washington DC. 

The two aircraft collided over the Potomac River in Washington on January 29, 2025, as the PSA Airlines-operated flight, with 64 people onboard, was just half a mile away from landing at Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA). 

Within the Black Hawk helicopter were three military crew members conducting a ‘check ride’, an exam that a pilot must pass to undertake certain flight duties.   

When the hearing opens on July 30, 2025, at 09:00 local time, it will be just over six months since the tragedy.  

Over that time, details have emerged about the two flights that will undoubtably be examined further during the public hearing.  

Among the issues to be discussed is why there were 85 recorded incidents between October 2021 and December 2024 in which planes and helicopters came dangerously close to one another while operating in the same airspace. 

Another area of contention likely to be discussed at the hearing is that, prior to the collision, the Black Hawk helicopter did not have Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) operating. 

According to the NTSB, the hearing has been called to obtain “information necessary to determine the facts and circumstances” of the incident.  

Although the investigative hearing is open to the public, only NTSB board members, investigators, witnesses and parties to the hearing are allowed to participate. 

Following the hearing’s opening statements on July 30, 2025, the NTSB panel will first conduct an overview of the ‘Accidents Helicopter’s Air Data Systems and Altimeters’. This will be followed by an overview of ‘DCA Class B Airspace and Helicopter Routes’. 

On day two the panel will discuss ‘Training, Guidance and Procedures Applicable to DCA Air Traffic Control’, before conducting an overview of ‘Collision Avoidance Technology’. 

On the final day of the hearing, the panel will look at ‘Safety Data and Safety Managements Systems (SMSs) at the Various Organizations’. 

At 09:00 on July 30, 2025, factual reports, transcripts of the cockpit voice recorders for both aircraft, photographs and other investigative materials will also be released.  

“After the hearing, the NTSB will use the information gathered to complete the investigation, determine probable cause, and make recommendations to improve transportation safety,” a spokesperson for the agency said. “The full investigation will take approximately one year to 18 months from the date of the accident to complete.”  

According to the Associated Press, the FAA Administrator, Bryan Bedford said that he expects there will be some “very uncomfortable conversations” during the hearing. 

“They need to be had in the clear light of day – and simply put the best interest of the traveling public ahead of any of our personal interests, perhaps,” he added. 

The helicopter, a Eurocopter EC135P2+, with the callsign “Stallion 82”, belonged to the Bundeswehr, the German Armed Forces, and was engaged in a training exercise at the time of the incident.  

This helicopter is among several civil-registered aircraft that provide pilot training for Helicopter Wing 64, which is located at Holzdorf Air Base. 

“The very experienced crew took off this morning at 9:00 local time for a training flight in the low altitude band,” Lieutenant General of the German Air Force Holger Neumann commented. “At 11:30 local time, the helicopter was reported missing.” 

A spokesperson for the Leipzig District Fire Brigade Association reported that a kayaker found the helicopter wreckage in the Mulde river and notified the authorities. 

Germany’s Defense Minister Boris Pistorius confirmed to German public broadcaster MDR that the accident resulted in the deaths of two people. As of July 30, 2025, one person, believed to be the pilot, remains missing. Efforts to locate the missing individual are ongoing. 

State Minister of the Interior of Saxony Armin Schuster stated that the authorities will do everything possible with the police, fire brigade, technical relief agency, and Bundeswehr to locate the missing person. 

The police reported that the Bundeswehr has established a military restricted area at the crash site. Furthermore, the Federal Aviation Office has imposed a no-fly zone within a radius of approximately 3.7 kilometers. 

More than 100 emergency service members, including those from the Grimma Police Station, the Federal Police, and the Water Police, joined the investigation.  

However, emergency teams reported that reaching the helicopter wreckage is currently challenging because a lot of kerosene has leaked into the water. Additionally, the wreck is located in the center of the river, making access challenging. 

“We are deeply saddened by the loss of two Bundeswehr soldiers who lost their lives in a tragic accident during a helicopter training flight near Grimma,” the German Delegation to NATO stated in a post on X on July 30, 2025. 

According to the BBC, at around 05:00 (UTC) a four-foot wave reached the coast of the coast of Oahu in Hawaii as people on the island were told to evacuate to higher ground.  

The initial earthquake was registered off Russia’s Kamchatka Peninsula on July 30, 2025, triggering tsunami alerts around the Pacific Ocean.  

