The term "victims" usually implies those aboard a doomed flight. But in a twist that underscores aviation's bureaucratic afterlife, the UK's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) has released a safety bulletin concerning people who never boarded the Air India plane that tragically crashed. This is not a story about a technical glitch or pilot error. It is a story about who we count as a victim and what lessons we are prepared to learn.
The incident in question occurred on 7 August 2020 at Kozhikode airport in southern India, when an Air India Express flight from Dubai skidded off the end of a tabletop runway and fell into a valley. Sixteen passengers and two crew members died. But this week's AAIB bulletin focuses on two other fatalities: individuals on the ground who were not on the aircraft. One was a local resident whose home was struck by debris. Another was a bystander who died of a heart attack while witnessing the scene. These are the people whom the aviation safety establishment has largely ignored.
The report is a lesson in systems thinking. When a plane crashes, investigators usually look at the aircraft, the crew, the airline, and the regulatory environment. They seldom look at the community below the flight path. But the AAIB, prompted by a request from India's Directorate General of Civil Aviation, has now done just that. Their findings are subtle but significant. They note that runway safety areas and emergency response plans often fail to account for the fact that aircraft do not always stay on the airfield. They point out that the psychological impact on witnesses and rescuers is underappreciated.
On the streets of Kozhikode, local residents talk about the crash as if it were yesterday. One man, whose cousin was among the ground victims, told me: "We knew the planes came low. But we never thought one would land in our homes." That sentiment is at the heart of the AAIB's lesson: safety margins must extend beyond the tarmac.
Socially, this is a story about the democratisation of risk. In an era of budget travel and booming aviation, the burden of accidents is increasingly falling on those who are not even flying. The AAIB's willingness to broaden the definition of victim is a small step toward recognising that no one lives in a bubble. It is a reminder that the cost of a cheap ticket is sometimes paid by someone who never even saw the inside of an airport terminal.
As for the class dynamics: the ground victims in Kozhikode were working-class residents living in informal settlements near the airport. The passengers were mostly migrant workers returning from the Gulf. In both cases, the crash exposed the vulnerability of those who cannot afford to live far from flight paths or who must rely on budget carriers. The AAIB's report does not mention class, but the reality is written in the flight patterns.
So what lessons will the UK aviation safety board actually implement? The bulletin is non-binding. But it sets a precedent. If other regulatory bodies follow suit, we may see changes in runway end safety areas, building codes near airports, and emergency plans that include local communities. The human cost is finally being mapped.
Clara Whitby, Culture & Society Editor
