AvTalk Episode 325: The crash of Air India flight 171

AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 1
EPISODE 325
[EPISODE]
[0:00:08] IP: Hello, and welcome to episode 325 of AvTalk. I am Ian Petchenik, here, as always
with –
[0:00:16] JR: Jason Rabinowitz. Hello, Ian. How are you?
[0:00:19] IP: Hello, Jason.
[0:00:23] JR: Yeah. The show notes just say, begin with long sigh. I think you hit the nail on the
head there with that sigh. These are not episodes we like doing. You all knew it was coming.
We have to talk about it. But the news has had almost a week now to sink in, and none of it is
particularly good. Where do we even start with Air India?
[0:00:44] IP: Well, I mean, as always –
[0:00:46] JR: Get right into it.
[0:00:47] IP: Let's start with the facts. On the afternoon of June 12th, Air India Flight 171 from
Ahmedabad to London Gatwick crashed shortly after takeoff. This is the first fatal crash of a
Boeing 787. It is the first 787 total whole loss. There are any number of questions at this
moment that will need to be answered eventually by a full investigation that is currently
underway. 241 of the 242 people onboard perished in the crash. There was one survivor, a man
that was seated in seat 11A, next to the L2 exit door. He is the lone survivor from the airplane.
At this point, there is still an as yet, unknown number of casualties on the ground as the aircraft
impacted a medical school dormitory.
This was a flight that operated daily to London. Everything we know so far is based on what
limited ADS-B data we have. There are a few reports that have come out today, published in the
Wall Street Journal about some of the things that we may have seen in the video that was taken
of the departure roll, of the liftoff, and of the crash. Jason, let's talk about what the ADS-B tells
us, limited as it is.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 2
[0:02:29] JR: Not a whole lot, but enough to know –
[0:02:31] IP: Not a whole lot.
[0:02:32] JR: - it went wrong real quick.
[0:02:34] IP: Very quickly indeed. A few things to address with the ADS-B data here. Our
ground coverage, FlightRadar24 ground coverage at Ahmedabad is limited in the northeastern
section of the airfield. The terminal complex, the runway is a northeast, southwest oriented
runway. Then the terminal complex is located in the, I guess, southwest to the north side of the
runway. In the terminal complex area, we have excellent ground coverage. In the area about the
northeast half of the runway, we lack ground coverage at the moment, or ground coverage is
variable. It comes in and out, depending on particular effort, but for the most part, we lack
ground coverage on that part of the runway.
There was some question initially that thankfully, some additional non-positional data, and some
third-party data that we've been able to look at confirms that the aircraft did in fact use the full
length of the runway. There were some questions that the aircraft made an intersection
departure and took off only using half the runway. On the first day, this led to immense
speculation that they took off with only half the runway. Of course, they didn't have enough
speed, and that's why they crashed. That's not the case.
[0:04:02] JR: It was just, the data happens to be missing the back taxi, the U-turn and the full
length of it.
[0:04:07] IP: Exactly. Exactly. Then, looking at the airborne data that we have, the aircraft lifted
off at 13:38 local time, which is 08:08 UTC. Then things happened very quickly. We received
just a handful of airborne data points. We're looking at eight airborne data points, before the
aircraft either went out of coverage again, or stopped transmitting ADS-B. We'll get to that point
of clarification –
[0:04:40] JR: In a moment.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 3
[0:04:41] IP: - in just a moment. The first data point that we have, once the aircraft is airborne
toward the end of the runway is at 575 feet standard pressure reporting. Remember, ADS-B
data reports the altitude of the aircraft at standard pressure at above mean sea level,
uncorrected for local air pressure, temperature, or height above ground level. What we were
able to do in this case is provide a calculation for how high above ground the aircraft was. In this
case, the first airborne position we have, the aircraft's about 20 feet in the air. The max altitude
that we received via ADS-B was 625 feet. That equates to about 70 feet above ground level.
The first airborne position we have from the aircraft is 184 knots. Each subsequent airborne
position is slower than the liftoff speed. We go from 184 knots and this is ground speed. 184
knots, down to 177, down to 174. The final airborne position we have is 172 knots, and then we
stop receiving data from the aircraft.
[0:06:01] JR: Yeah. Not that much to be, I guess, calculated off the ADS-B here data, because
we have video of what happened. Surely, you've all seen it. Plane went up, and there are only a
few data points, because the flight, what was it? 30 seconds? The whole flight?
[0:06:16] IP: About 30 seconds, the whole flight.
[0:06:18] JR: Not much data. Even if there was better coverage, there may not have been more
data to begin with.
[0:06:24] IP: Exactly. What can we talk about as far as the video is concerned? We'll talk about
what we've seen in the video. We can talk about things that we know. We can talk about areas
that have been subject to speculation. We're not going to get into those necessarily, but we will
touch on that. Then, we can talk about what the Wall Street Journal is reporting today.
