You have a right to an opinion. It's absolutely fine for you to boycott AI. I don't consider it bashing. Your concerns may or may not be real. But then it's your decision. Going out on a crusade with a silly claim as the one made by the pilot in question regarding windows covering is bashing.

Can I ask which other airlines are on that list?

I'm not saying there aren't problems in Indian aviation (nor on Indian roads and infrastructure), and vast improvements need to be made, but that not every report of every problem is credible or unbiased.

Saying that he fears being found dead in a Delhi hotel room leads me to question his judgement. His other statements about expat pilots lead me to question his attitude and motive.

I wasn't talking about safety practices, but about attitude. Being rude and arrogant does not improve safety.

And going off-topic for a bit, as this doesn't apply to aviation, but sure, NA driving on NA infrastructure is safer, but NA driving on Indian infrastructure will get you killed. Blowing the horn, for example, is used to warn other drivers of oncoming traffic, among other things, and is used in a vastly different way than in EU / NA. That these drivers refused to get it speaks to an attitude problem.

Indian driving on Indian infrastructure will also get you killed, to the tune of 100,000 fatalities a year.

Perhaps instead of insisting that when in India, do it the Indian way, we could be less arrogant and try to learn how to be drive safer and adopt best practices even on Indian infrastructure.

This is the second time you have failed to get the point. What are you tryig to say? You should never adapt to Indian driving conditions even if your stubbornness gets you killed? No one is defending Indian drivers or Indian roads. But They are a reality, When you are driving, the best practice is to be defensive (not timid), to anticipate and make allowance of stupidity - of which, there is no shortage on Indian roads, of other drivers.

No question about adopting best practices. Honking when approaching a blind turn in mountains is a good practice. It lets oncoming traffic know that you are approaching a blind corner. There is also traffic on Indian roads, in older vehicles that don't have rear view mirrors. You have to honk. The NA driivers arrogantly thought that Indians were crazy to be honking. Whille it's true that there is too much honking, but some of it is necessary, and is a good practice to adopt. One driver realised the necessity of honking in Indian traffic. The others did not, sticking to their belief that it was best to driive with practices prevalent in the U.S., forgetting tat the purpose of a horn is to draw attention of someone who is not paying attention or cannot see you. There is more frequent need of honking in India. The male drivers never understood that.
Of course, Indian drivers need to learn to drive properly. But it does not mean that it's smart to ignore practices, that have developed out of necessity. It's stupid to get killed because of your belief in inherent superiority of your practices and by corollary, inferiority of the host country.
It's best to obey traffic signals. When you approach a red signal, you need to stop. And when you see green, you may proceed. it does not mean you must npot be cautious when proceeding on green. When most people don't obey traffic signals, it's stupid to proceed without being circumspective at the signal and its surroundings. If a driver approaching an intersection from the left, or right, headed towards redlight appears to be speeding ahead, it's SMARTER to stop even when you have the green signal permitting you to proceed, rather than stick to your guns and get killed. Would you proceed through a green light when the other guy approaching a redlight isn't slowing down at all? Sure the other guy iis wrong. And sure, it's your right to proceed, Sure, it's better if the other guy stops. But being stubborn gets you killed, regardless of the colour of your skin.

I get the point very clearly, thank you, I just don't agree with it. Why are we persisting in using this analogy. It does not apply to flying or piloting skills.

The core issue is the culture in most Indian cockpits is one of strict hierarchy and poor CRM, along with a mix of bending the rules and not maintaining cockpit discipline (eg routinely violating sterile cockpit rules). This situation is being worsened by loosening training standards / fraud etc. Where does the arrogance and stubbornness of expat pilots come into this? Do we have any examples where expat pilots (from Western airlines) have caused safety issues due to stubbornness and arrogance? Quite the contrary, the evidence would suggest. If it wasn't for them willing to blow the whistle and resign, these issues would just have been swept under the carpet.

And for those who keep pointing to the Mangalore crash: Yes, the Mangalore crash had an expat pilot, but not one from a country (Serbia, and formely a pilot with JAT) whose aviation practices would be considered best practice!

On doing some further digging, I apologize for generalizing about the Serbian captain. By all accounts he was a good pilot and well-liked by his FOs, even in India. This article I came across in the Times of India once again points the finger back at AI / AIX culture:

"The commander of the ill-fated Air India Express flight, Capt Zlatco Glusica, had been called for a counselling session and admonished by the airline's air safety department in March for a hard landing in Thiruvananthapuram. The landing was well within the limits laid down by the aircraft manufacturer and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation.

"He was paranoid about hard landings after that. Due to the fear of being hauled up by the executive director (flight safety), Capt Glusica, like many pilots in AI Express, used to extend the flare (aircraft floating over the runway) resulting in loss of valuable runway for stopping after touchdown," revealed a senior commander. International airlines do not haul commanders for a few hard landings within the limits as it puts undue pressure on pilots.

