India’s aviation sector was jolted in late November 2025 when IndiGo—normally known for reliability—was hit by an unprecedented operational collapse. The crisis unfolded just weeks after new Flight Duty Time Limitations (FDTL) norms came into force on November 1. Stricter rest rules, particularly for night operations, exposed deep structural weaknesses in IndiGo’s crew planning, rostering, and training systems. By early December, the disruption snowballed into one of the largest aviation breakdowns in India’s history, prompting the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to establish a four-member inquiry panel.
A Nationwide Breakdown Across Major Hubs
The scale of disruption was staggering. Late November saw daily cancellations surge to 170–200 flights. The situation worsened dramatically in early December: more than 1,000 flights were cancelled over four days, dragging IndiGo’s on-time performance to nearly 35%.
Major metros—Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, and Chennai—experienced cascading disruptions. Delhi faced the worst single-day shock when all 235 scheduled domestic departures were grounded. On December 6 alone, over 400 flights were scrapped for the fifth consecutive day, leaving thousands of passengers stranded amid winter schedule pressures, A320 software advisories, Cyclone Ditwah’s peripheral weather impact, and chronic congestion.
With IndiGo operating 2,300 daily flights and commanding roughly 60% of domestic market share, the collapse triggered nationwide chaos unmatched by rival carriers.
Why the System Failed
At the heart of the crisis was insufficient preparation for the new FDTL regime. Pilot associations, including ALPA and FIP, argued that IndiGo’s lean crew model and inadequate forecasting made compliance nearly impossible without schedule rationalisation. The midnight-linked A320 software advisory aggravated delays, pushing pilots beyond legal rest thresholds and triggering mass cancellations in a rolling chain reaction.
DGCA initially found serious internal lapses in oversight, manpower planning, and readiness—despite earlier directives urging IndiGo to prepare for the regulatory shift.
DGCA Steps In: A High-Level Probe
On December 5, DGCA constituted a four-member panel—Joint DG Sanjay K. Bramhane, Deputy DG Amit Gupta, Capt. Kapil Manglik, and Capt. Rampal—to investigate procedural gaps, accountability, and compliance failures. The committee was given 15 days to submit findings.
To stabilise operations, DGCA temporarily relaxed some FDTL night-duty norms and weekly rest requirements. The Civil Aviation Minister simultaneously promised strict accountability for systemic and managerial failures.
IndiGo’s Official Response: Cooperative but Cautious
IndiGo struck a conciliatory tone in response to the probe. CEO Pieter Elbers acknowledged that December 5 marked the peak of the crisis and issued a public apology, expressing “deep regret” to passengers. The airline attributed the meltdown to a “combination of unexpected operational challenges,” citing technical glitches, weather disruption, congestion, and the abrupt FDTL transition.
IndiGo announced 48-hour calibrated schedule cuts to stabilise the network and committed to submitting detailed factual reports and mitigation plans to DGCA. It also welcomed temporary FDTL relaxations, positioning them as necessary for short-term recovery. Importantly, IndiGo did not contest the probe and pledged full cooperation while urging passengers to monitor official updates.
A Stress Test for India’s Largest Airline
The IndiGo flight disruptions were more than a scheduling mishap—they revealed structural vulnerabilities in manpower planning, compliance culture, and operational resilience. While DGCA’s probe aims to identify lapses and enforce accountability, IndiGo’s response suggests an effort to contain damage and restore trust. The airline’s ability to learn from this crisis—modernising crew systems, strengthening buffers, and ensuring regulatory alignment—will determine whether this episode becomes a one-off shock or a turning point in India’s aviation safety and reliability landscape.
(With agency inputs)