[0:06:43] JR: Yup. As always, there's a lot we don't know, but we do know a few things.
[0:06:46] IP: Exactly. What we do know is that the aircraft lifted off, so we know this from the
ADS-B data, we know this from the video. The aircraft lifted off toward the end of the runway.
We know that upon liftoff, they raised the nose, they did not raise the landing gear. The landing
gear stayed down for the entire flight. Unfortunately, the video to my mind is not clear enough,
but I do want to call out the fact that the 787, and I think we talked about this accidentally, not
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 4
too many episodes ago, in the context of the A330’s automatic gear door system. Then Jason,
you came back and said, “Oh, hey, the 787 already does that.”
Upon liftoff, the 787's gear doors, not the gear itself, but the doors automatically open. To my
mind, and I don't know if, Jason, you have a different opinion, but I can't tell if – the video is not
clear enough to me.
[0:07:49] JR: No. Unfortunately, the video is probably quite a bit zoomed in, so there's a lot of
resolution lost there. It's real hard to tell any fine details.
[0:07:58] IP: We do know that the gear itself stayed down for the entire flight.
[0:08:05] JR: Yeah. Not terribly surprising. I don't think you can really draw up any conclusions
from that. It is just fast.
[0:08:10] IP: No. I'm just saying what we absolutely know for sure.
[0:08:12] JR: Again, not saying you are. Just, it is a fact. That is what happened. That is what
occurred.
[0:08:19] IP: We also know, based on the video, that the angle of attack of the aircraft
increased as it lost height.
[0:08:26] JR: Yeah. Whether that was them attempting to try to gain some altitude at the last
second, even though there was really not much hope of that, or really, just trying to do anything
at all. Again, we have no answers for why that happened. We just know it did happen.
[0:08:40] IP: Exactly. What speculation immediately turned to was the position of the flaps of
the 787. Standard 787 takeoff is flaps five, which includes the deployment of the front slats as
well. The 787 flaps at this resolution, I think it's impossible to tell. There have been posts upon
posts and video analysis and everything like that. I think, for my money, it's impossible to tell
based on this video. I don't think it's worth examining grainy frame by frame things.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 5
[0:09:19] JR: No. But you're never going to get a clear answer out of that, unless you're an
investigator with one of the black boxes. It's really hard to see these theories come out right
away and people blasting it out on YouTube and getting millions of views when there's just no
answers to that yet. What we do know is that the 787 has protections against taking off without
flaps deployed. It may at some point, let the flight crew do it, but it is not going to be happy
about it. It is going to let the flight crew know that, “Hey, you have an incorrect flaps setting.
Don't do that.” This isn't an old school 737 that's just going to let you do it for the most part. This
is the 787. This is a next-gen aircraft, so it has warnings and alerts about this kind of thing.
It's really hard to draw any conclusion from what is the one video we have, especially since
there's also no video of the front of the aircraft to see what the slats were set at as well, because
that might be a bit easier to tell. As far as I am aware, no such video exists.
[0:10:14] IP: Yeah. If one is out there, I have not seen that, of that particular angle, or at least
conclusive enough to provide any evidence one way or the other. Today, the Wall Street Journal
is reporting that Indian investigators are saying they believe the 787’s Ram Air Turbine was
deployed when the aircraft crashed. That had been something that was speculated upon
watching the video. Again, to my mind, the video does not provide conclusive evidence one way
or the other. A pixel here, a pixel there. I can't make heads or tails there. But if the Wall Street
Journal is reporting it, let's talk about what that could mean.
[0:10:55] JR: And what it is as well. Not everyone's going to know what a RAT is.
[0:10:58] IP: I was going to start with what the RAT is. The RAT, or Ram Air Turbine, it's well
named, because it takes Ram Air and generates electricity with a turbine.
[0:11:10] JR: Hey, it is what it says it is.
[0:11:12] IP: It is what it says it is. In the 787, it's located aft of the right wing and drops out of a
compartment and drops into the slipstream of the aircraft. Airflow moves over. It's a small
propeller. Using general terms here. That spins based on the air flow and that generates
electricity. Used to generate electricity, to generate emergency electrical power, to provide
enough electrical power to the aircraft to power critical systems. The RAT only drops in the case
of full power loss.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 6
[0:11:52] JR: Which also potentially tells us that the APU, if it was working, may not have been
running after takeoff, which a very quick look at some very unofficial Boeing checklists shows
that the APU, I believe, is supposed to be running at takeoff and is turned off in the climb out
phase. There is some amount of questions we can infer from the RAT deploying, but that should
only happen, like Ian said, during a full electrical loss. That this is a last-ditch effort to generate
some electrical power for some systems onboard the aircraft. It's really, in case everything else
fails. There's a lot of questions that the Ram Air Turbine being deployed raises.
