Char Dham copter crashes: 'No proactive safety culture, mountain training for pilots,' flags Parliamentary panel

A Parliamentary panel has issued a scathing indictment of India’s aviation safety regime, warning that helicopter operations during the Char Dham Yatra remain mired in regulatory confusion, reactive measures, and systemic neglect, despite a spate of fatal accidents earlier this year.

In its report tabled on Wednesday, the Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism and Culture, chaired by JD(U) MP Sanjay Kumar Jha, said the oversight structure created “a responsibility vacuum” between the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and the Uttarakhand Civil Aviation Development Authority (UCADA).

“The DGCA's position of being a passive licensing authority in this context represents an abdication of its ultimate responsibility for ensuring the safety of all civil aviation activities within the country,” the report said, adding that the ambiguity between central and state regulators had created an “inherently unsafe and unsustainable” two-tier system.

The findings come in the backdrop of four helicopter crashes during the 2025 Char Dham season. The committee noted that these occurred in a “high-risk operational environment characterised by challenging topography, rapidly changing and often severe climatic conditions, and high-density traffic”. The Ministry of Civil Aviation itself had admitted that such flights carried “inherent risks that warrant immediate and serious intervention”.

While the DGCA responded by suspending two operators, restricting flight density at Kedarnath, and conducting special audits, the committee was unconvinced. “These measures, while timely, were largely reactive, emerging only as a response to the accidents that had already occurred,” the report stated, pointing to the absence of a proactive safety culture. Most damningly, the panel flagged a glaring gap in pilot training. “Despite the risks of Himalayan terrain, there is no mandatory, terrain-specific mountain-flying training and certification for pilots who operate in the treacherous Himalayan terrain,” it observed.

The DGCA itself conceded that UCADA lacked adequately trained manpower, yet no such training mandate had been put in place.

The report also underscored the unusual governance model, under which UCADA not only manages helipads but also regulates fares, selects shuttle operators, and oversees slot management functions that would normally fall within central aviation oversight.

The committee questioned whether a state-level body had either the technical capacity or regulatory mandate to oversee such complex and hazardous operations. Calling the fragmented structure “a symptom of a larger and more dangerous structural flaw in India's aviation governance”, the committee said aviation safety demanded “uniform, high standards that are applied consistently, regardless of the operator, the region or the nature of the operation”.

The report laid out tough prescriptions to fix accountability. Among them: a uniform national framework for all state-operated helicopter services under DGCA’s direct oversight, mandatory terrain-specific training and certification for pilots flying in mountainous zones, a dedicated oversight cell within the DGCA to monitor high-altitude operations year-round, and a robust certification mechanism for state aviation agencies.

“The committee is not satisfied with the current regulatory arrangement and believes that the DGCA must play a more proactive and assertive supervisory role,” it concluded.