Japan, Hawaii, the US West Coast, Mexico, Peru, Ecuador, Chile and New Zealand were all thought to be at possible risk. 

In the face of uncertainty, both Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines suspended flights to Hawaii.

With less than an hour to go, emergency announcements are being made at the Kahului airport. #tsunami #maui #hawaii pic.twitter.com/aaiAmi43e6

— Laura Buchtel (@Laura_Buchtel) July 30, 2025

Before large waves began striking the area, Hawaiian Airlines said it was “monitoring a tsunami warning impacting” the Islands.  

In a social media post the airline said: “Guests with travel to, from or within the Hawaiian Islands should check the status of their flight before heading to the airport.” 

Alaska Air Group which owns Hawaiian Airlines said: “We are monitoring airport conditions with government agencies and could see operational impacts. A waiver is in place allowing guests to adjust their travel plans.”   

In Japan nearly two million people have been evacuated from at risk areas, and the country is bracing itself for possible waves up to nine feet high.  

According to the BBC, Japan’s Meteorological Agency said areas such as Fukushima, Miyagi and Iwate have already experienced tsunami waves. 

Huge waves reached the coastline of Hokkaido in Japan after a magnitude 8.8 earthquake struck off Russia's Far Eastern Kamchatka Peninsula https://t.co/uZy2bkYyKW pic.twitter.com/UlN6eToK7K

— Reuters (@Reuters) July 30, 2025

Japanese news outlet TRAICY reported that Sendai Airport (SDJ) had closed its runway, leading to the cancellation of flights.  

All Nippon Airways (ANA) also announced it had cancelled flights to Kushiro, Hakodate, and Sendai. 

Japan Airlines, AIRDO and IBEX Airlines were also reported cancelling flights in response to tsunami warnings. 

Taiwanese carriers EVA Airways, Starlux Airlines and Tigerair Taiwan also announced they were cancelling forthcoming flights to Sendai Airport.

The incident occurred at 14:25 local time, as flight AA3023 was preparing to depart for Miami International Airport (MIA) with 173 passengers and six crew onboard. 

Passengers reported hearing a loud bang followed by strong vibrations right before the evacuation order was issued. 

Dramatic footage of the evacuation, which was captured on camera by those at the scene, shows fire and heavy smoke next to the aircraft’s undercarriage as passengers slide down to the ground while being helped by staff on the ground. 

One person reportedly suffered minor injuries during the evacuation. 

The blaze, which affected the left side of the main landing gear, was quickly extinguished by the airport’s fire service. 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is currently investigating the incident, which the airline blamed on a maintenance issue. 

Drone possibly thrown off course by Ukraine’s air defenses, says Lithuania

In an update on the unidentified drone that entered Lithuania from Belarus, the Lithuanian Armed Forces said the object was initially detected by the Lithuanian Air Force while it was still in Belarusian airspace. The information was then relayed to the NATO Joint Air Operations Center. 

“So far, the most likely version is that the aircraft was disoriented by Ukrainian air defenses, but all possible scenarios will be investigated,” the Lithuanian Armed Forces said. 

Despite the early detection, local residents were the first to report on the drone after it crossed into Lithuanian airspace. The Lithuanian National Crisis Management Center confirmed to local media that authorities were alerted by civilians who both saw and heard the aircraft. 

The Lithuanian Armed Forces added that soldiers, along with officials from other national agencies, are continuing the search for the drone. Once located, demining specialists will secure the area before any further investigation begins. 

Lithuanian authorities are investigating reports of an unknown drone that entered the country from Belarus on the morning of July 28, 2025. 

Local residents in certain areas received phone alerts warning them about the aircraft, which was referred to as an ” unidentified type of unmanned aircraft”.  

“The police reported the sighting of an unidentified type of unmanned aircraft that entered Lithuanian territory from Belarus on the morning of July 28, 2025,” the alert read. 

Based on early reports, a few residents mentioned spotting a drone flying at about 200 meters high. The drone was last observed close to the capital, Vilnius. 

“All emergency services have been alerted, and police forces have been fully mobilized,” Darius Buta, a spokesperson for the National Crisis Management Center, said to the country’s national broadcaster LRT. “We urge anyone who spots the drone not to approach it under any circumstances and to immediately call the emergency number.” 

The drone’s type and origin are still unknown. Buta stated that officials are currently looking for the object and have not dismissed the chance that it might have already touched down. 

