Jet Research

06/14/2026

Yesterday marked one year since Air India Flight 171 — a Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner — crashed 32 seconds after takeoff from Ahmedabad, killing 260 people. The deadliest air disaster in a decade. The first fatal hull loss of a 787 since the type entered service in 2011.

A year later, there’s still no final report.

Here’s what we do know — and a question worth asking:

In December 2018, the FAA issued Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin SAIB NM-18-33, flagging that fuel control switch locking mechanisms on certain Boeing models — including the 787-8 with the exact part number fitted to this aircraft — could disengage, allowing the switch to move to CUTOFF without the required lift action. The FAA’s determination at the time: not an unsafe condition. No Airworthiness Directive was issued. India’s DGCA adopts mandatory modifications based on ADs from the State of Design — but with no AD ever issued, there was nothing mandatory for anyone to adopt. The SAIB remained advisory. Air India, per their own submissions to investigators, never acted on it.

Now look at what the NTSB uncovered last month at the public hearing into the UPS MD-11F crash in Louisville — where an engine and pylon separated on takeoff in November 2025, killing 15 people. Investigators found at least 10 prior instances of aft pylon bearing fractures dating back to 2002. Boeing’s own 2007 Safety Review Board had concluded that bearing failure could cause aft pylon lug damage. Service documents in 2008 and 2011 addressed the issue — but replacement was recommended, not mandated. No AD was issued. At the NTSB hearing, Boeing admitted the bearing should have been classified as a Principal Structural Element during original certification, and that their Continuing Operational Safety program failed to catch it.

Two accidents. Two different aircraft types. In both cases, a known risk existed. In both cases, the response stopped short of a mandatory Airworthiness Directive.

So the question has to be asked: is the FAA’s threshold for elevating a known issue to mandatory action set in the right place — and who reviews that determination when the outcome is this?

📎 Air India / SAIB: https://jetwhine.com/2025/07/the-mystery-deepens-around-air-india-171-crash/
📎 UPS MD-11 / NTSB hearing: https://www.airdatanews.com/ntsb-questions-why-earlier-md-11-pylon-failures-did-not-prevent-fatal-ups-crash/
📎 AI171 one year: https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/air-india-787-crash-report-delayed-fuel-cutoff-questions

Indian investigators are expected to delay the final Air India Flight 171 crash report as fuel cutoff questions and engine analysis remain unresolved.

06/09/2026

We’ve shared Boom Supersonic’s progress on here before — this week, the bigger supersonic picture got even more interesting.

On June 5, NASA’s X-59 broke the sound barrier for the first time, reaching Mach 1.1 at 43,400 feet out of Edwards Air Force Base. The aircraft — built by Lockheed Martin Skunk Works — flew for 81 minutes and is specifically engineered to fly supersonic while producing a noise level roughly equivalent to a car door closing at ground level.

That’s the piece that matters for where Boom is headed. Boom’s XB-1 demonstrator already hit Mach 1.1 back in January 2025. But the X-59 is the aircraft that generates the community noise data that goes directly to the FAA and international regulators — data needed to rewrite the rules on civil supersonic flight over land. The Supersonic Aviation Modernization Act passed the House in December 2025 to start that process.

Two different programs, same mission. The regulatory and technical pieces are finally moving in the same direction.

NASA official release: https://www.nasa.gov/aeronautics/x-59-first-supersonic-flight/

Boom Supersonic: https://boomsupersonic.com/xb-1

XB-1 goes Mach 1 — the world's first independently developed supersonic jet.

05/31/2026

Boeing gets approval to increase production on the MAX line allowing them to get to 47 per month.

Boeing has hit another regulatory milestone in its effort to increase MAX production, paving the way to build 47 planes per month this summer.

05/29/2026

Have at it!

04/28/2026

unveils a magnificent new paint job for the 250th year celebration! Well done!

04/21/2026

It seems the possibility of a bailout may actually be viable for Spirit!

Trump floated federal help for Spirit, but any bailout would be costly and politically explosive.

04/19/2026

Spirit has now gone to the government to ask for a bailout.

Spirit Airlines on Friday asked the Trump administration for hundreds of millions of dollars in ​emergency funding to offset rising fuel prices and ‌stave off a possible liquidation, Air Current reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

04/19/2026

The trend of using the aircraft to secure loans and financing continues but often indicates underlying economic weakness.

A confluence of fuel price shocks and longstanding profitability issues is putting intense financial pressure on the New York-based leisure carrier. JetBlue Airways has reached an agreement with affiliates of aircraft lessor Sky Leasing to secure up to $500 million in financing secured by the airlin...

04/12/2026

A case has emerged involving a United Airlines technician who alleges he was terminated after taking a bottle of water from an aircraft while experiencing a medical episode. A lawsuit has been filed, and the details will ultimately be decided in court.

If the core facts are substantiated, this raises a serious concern that extends beyond a single company:

At what point does rigid policy enforcement override basic human judgment?

Aviation is built on procedures for good reason. But it is also built on experienced professionals making real-time decisions in physically demanding environments. When an employee facing potential medical distress is disciplined for a low-value consumable, it forces the industry to examine whether policy is being applied with appropriate discretion.

There is a difference between protecting assets and losing sight of proportionality.

Cases like this matter because they influence workforce trust, retention, and ultimately operational safety. When frontline personnel believe that context will not be considered, it changes behavior—and not always in ways that benefit the operation.

We will be watching how this develops. The outcome may have broader implications for how airlines balance compliance with common sense.

A 76-year-old aircraft technician is now suing United Airlines after being fired… for drinking a bottle of water.

Frank Bucci had spent years working on the ramp at Los Angeles International Airport.
At his age, he knew exactly what long hours under the California sun could do.

In April 2025, it caught up with him.

While working outside, he suddenly felt lightheaded, with heart palpitations.
He believes dehydration was the cause—and says he felt close to passing out.

At that moment, he made a quick decision.

He stepped onto the aircraft he was servicing, took a bottle of water meant for passengers, and drank it.

Not long after, the incident was reported.
An internal investigation was opened.

Bucci didn’t deny it. He explained why he did it.

But that wasn’t enough.

By June, he was terminated.

Now, he’s suing United in a California court, claiming disability discrimination, age discrimination, and retaliation.

His lawyers argue that this wasn’t theft—it was a response to a medical situation.

They say his symptoms should be considered a temporary disability, and that the company failed to take that into account.

The lawsuit also raises two key points:

• It claims younger employees committed more serious violations without losing their jobs
• And it suggests Bucci may have been targeted after raising safety concerns in the past

That second point stands out.

According to the filing, his concerns came not long after a serious incident involving a United aircraft losing a wheel during takeoff—an event that caused damage on the ground.

But there’s another side to the story.

In aviation, rules are strict.
Even small actions—like taking an item from an aircraft—can be treated as a serious breach.

Some say that’s exactly why the airline acted the way it did.

Others see something very different:

A worker in distress, trying to avoid collapsing on the job.

United has not publicly commented on the case.

For now, it’s a legal battle that will play out in court.

04/09/2026

Congratulations to Mammoth for obtaining FAA approval for their 777-200 PtF conversion!

The first-ever Boeing 777-200 converted freighters could be flying with cargo airlines later this year after U.S. authorities gave approval to Mammoth Freighters to reengineer the aircraft.