The Air India spokesperson confirmed Capt Glusica was called for counselling for a hard landing. "As per our airline policy, if the hard landing limit values exceed, suitable action is initiated or DGCA is informed depending on the level of excess," said the spokesperson, adding the aircraft maintenance manual also stipulates that an inspection must be carried out by engineering if the limit is exceeded.

The TOI has a copy of Vg (vertical acceleration due to gravity) limits followed by AI and AI Express. For a B737 aircraft with a 1.65g landing, the pilot gets an email, for a 1.74g he is called for counselling, for 1.8g the report goes to the DGCA and only for a 2.1g landing is the aircraft sent for inspection. "Any normal landing is around 1.2 to 1.4g. The figure of 1.74g is way below manufacturer's limit. To counsel a pilot for that is to keep him in a negative frame of mind for all approaches and landings," said Capt A Ranganathan, an airsafety expert. Another shocking revelation, which, too, goes against airsafety norms followed worldwide, is Air India's policy towards go-arounds.

"In Air India and Air India Express, there is no emphasis or encouragement to pilots to do a go-around if they are doubtful about the quality of approach and the subsequent safe landing. In fact, pilots in Air India and Air India Express are petrified of a go-around as many pilots, though not all, have had to explain their action to the executive director," another commander said. "This is apart from filing an Operations Incident Report. A copy of this goes into the records maintained by the airline's air safety department and another goes to the Directorate General of Civil Aviation," says a senior commander. ".

Despite what is commonly assumed, it is not at all clear that the Mangalore crash can be attributed to the expat captain.

Perhaps you could tell us how AI managers caused him to fall asleep? Perhaps they drugged his coffee?

edit: Maybe they meant to get him in his hotel room, but misjudged the timing?

srirams -- indeed he was sleeping for part of the flight. Do we have any evidence that his sleeping is directly linked to the accident? And while on the subject, do we know his flight pattern and fatigue level that causes him to fall asleep during the flight? Incidentally, the India-Gulf-India turnaround flights are notorious for pushing the limits on pilot fatigue.

What is known is the aircraft attempted a go-around after landing long and after reverse thrust had been applied. It is also known the FO had wanted a go around all along. What is not known is who pushed the throttles forward to initiate a go-around after reverse thrust had been applied. What we know is one of the pilots did it, and the cause of the accident was put down to pilot error.

Phew! I am so glad that you do.
Anaology is not in operation, i.e. flying a plane versus driving, but in attitude. You are missing the forest for the trees. The attitudes displayed are analogous.


Environment in an Indian cockpit is a micrcosm of Indian society. But using a weak case such as newspaper in a window is a very weak argument.
The lax attitude is pervasive in Indian society, which is bad, is not unique to AI. Blocking a portion of the window to keep the sun out, is not an issue that's related to CRM or whatever you claim. That's why it's bashing and not real criticism. His claims are sensational. Sensationalism is often greeted with incredulity.
Once again you are missing the point. No one is saying expat pilots, or even the one whose statements are being discussed, are bad pilot. But we are questioning is attitude and credibility. No one has said all expat pilots are arrogant. But this one is. Why do you persist on generalising from one pilot to all expat pilots? You are extrapolating what was never said or implied.
Please don't make it Indian pilots versus expat pilots, or as it seems expat pilots from one specific country. It's about one expat pilot making sensational claims.

Actually if you follow the broader discussions, not just here but on Pprune, it is not just about ONE expat pilot making sensational claims. Any expat pilot who dares to criticize the system is ridiculed and bashed by those in denial. Many of them make perfectly rational, level headed observatons but are bashed. Their inputs are either belittled, ignored, denied, or squashed by Air India and other Indians in denial. Those pilots who dare to bypass Air India and go directly to the DGCA are reprimanded.

And this brings us back to your original question: Has Air India bashing gone too far? Any my answer remains a firm "not far enough".

Even pilots are divided on the seriousness of blocking a portion of the window to keep the sun out.
There is another discussion going on about cracked windshield in NewsstandOne pilot is arguing that it's safe to fly a plane with a crack in the windsheild., while my stand is, it depends on the type of crack an location. It may be safe to fly under some conditions, but you can't just make a blanket statement that it's safe to fly a plane with a crack in the windshield. I am sure pilots will be divided on this issue too.

He was a passenger on the flight to Dubai the day before, and he slept in a hotel before his flight. One of the causes of the crash was "sleep inertia", and I'd think you'd agree that sleeping in the cockpit is not considered "best practice".

I am not a pilot, nor have I worked for an airline, so I don't know how serious it is for the aircraft to be in the hands of the co-pilot in the situation Sankaps described. But I am sure there has to be a first for a co-pliot. I would like the pilot in command to be available in case the copilot is not able to handle a situation.

LOL. Why didn;t I think of that! :D