After the issue was raised by the passengers, Singapore Airlines admitted that there was a leakage in their flight SQ424 on December 11, which was due to the seepage of rainwater.
Water dripping from the roof of the aircraft
A safety lapse was observed on Singapore Airlines flight SQ424 on December 11 as the aircraft, bound for Mumbai, took off with what appeared to be a crack in the structure. Flight passengers had also pointed out the issue to the crew as it was about to take off from Singapore, however, the flight anyway departed after being cleared by an airline staff member.
ADVERTISEMENT
Aviation experts believe that this could have turned out to be a major catastrophic incident if the fuselage had burst open.
Passengers point out leakage
Passengers on board pointed out to the crew about water seeping in the aircraft from a point. Speaking to mid-day, Siddhesh Vartak, a passenger, said, “On the evening of the flight, heavy rain in Singapore caused water to drip continuously inside the aircraft. Several seats were wet, and tissues were used as a temporary solution. This made many passengers, including myself, extremely uncomfortable and raised serious concerns about safety. To our surprise, the cabin crew instructed passengers to sit on the drenched seats, cover themselves with blankets, and proceed to watch the safety video. This approach was highly inappropriate and dismissive of passenger well-being.”
He added, “My primary concern is that proceeding with the flight under such conditions posed a significant safety risk. Increased air pressure or other in-flight complications could have resulted in an emergency situation. A more prudent and safety-conscious decision would have been to delay the flight or rebook passengers on a subsequent one.”
Sharing a video of the incident, Vartak added, “Safety must always take precedence over scheduling. Although we landed safely in Mumbai, the experience has left me deeply concerned about the airline’s commitment to passenger safety. When some passengers voiced their discomfort, they were met with an unprofessional response from the crew.”
Vartak further disclosed, “An airline official was called in to check the leakage issue. I am not sure if he was an engineer or a technician, but he cleared the aircraft for the flight.”
Following the incident, Vartak had also lodged an official complaint with the Singapore Airlines as well as the civil aviation ministry.
Airline admits leakage in flight
After the issue was raised by the passengers, Singapore Airlines admitted that there was a leakage in their flight SQ424 on December 11, which was due to the seepage of rainwater.
In its official statement sent to mid-day replying to a WhatsApp query sent by mid-day, the airline said, “On 11 December 2024, following a heavy downpour in Singapore, water seeped into an Airbus A380 operating Singapore Airlines (SIA) flight SQ424 from Singapore to Mumbai and on to 20 Economy Class seats in the aircraft. The water seepage stopped shortly after takeoff. To mitigate the situation, the affected 20 seats were covered with plastic sheets prior to boarding, and our cabin crew provided the necessary assistance to the affected customers during the flight, including changing the seat cushion covers, pillows, and blankets. SIA sincerely apologises to the 20 affected customers. The safety of our customers and crew is always our top priority.”
ExpertSpeak
Captain Mohan Ranganathan, a seasoned aviator and aviation expert, told mid-day, “Any flight that is potentially not safe for passengers is grounded, and then work starts on the aircraft. If the cabin had been depressurised, an emergency landing would have been needed as the pressure in the cabin would have dropped drastically and in a matter of seconds. This, again, depends on the size of the hole or the crack in the aircraft that was allowing water to seep in.”
A senior investigator at the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) told mid-day, “This indeed has multiple factors at play. No doubt that the water was pouring into the aircraft, but it needs to be investigated whether the crack or hole through which the water was seeping was directly on the fuselage of the aircraft or some other place from where the water seeped in and then made its way to the cabin.
It is also a fact that if the crack or hole was directly on the fuselage, there was a possibility that the cabin might have burst open due to the pressure difference between the low air pressure at high altitudes and high air pressure in the cabin.”
He added, “Luckily no such catastrophe happened on this flight, and the aircraft reached Mumbai safely considering the flight path. There is a section where the aircraft has to travel over the ocean, which we call the oceanic transfer. During this phase, there is no land kilometres away from the aircraft. If any fuselage burst would have happened during this phase, the aircraft would have had to make an emergency landing in the ocean and wait for a rescue mission to reach them.”
Dec 11
Day of the incident
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
