In June of last year, commercial aviation saw one of the most chilling incidents in recent memory: the crash of Air India Flight 171.
On 13th June 2025, the day after the crash, we published a follow-up piece wherein we asked if the global aviation industry needs to retool its flight safety protocols.
But now, more than a year on, we have to wonder if we were perhaps asking the wrong questions: what if it isn’t so much the operational protocols that need to be changed, but the overall wellbeing of those tasked to fly people from one destination to another?
In which case, what measures need to be put in place to ensure that people working in aviation are healthier both physically and emotionally?
The need for mental health reform in aviation
Last year, following the crash, the Indian Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) dismissed three airline personnel based on the initial findings of the post-incident investigation.
Per a feature on Airline Buzz:
“The internal audit revealed a series of serious violations, including pilots exceeding legal flight hours, failure to inspect emergency equipment on time, and non-compliance with safety procedures…According to internal sources, a crew member withdrew from duty the day before the accident, citing stress.”
As tragic as the accident was, aviation professionals are grateful that it served to highlight the pressing need to care for the mental well-being of pilots and flight crews.
This resulted in increased focus on overall pilot wellbeing on the part of Air India and the relevant regulatory bodies, providing the impetus for new initiatives that make mental and physical health priority areas.
Since June of last year, airlines throughout India have introduced anonymous counselling services, regular mood surveys, a 360-degree feedback system, as well as new workload regulations.
Why has it taken so long for aviation to even consider reforms?
On 26th July of last year, the Transportation Trades Department (TTD) of the United States called on lawmakers to reform the measures governing mental health protocols for both pilots and air traffic controllers.
This call to action came about in the wake of two international incidents: AI171 and that of South Korean low-cost carrier Jeju Air in late December 2024.
According to the official TTD statement:
“For far too long, aviation professionals have faced a difficult choice between seeking necessary mental health care and maintaining their careers. The current Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulatory framework creates a punitive culture that forces pilots and air traffic controllers to risk their livelihoods when seeking professional help. This outdated approach not only harms individuals but also undermines the safety standards of trust and collaboration that the US aviation system is built upon.”
Indeed, commercial pilots avoided reporting mental health struggles or burnout out of fear of being grounded, penalized, or terminated, a dire state of things which has gone on for decades.
Following both incidents, and most particularly AI171, authorities discovered that crew members tried to voluntarily withdraw from duties citing stress just before the accident.
As TTD officials discovered, disclosing a mental health condition essentially precluded aviation operations and safety professionals from working.
As they put it: “Under the current rules, these professionals who seek help for mental health conditions are treated on a case-by-case basis, whereby they may apply for a special issuance medical certificate if they can prove that the treated condition is well-controlled and unlikely to impact flight safety. This review and special issuance involve additional testing and documentation from medical professionals and can result in lengthy delays and backlogs, sometimes as long as 18 months.”
Due to these issues, pilots and air traffic controllers ran the risk of losing their livelihoods; and this resulted in significant underreporting of mental health issues and many reporting back to work despite not being in the best frame of mind to do so.
What the world can learn from how India handled the situation
Since June 2025, Indian aviation authorities have changed the game when it comes to the physical and mental wellbeing of their professionals.
Such measures have included the following:
Extended weekly rest periods
Mandatory weekly rest for pilots has been increased to 48 consecutive hours, a substantial jump from the previous 36-hour minimum.
This 48-hour block must explicitly encompass two full local nights at the pilot's home base to ensure adequate recovery and circadian alignment.
At the same time, airlines may no longer substitute a pilot's earned or scheduled leave to count toward this mandatory weekly rest period.
Redefined night flying and duty restrictions
The definition of night hours which account for the critical Window of Circadian Low (WOCL) has been extended, now spanning from 12:00AM to 6:00AM.
For flight operations that encroach upon these night hours, maximum flight time is strictly capped at eight hours, and total flight duty periods are restricted to ten hours.
Also, to prevent high-stress cumulative fatigue, pilots are limited to just two night landings per duty period, a steep reduction from the six landings previously permitted.
Rest enhancements for those flying ultra-long-haul assignments and cumulative workload caps
For highly demanding trans-meridian, ultra-long-haul flights crossing multiple time zones, minimum post-flight rest has been increased to 144 hours from 120 hours.
An additional mandatory 24-hour rest period is also required immediately after a crew operates two consecutive long-haul flights.
At the same time, to prevent cumulative, long-term fatigue from building up over weeks, the DGCA placed a firmer upper bound on rolling workload accumulation:
- In seven consecutive days: Maximum 35 flying hours.
- In 14 consecutive days: Maximum 65 flying hours.
- In 28 consecutive days: Maximum 100 flying hours.
Accountability and fatigue reporting is now mandatory
Airlines are legally mandated to submit comprehensive quarterly fatigue data directly to the regulator.
Also, to ensure honest compliance, the DGCA requires these corporate fatigue reports to follow a strictly confidential and non-punitive safety policy.
This protects pilots from career backlash if they report being unfit to fly due to exhaustion.
