India, June 14 -- The Air India flight AI-171 tragedy has reignited concerns around safety oversight, emergency handling and regulatory transparency in India's aviation sector. While investigations are ongoing, early observations provide insights that merit the attention of industry and policymakers. Video footage showed a plume of dust kicked up as the aircraft became airborne, an unusual sight during normal take-off. The sole survivor says he heard a loud bang, raising the possibility of an engine malfunction. In a normal situation, the aircraft would have taken a lot less runway length to get airborne using the powerful GE Trent engines. The stress on the crew to manage an emergency during a critical phase of flight would have increased considerably. Another concern is that the landing gear remained extended during the climb. Leaving the gear down significantly reduces climb performance, especially critical if thrust is compromised. Whether this was due to workload saturation, distraction, or checklist omission remains to be seen. But, it illustrates how a high-stress environment can interfere with routine procedures, even in a modern cockpit. It is essential to avoid speculation and await official findings. Still, the pattern emerging here aligns with known risks: Multiple stressors occurring close together can overwhelm human capacity and lead to omissions. This points to the importance of robust emergency training and real-time support systems. While the latest ICAOState Safety Briefingclaims zero fatal accidents in India over the last five years, the tragic Air India Express crash at Kozhikode in August 2020, which claimed 21 lives, tells a different story - one that can't be buried under statistical oversight. This raises concerns about safety data accurately reflecting operational realities. The absence of such a significant accident from India's safety narrative is troubling. It suggests that a focus on meeting numerical targets may obscure critical lessons. Although India claims Level 4 implementation of its State Safety Programme (SSP), its SSP Foundation value remains unreported. This gap, coupled with the lack of transparent debate or reform after the Kozhikode crash, suggests that the mechanisms for identifying and mitigating risk may not be functioning as intended. India's growth in aviation must be matched with an equally strong commitment to a safety culture based on openness, accountability, and learning. Selective reporting or focusing only on positive indicators risks fostering a false sense of security. The AI-171 incident is a reminder that aviation safety extends beyond infrastructure and certification. It is about the readiness of systems and people to respond when things don't go as planned. For airlines and regulators, this is an opportunity to revisit crew resource management protocols, scenario-based training, and post-incident learning frameworks. India has substantially improved its safety oversight systems over the years, as reflected in ICAO's effective implementation score. However, sustained progress depends not only on audits and metrics but on acknowledging gaps and acting on them without delay. For a nation with global aviation aspirations, the foundation must be built on more than compliance - it must rest on trust, accuracy, and continuous learning. As the AI-171 investigation proceeds, the focus must remain on identifying lessons and ensuring they lead to meaningful change. Only then can we say that safety is not just promised - but truly practised....