[0:12:38] IP: Exactly. Where do answers come from? In this case, they will come from what we
often call the black boxes. Though in this case, because it's a 787, thankfully, it's just a black
box. The 787 has two enhanced airborne flight recorders. Those are combined flight data
recorder and cockpit voice recorders. One of those is located in the aircraft's nose, one is
located in the tail. Indian investigators have confirmed that they have recovered one of the
devices, and I believe they've also confirmed that it's the one from the tail section of the aircraft.
[0:13:17] JR: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. This is at least some good news that not only
were they able to find one of the two boxes, but again, this is a newer generation aircraft with
redundancy built in, so we no longer have to worry about things, like the flight data recorder
versus the cockpit voice recorder, because they are both one. It would be nice if the rest of
every aircraft out there had the same redundancy like that.
[0:13:43] IP: One day. One day. Where is the investigation now? Well, the first thing that
happened was Air India needed to investigate its own 787 fleet. That is currently in process. I
believe, they've completed all but six of those inspections on the aircraft. None have revealed
any systemic, or major fleet-wide issues. Indian regulators, the Civil Aviation Authority seems to
be happy with how those inspections have gone. The FAA has said and continues to say that it
is premature to make any fleet-wide decisions about grounding or not on the 787 fleet, so we'll
continue to watch that.
This is certainly something, where investigators are going to be looking at whether or not this is
a 787 issue, or was this an issue particular to this flight. As of yet, everything that investigators
and regulators are seeing, it's not telling them that this is a 787 issue. That could certainly
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 7
change as the investigation continues. As of right now, it does not seem to be something that
investigators and regulators are particularly focused on as far as a fleet wide issue.
[0:15:04] JR: Yeah. Particularly, the FAA is saying it would be premature to make any fleet-
wide decisions. It would be even premature to call it premature. There is no information,
whatsoever, to indicate that this would be something indicative to the entire 787 fleet and not
just one aircraft. I also want to bring up the fact that early on, a lot of less trustworthy outlets
were going on, immediately jumping to conspiracy theories about, oh, Boeing, another bad
Boeing aircraft, and talking about how aircraft from the Charleston facility have had
manufacturing issues for so long. Well, this isn't quite an old 787 in the grand scheme of 787s.
Not that it is old overall. It was only 11 and a half years old. But this was line number 26. Fairly
early on in the Boeing production line.
I believe, it predates the Charleston line actually charting out any 787s to begin with at all. It did
sit on the ground for a number of years, before it was reworked and eventually delivered to Air
India. No, the Charleston issues in the past have no bearing on this aircraft, because it was
manufactured back when these were still being manufactured at the Everett facility, not in
Charleston. If anyone tells you otherwise, that is absolutely not the case here.
[0:16:22] IP: I think that's worth noting. I mean, if we're going to discuss problems with
coverage, I think it's worth noting the just, and part of my job here at FlightRadar24 is to read
the comments section.
[0:16:38] JR: Oh, I'm so sorry.
[0:16:41] IP: I know that it's not people listening to this podcast. I know that's not this audience,
but if you are listening to the podcast and you go and talk about this with somebody, the amount
of just, I don't even know what exactly it is, but the rush to blame either Air India, or the pilots,
without any shred of evidence. I mean, it's very upsetting to me that we continue to do this.
[0:17:14] JR: Yeah, especially for an aircraft that had been operating, apparently, without any
significant issue for 11 and a half years. That's a noteworthy point to say, this is not a brand-new
aircraft that continually had delay issues and maintenance problems. It’s an almost 12-year-old
aircraft that has been operating by all accounts perfectly fine, until it didn't, unfortunately. We
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 8
don't know what the cause is. It is just outrageous to go on with conspiracy theories about the
overall issues with the 787, or blaming Boeing, or, oh, yet another Boeing issue. It’s just, we
don't know. We don't know anything.
[0:17:50] IP: Exactly. We've got one more point on Air India. Because of the 787 fleet
inspections, because of what we're going to talk about in the next block on the episode and
because of a variety of operational factors, Air India is reducing its wide-body flying schedule by
about 15% over the next couple of weeks.
[0:18:16] JR: Yeah. That is because of a whole host of reasons, due to the tensions in the
Middle East, night curfews, and of course, the fleet inspections and generally, it's still Air India.
They're still dealing with the normal Air India stuff day-to-day. But yeah, they seem to be going
through these inspections pretty quick, and I'm sure by the time this episode is out, they will be
done.
There's one more thing I did want to point out. There were several videos and reports about, oh,
the aircraft suffered a power issue and the evidence people used to prove that in their mind was
by showing video from the prior flight of the inflight entertainment system not working, and it
being hot in the aircraft. Well, again, this is still Air India. This is an original to Air India aircraft. If
the entertainment system worked onboard this aircraft, that would be news, because it generally
does not ever. In the video itself that you may or may not have seen the passenger says like,
“Hey, it doesn't work.” It never works. That should be a good indication that that is not news.