“There is no verified information at this stage about the level of threat the drone may pose,” he told LRT, adding that all relevant agencies continue to work on the incident. 

Locals spotted the drone first 

Local residents shared on social media that they saw a drone entering Lithuania just before 5:00 local time.  

Haroldas Mackevičius, a local public figure active on social media, mentioned in a Facebook post that the drone “flew over [his] house at 4:56 local time.”  

“The noise lasted for 5–6 seconds, and it moved quickly. From the sound, it seemed to be flying low,” Mackevičius wrote. 

Footage shared on social media appears to show a drone resembling the one involved in a previous incursion, namely a flying wing design powered by a pusher propeller. It is similar in appearance to the Iranian-designed Shahed loitering munition widely used by Russia to strike Ukrainian cities. 

Second such incident in July 2025 

Lithuanian Minister of National Defense Dovilė Šakalienė informed LRT Radio that, as Belarus gets ready for the joint Russian-Belarusian military exercise ‘Zapad 2025’, the chances of incidents, including accidental ones, are rising. 

This is the second incident of this kind this month. On July 10, 2025, authorities in Lithuania reported a suspicious homemade aircraft that looked like a Shahed drone had entered Lithuania from Belarus. 

However, it was later revealed that the drone was actually a Russian-made ‘Gerbera’, which is visually similar to the ‘Shahed’ and is designed to trick air defenses. 

On July 25, 2025, the Southwest Boeing 737-700 was forced to descend around 500 feet to ensure the safety of passengers and crew, according to Flightradar24. 

The data website added that at their closest position, the 737-700 and Hawker Hunter were 4.86 miles apart laterally and 350 feet apart vertically. 

“Southwest Airlines Flight 1496 responded to an onboard alert that another aircraft was in the vicinity while in Los Angeles Air Route Traffic Control Center airspace. The FAA is investigating the event that occurred around 12 p.m. local time on Friday, July 25,” said the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in a statement. 

Southwest confirmed that two flight attendants were injured during the incident, but no passengers were harmed. The 737 was just below 15,000 feet when it maneuvered.  

Earlier today, a Southwest Airlines 737 received a TCAS RA as a Hawker Hunter crossed in front of it. The Southwest jet descended while the Hawker climbed. At their closest point the aircraft were 4.86 miles apart laterally and 350 feet apart vertically. https://t.co/JroaZo5DrE pic.twitter.com/Ymhzc6Dd0K

— Flightradar24 (@flightradar24) July 26, 2025

“The Crew of Southwest Flight 1496 responded to two onboard traffic alerts Friday afternoon while climbing out of Burbank, Cal., requiring them to climb and descend to comply with the alerts,” the airline said in a statement. 

Following the incident, the passenger plane continued to its destination and landed safely at Las Vegas Harry Reid Airport (LAS). 

“We appreciate the professionalism of our Flight Crew and Flight Attendants in responding to this event. Nothing is more important to Southwest than the Safety of our Customers and Employees,” added the airline.  

On July 18, 2025, a SkyWest Airlines Embraer E175 aircraft operating for Delta Air Lines was forced to perform a sharp evasive maneuver to avoid colliding with a B-52H bomber as it was on its final approach to Minot International Airport (MOT). 

The ground stop was confirmed in a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) advisory note on July 24, 2025, with the instruction coming into effect at 23:26.  

United Airlines described the ground stop as “brief”, with no requirement for any flights to be diverted. Its regional subsidiary airline United Express was unaffected. 

A spokesperson for United Airlines said: “A fire alarm sounded at our operations center, which caused employees to move to our nearby backup facility and resulted in a brief nationwide ground stop of United aircraft. Employees have returned to our primary operations center, and the ground stop has been lifted.” 

All @united flights grounded in Newark because of a fire alarm issue in Chicago control center? Is this for entire US? pic.twitter.com/FZWv8lUllf

— Brian Land (@brianland) July 25, 2025

The United Airlines ground stop comes just days after Alaska Airlines experienced a brief nationwide IT outage that grounded all of its flights.   

The outage, on July 20, 2025, caused a temporary, system-wide ground stop for both Alaska Airlines and Air Horizon flights. 

Following the incident, Alaska Airlines said: “We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience and encourage guests to check your flight status before heading to the airport.” 

Both incidents come at a time when the efficiency of the US commercial aviation industry is high on the priority agenda for the Trump administration.