That is not a story. That is unfortunately, all too common place at Air India. That is something
they were addressing with refurbishments across the entire fleet. If you do happen to see that
video, just know that that aircraft probably never in its history has had a working seatback
entertainment system, and it does not actually mean anything.
[0:19:41] IP: Fair enough. Yeah, we'll leave it there. Let's turn our attention to the ongoing
situation in the Middle East. We're going to talk about what's happened so far in the past five or
so days. This is June 18th. By the time the podcast comes out, on June 20th, everything we say
could either be moot, or incredibly worse. We just don't know at this point. Following Israeli
strikes on Iranian sites in the early hours of June 13th late last week, airspace in Iran, Iraq,
Jordan, Syria and Israel went into closure mode. Jordan and Syria opened back up a little bit.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 9
Iraq has opened up to a very small amount of flights near Basrah, and Iran remains completely
closed.
Let's start with where the airspace closures are and where aircraft are headed now. Iranian
airspace is completely closed. There are no flights in Iran, except for some Iranian government
flights. Today, there were some Iranian government flights that flew from somewhere in Iran.
We picked them up near the Persian Gulf and landed in Oman. There were also a few
movements out of Tehran earlier in the week. But as far as normal traffic goes, that's completely
shut down. As far as Iraq is concerned, airspace there is completely closed, except for flights to
and from Basrah, out of the south of the country. There are specific airways that flights need to
operate through, as well as specific waypoints, and from there, flights can fly in and out of
Basrah.
Syria for its part has closed certain airways that have become unavailable at various times.
They've completely closed their airspace and then reopened and allowed certain flights. Same
with Jordan. Jordan was closed completely for a time. Then it was reopened on certain airways.
At the moment, aircraft are required to carry at least 30 minutes of extra fuel however the
airspace is open. Israel for its part has a full closure to normal traffic. All regularly scheduled
flights have been canceled in and out of Israel. However, repatriation flights are being allowed,
so those are flights to Israel for passengers who were stuck outside of Israel as of last week.
There have been a lot of aircraft staging in Cyprus to bring passengers from there and from
other origins to Tel Aviv. Those are all being operated with prior permission only.
Airspace in Saudi Arabia and airspace in Afghanistan has become increasingly busy, with flights
over Afghanistan going from about 50 per day, this time last month, to nearly 300 per day as of
today, over the past couple days. Saudi Arabia has gone from 700, and these are over flights
only. They've gone from 700 daily flights up to 1,400 daily over flights.
[0:23:09] JR: Wow.
[0:23:11] IP: Lots and lots of compression of traffic. Obviously, Egypt and Saudi Arabia seeing
the largest increases. Over the past few days, we have also seen a dramatic influx from the
United States to bases in Europe and the Middle East of United States Air Force and other
military tanker and transport aircraft. Dozens of tankers have positioned along with fighter jets
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 10
that they've towed from bases and from bases in Europe, to bases near to the Middle East, or in
the Middle East. Those are continuing to operate, and that's where we stand at the moment.
[0:23:54] JR: What are those tankers doing?
[0:23:54] IP: As far as what we’re tracking.
[0:23:57] JR: As of now, nothing. Hopefully, it stays that way. Hopefully, it is just they're there
and they're hanging out and they're not doing anything and they come home, and let’s leave it at
that and never talk about it again.
[0:24:07] IP: There you go. Commercially speaking, Jason, you've been keeping tabs on which
airlines and which airports are offering travel waivers, and I believe, we now have travel waivers
in place for Dubai and Doha. Is that correct?
[0:24:21] JR: Yes. American to Doha, as American operates to Doha, and United to Dubai, as a
United flies to Dubai. It is interesting to see these airlines issue a blanket waiver for countries
not really involved in any of this, at least directly. But it is a pretty good indication that they are
aware that their passengers may not want to go to the region at all, or even connect through the
region.
[0:24:46] IP: Yeah. I mean, we have no indications at this point that these waivers are due to
any direct impact to these flights. But there is certainly hesitancy and caution on the parts of
these airlines to around these flights. I think it's a prudent move to allow customers the ability to
change their flights if they choose.
[0:25:10] JR: Yeah. I would probably be thinking twice about it as well. Good on them. I’m sure
other airlines are doing the same, but I just happen to see from American and United today.
While all of this is going on, so is the Paris Air Show, which I almost [inaudible 0:25:27] that
about.
[0:25:28] IP: Paris Air Show.
[0:25:30] JR: I kind of forgot about it.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 11
[0:25:31] IP: It's been a week, but has also been quite the week at the Paris Air Show. Now, it's
fair to say that the Paris Air Show has been Airbus's show this year.
[0:25:41] JR: Yeah. Whether that is just because Airbus is winning, or because Boeing is laying
low after last week. I could totally understand. I don't think anyone could blame Boeing for that.
We'll probably never know if this is a consequence of the Air India crash, or if this is just things
playing out as they ordinarily would. I don't think that's probably the case, because we have
seen Boeing put up some pretty decent numbers in air shows in recent history. I think we have a
nice list of the orders and other major aircraft movements, I guess, because they're not all
orders, in no particular order. I think we have it here. Let's just take it from the top, I guess.
[0:26:25] IP: Yeah. I tried to group them thematically, because there's a couple of things that I
wanted to talk about.
[0:26:30] JR: Then I just put in more and random places, breaking up that theme.
[0:26:33] IP: Oh, oh, great. I always appreciate that.
[0:26:36] JR: Well, you didn't tell me there was a theme before.
[0:26:38] IP: We'll figure out as we go, like we always do.
[0:26:41] JR: Take it from the top with Riyadh Air ordering some more, as if they need more,
even though they haven't even started operating yet. But more aircraft. This time, A350-1000s
with an order for 25 firm and 25 options. This is going to be a big airline.
[0:26:59] IP: They do not have small ambitions.
[0:27:02] JR: No.
[0:27:03] IP: They've completed large orders for wide body aircraft and narrow body aircraft.
They've said, “Okay, we've got our order book. Now, we need to go figure out where we're going
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 12
to fly.” They have a stated goal of connecting Saudi Arabia to 100 destinations. They've got
some places to fly.
[0:27:23] JR: Yeah. Going to need even more airplanes right now, according to the always up
to date and accurate, Wikipedia, this 25 A350-1000s is in addition to the 40 787-9s that had
previously been announced. There are some additional options and purchase rights there as
well. Between that and the 60 A321neos, that's a lot of airplanes, but probably still not enough.
[0:27:50] IP: Also, in Saudi Arabia, we have lessor AviLease taking 22 Airbus A350 cargo jets,
a big boost for the A350 cargo program. That is also part of a larger order that includes 55
A320neo family aircraft, which is going to be a mix of A320neos and A321neos, but not any
XLRs. This will be split just between A320neo and A321neo aircraft, but 22 A350 freighters, not
too shabby.
[0:28:25] JR: I learned something about the A350 freighter that Seth Miller tweeted out from the
Airbus media thing in Paris, that apparently, the A350 freighter is able to carry all large modern
engines onboard, which is a pretty big claim to be able to put any engine inside the fuselage of
an A350 and be able to deliver it pretty much anywhere. That's not really the case with any
modern freighter today, but I'm really interested to know what caveats and exceptions there are
to large modern engines, because are there engines that are bigger, that are in a different
category, that they would maybe call extra-large modern engines? That's how they might get us,
because to be able to put a 777X engine in an A350, I'd like to see that happen.
[0:29:18] IP: I mean, that would be hilarious. The interesting thing here is that Airbus in
designing the A350 freighter was able to take stock during the pandemic, basically, and learn
from what operators wanted and needed out of a fresh-built freighter and said, “Okay, we'll
make the door bigger. We'll put it at the rear of the fuselage.” This will allow folks to load these
long cargos and oversized cargos with minimal movement. I wish I could find the piece that I
was reading, but they were discussing how many turns it takes to get a large engine into a 777
freighter.
[0:30:03] JR: Oh, I guess, 50-point turn.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 13
[0:30:05] IP: Yeah. They were like, okay, we want to be able to do it in far fewer turns. I wish I
could find that article, because, of course, now that it becomes relevant and we're talking about
it, I can't find it again.
[0:30:14] JR: Well, of course. But if Airbus can truly fit a GE9X engine inside an A350, I cannot
wait for that demonstration.
[0:30:25] IP: Hey, GE, can we borrow –
[0:30:27] JR: Can we borrow an engine just to see? Honestly –
[0:30:31] IP: Well, but remember, that the GE9X is large, but it's not that much larger than the
GE90.
[0:30:44] JR: Yeah. But it's also bigger than the fuselage cross-section of a 737, right? Can
they also transport 737 fuselages?
[0:30:53] IP: Have you ever been inside a 737?
[0:30:55] JR: I have, unfortunately. They're not great. But yeah, let's – if for some reason,
Boeing needs to move 737 fuselages by air, apparently, Airbus might be able to do that. You'd
have to cut a wider door, probably, in the aircraft. I just want to know if they can actually fit it
inside.
[0:31:12] IP: Things just got real weird here.
[0:31:14] JR: They did. Let's move on to Starlux ordering 10 more A350-1000s. Popular
airplane in addition to the eight they've already had on order. First delivery is later this year.
That's interesting. Likely headed to Phoenix, you say. Oh, that's because they announced
Phoenix earlier this year. That's nice.
[0:31:31] IP: They did announce Phoenix later this year, earlier this year. Later this year, once
they get what sounds like a couple A350-1000s in the fleet, they'll be able to launch service to
Phoenix.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 14
[0:31:42] JR: That's nice. Let's move over to Embraer.
[0:31:44] IP: Let’s get a lot smaller.
[0:31:46] JR: Yeah. Embraer, also doing things. Airlink leasing 10 E195-E2s from Azora. That's
nice. The E2 program, I'm always happy to see the E2 get some orders. That's great. Airlink,
that would be the South African operator. Just making sure –
[0:32:01] IP: Correct. Yes.
[0:32:01] JR: Okay. That's good.
[0:32:02] IP: They will be the second African operator after Air Peace of the E2.
[0:32:08] JR: That's great. Somewhere, I don't think we have it in the notes here somewhere,
but somebody became the launch operator for the E195 freighter, I think I saw.
[0:32:21] IP: Yes. That is going to be, see, we ditched that.
[0:32:25] JR: I remember. It's in my brain.
[0:32:27] IP: Now you're going to put it –
[0:32:28] JR: But it’s not on the notes. Now, I'm making you look it up.
[0:32:32] IP: Let's move on, and we'll come back to it.
[0:32:33] JR: Okay.
[0:32:34] IP: Jason, tell me about Skywest.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 15
[0:32:36] JR: I love the E2. It's a great little airplane. The cockroach of the skies was just
awarded another state of execution by way of 60 orders from Skywest. Order for 60 aircraft.
Skywest operates –
[0:32:52] IP: No, there was 61 aircraft orders. They went through a lot of paperwork.
[0:32:57] JR: A lot of paperwork. Apparently, they will operate 16 of the E175s under a new
multi-year contract for Delta, it disclosed today. These aircraft are expected to replace 11 CRJ-
900s, no great loss there, five CRJ-700s, no great loss there, under contract with Delta.
Deliveries will begin pretty soon in 2027. I mean, I'm conflicted over this. I love being a
passenger on an E175. They are supremely comfortable. But like, does this ever end?
[0:33:27] IP: Nope.
[0:33:28] JR: There's no end.
[0:33:29] IP: It doesn't. It just never ends.
[0:33:30] JR: It's just never going to end. Very quietly, the E175 is going to end up being the
longest mass-produced commercial aircraft in history, which is really quite interesting, because I
never would have thought that the 737 would be dethroned. At this rate, we may never see the
end of the E175, and I guess, that's okay.
[0:33:53] IP: I mean, sure. Why not? As long as they keep making it comfortable, let's –
[0:33:57] JR: Sure.
[0:33:58] IP: - let's keep doing it.
[0:33:59] JR: Sure. How about we switch back to Airbus, for some reason? I'm not really
detecting that we –
[0:34:03] IP: I was going to tell you who the freighter operator is.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 16
[0:34:06] JR: Oh, who's the freighter operator?
[0:34:08] IP: It'll be Bridges Air Cargo, which is a Malta-based operator. It will be the launch
customer for the E190F, says Embraer this week, and they will take a pair of those E190
freighters.
[0:34:22] JR: Neat.
[0:34:23] IP: Beginning in the third quarter of this year.
[0:34:26] JR: Neat. That's a niche little aircraft. Good luck to them. Moving back to Airbus Land,
Egypt Air added six more A350-900s to its backlog, making that 16 total. MNG Airline signed an
MOU, so not quite an order, for two A350 freighters. Maybe they want to put some GE engines
inside for, I don't know, whatever. Maybe they saw that and they said, “We'll take two of those.”
VietJet. Oh, wow. VietJet is on a spree after the exaggeration of its death, apparently. They are
really on a tear, signing an MOU for 150 A320neos, plus apparently, oh, sorry, that's 100 firm
and 50 options. That is in addition to its order last month, where it doubled its A330neo order
book to 40. This airline that doesn't have a lot of cash on hand, and we were talking just a few
weeks ago about it may not being long for this world is sure wants a lot of aircraft.
[0:35:28] IP: Yeah. Real quick, let's just run through the acronyms that we use when we talk
about orders. Firm order is exactly what it sounds like. It is an actual order saying, “I have
money. You build airplanes. Here's some money. I want some airplanes.”
[0:35:51] JR: Yes. By here's some money, you mean, there's a down payment almost certainly.
[0:35:55] IP: There's a down payment. You don't pay for the whole airplane, until you take
delivery.
[0:35:58] JR: Right. If you don't take delivery, you will lose that down payment almost certainly.
[0:36:03] IP: Yeah. It gets very murky very quick.
[0:36:04] JR: They’ve got skin in the game.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 17
[0:36:06] IP: Yes, exactly. When we say options, that means that you have a contract to say,
usually, options come as part of a firm order. Here's money that secures me 100 delivery slots.
Then, I am going to agree in the contract that later at some point in time, I can say, I want 50
more airplanes and I will be guaranteed delivery slots for those aircraft when I exercise the
option to order more.
[0:36:38] JR: Now here's where it gets murky.
[0:36:40] IP: Yeah. Then we have a level below. Let's go in decreasing order of reality. A
memorandum of understanding is an aircraft manufacturer coming to an agreement with an
airline or lessor saying, we generally agree that this is what we're going to do. We want this to
happen. There could be some monetary consideration involved. There could not be as far as
the memorandum of understanding goes. But it's saying, we want this to happen and we're
going to work towards this. Usually, that results in a firm order coming later at some point.
MOUs come about, because they agree on the aircraft, but there might be engine choices, or
financing issues that need to get worked out before they can actually order the aircraft, or
something might require board approval from the airline. The airline says, “Okay, we're going to
agree to all of this and then we're going to go get our approval from shareholders, board
members, or what have you, or choose our engines and then we'll make a firm order.”
Then there's the letter of intent, which is basically, just a marketing. It's a bit more than
marketing, but it's just saying, “We want these airplanes,” and the manufacturer saying, “We
want to sell you these airplanes,” and that's about it.
[0:38:06] JR: Yes. They intend to do it. I intend to do a lot of things that never get done. Really,
you should look at an LOI, a letter of intent as about like, man, you really wanted to do laundry
today, but maybe you get to it, maybe you don't. There's a lot of reasons why you might not. We
mentioned them anyway, but take it with a grain of salt, because it might be one step away from
never happening.
[0:38:32] IP: Exactly. This next one is, actually, I'm going to leave that for last. I want to leave
the most interesting order to me, at least, for last. Let's talk about AviLease, which ordered 10
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 18
A350 freighters and 30 A320neo families. Actually, we already talked about that, but Jason, you
did go in and add things.
[0:38:52] JR: I told you, I added things. I gave you fair warning.
[0:38:55] IP: ANA finalized their order, which was previously announced in February. This was
one of those MOUs becoming a firm order. 24 A321neos, 3 A321XLRs. Those are going to go
to Peach. 15 E190-E2s. 18 787-9s, and 10 737 MAX 8s. This is not the most interesting, but it's
weird to me. JSX, which is the public charter E135, E145 operator –
[0:39:20] JR: Formerly known as JetSuiteX.
[0:39:22] IP: Yes.
[0:39:24] JR: That'll become important in about 10 seconds.
[0:39:26] IP: They have leased two ATR-42s, and they have signed a letter of intent for 15, plus
10 options. Those ATRs covered in the letter of intent could either be ATR-42s in a “premium
configuration,” or ATR-72s in “all business class configuration.” Each aircraft would have 30
seats.
[0:39:54] JR: This is all sorts of interesting, and unexpected, there wasn't a ton of information
announced with this, but yeah, maybe this is why they're not called JetSuiteX anymore. Maybe
this has been a long run up to ordering turbo props to do something with, or really not sure what
they're going to do with these aircraft. Didn't we just talk last week about how the ATR isn't a
thing in North America?
[0:40:20] IP: I mean, in the context of Silver Airways, yes, we did. But it could be a thing if this
gets off the ground. I'm very unclear, and I certainly need someone who understands the
economics of both JSX's business model and the ATR operational economics to explain all of
this to me. This came out today on day three of the Paris Air Show. So, we're just scratching the
surface on this one. But I'm very interested to see how all this shakes out. We're going to have
to go away and talk to somebody who knows what they're talking about and figure all this out.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 19
[0:40:54] JR: Yeah. I mean, it is not surprising that they're ordering some aircraft. They can't
operate the incredibly inefficient E135 forever, even if they are fully paid for aircraft or whatever.
But they're getting old and they're not making any more, so they've got to do something at some
point, but ATR is not what I would have expected at all.
[0:41:14] IP: I would have expected some E175s.
[0:41:17] JR: Yeah. They'll be around forever.
[0:41:19] IP: Exactly. Okay, so here's the most interesting order for my money from the Paris
Air Show.
[0:41:27] JR: LOT, by far, the most interesting.
[0:41:30] IP: Has chosen the A220 to replace its Embraer fleet. This is LOT's first Airbus order.
This comes not long after, I think just months, LOT inaugurated its first E195-E2. Very surprising
to me. Commonality.
[0:41:50] JR: Well, I thought you were going to say that the fleet they've chosen, this is the
most surprising part to me, is that it's split evenly between 20 and 20 100s and 300. You don't
see many orders at all for the A220-100 these days. That's surprising to me.
[0:42:06] IP: Exactly, exactly. I mean, the fleet commonality is one thing. I get that, the A220, as
far as the maintenance and piloting and things like that, the 220, or the 100 and 300 are fine.
The split is very interesting to me. This will include a first batch of aircraft to replace the current
Embraer fleet. That'll be 40 aircraft in the first batch. Those deliveries will begin in summer of
2027. They will replace the oldest Embraers in the LOT fleet first, and then gradually work their
way up until the E195-E2s are gone. Then they have options to purchase even more aircraft
from Airbus and take even more A220s and continue to grow their fleet.
I mean, the A220, for all its bumps and lumps, has been a phenomenal success for a number of
airlines. This makes sense to me. The A220 order makes sense to me, absent the fact that it's
LOT. I just did not see this one coming.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 20
[0:43:14] JR: Yeah. That is quite surprising for a host of reasons and to defect from a long-time
partner Embraer. This one's a real surprising.
[0:43:22] IP: They just celebrated months ago. Very surprising to me. I can only assume, it was
very surprising to Embraer when it happened. Let's finish up the show with some urgent safety
recommendations from the NTSB, and then a bit of news that Jason says is “sort of aviation
news.” The NTSB is recommending urgent changes to the CFM LEAP 1B engines. Before we
enter any discussions, whatsoever, about what happened, what they're changing and things like
that, I will say that all the safety recommendations are already in progress by CFM and Boeing.
They have already developed a software fix for this particular issue. It's a waiting certification.
Then, what the NTSB is saying is, once this fix is certified, the FAA should mandate everybody
does this right away. Here's what happened. This comes out of a few incidents. One was a
Southwest 737 MAX flight coming out of New Orleans. The second was a flight coming out of
Havana. This is an issue in which the load reduction device on the CFM LEAP 1B engines is
activated and therefore, can enable smoke to enter the cabin and the flight deck. The load
reduction device is a mechanical piece that is in the LEAP engine that is designed to reduce
stress on the airframe in the case of a damaged, or unbalanced engine.
In the case of both of these flights, there was damage to the engine due to birds. The load
reduction device was activated. What the load reduction device actually does, mechanically
speaking, is the fan is partially disconnected from the rest of the engine. It does not require any
pilot intervention to activate. It happens automatically in the case of severe damage to the
engine, or extreme vibration. What happened to these aircraft is that the activation of the load
reduction device sent smoke and fumes into the cabin through the bleed air system.
To quote the NTSB with regards to the New Orleans event. “Activation of the LRD in the New
Orleans event caused tubes supplying oil to the engine sump to become dislodged and the
flange from the sump area to open, which allowed oil to enter the core compressor upstream of
the pneumatic bleed ports that supply bleed air to the cabin and cockpit. The oil was exposed to
high temperatures, resulted in smoke and fumes, and were then fed into the cockpit. When the
first officer pulled the engine fire switch, the smoke quickly dissipated, because its point of
access, the pressure regulating shut off valve automatically closed.”
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 21
That is an easy fix by actions on the flight deck. But if you can't really see what you're doing,
and all of a sudden, you can't see the person sitting next to you, you can't see the instruments,
that's certainly a bad situation. The CFM has developed a software fix that will prevent this
particular situation from happening. It will prevent any accumulated smoke from entering the
bleed air valves to stop it from going into the cabin, or into the cockpit. That's working its way
through. The NTSB says, “This is urgent. This is the fix.” They also say, we should talk to EASA,
which is the Airbus regulator, because the LEAP engine is also on the A321neos. We should
talk to the Chinese, because the LEAP engine is also on the C919. Hey, does that affect your
engines as well, and see if we can develop a fix for that as well. Some urgent safety
recommendations coming out of the NTSB today.
[0:47:43] JR: Good plan. Communication with your friends is good.
[0:47:46] IP: What is sorta aviation news?
[0:47:49] JR: Well, sorta. Remember a couple weeks ago, we talked about how in Stockholm,
the Candela P-12 hydrofoil ferry, electric ferry, remember we talked about that? Unfortunately,
you didn't get to go for a ride, but I did. It was fine.
[0:48:05] IP: Ian's dream of electric fairies.
[0:48:07] JR: Sorry. Not at the Paris Air Show, but Mumbai, apparently, city, I guess, has
ordered 11 P-12s to operate in and around central Mumbai. I specifically say this as a
tangentially aviation related thing, not just because it's a flying boat, but also, they specifically
say, they intend to at some point, operate boat flights, whatever, between central Mumbai and
the new air service that they're building there. Service. Cutting travel times for an hour and a
half to less than 30 minutes, which is pretty great, because cities like Mumbai is not all that
easy. Not quite a boat, not quite a plane, something in the middle, I guess. But at only 25
passengers onboard, not all that much left. But it's a start.
[0:48:55] IP: Got to start somewhere.
[0:48:56] JR: Yup.
AVT 325  Transcript
© 2025 AvTalk 22
[0:48:57] IP: All right. That was more aviation related than I thought it would be.
[0:49:01] JR: Yeah. See? Tied it all together.
[0:49:03] IP: Well, it's June 18th. I hope this episode holds up by the time that it comes out on
the 20th. Whatever changes, we’ll be back to talk about next week. In the meantime, this has
been episode 325 of AvTalk. Thank you all so very much. If this is your first episode, or if you've
listened to every single one so far, we appreciate all of you so very much. Thank you for
listening. I am Ian Petchenik, here, as always with –
[0:49:36] JR: Jason Rabinowitz. Thanks for listening.
[END]