Time period = now until end of 2025
Major incident = any sort of emergency landing, re-routing, cabin pressure breach, or serious injury to 1+ people on board. Also includes major accidents such as crashes of course. Anything not on this list that causes the FAA to ground planes and/or open an investigation would also count.
Must be caused by a technical failure of the plane, not obviously the operator's fault (e.g. poorly maintained plane). Re-routing due to airport congestion, bad weather or medical emergencies also doesn't count.
This question was prompted by the recent incident where a boeing flight in australia momentarily lost instrumentation, causing the plane to temporarily drop, injuring dozens of passengers. That obviously counts as a major incident (ETA: but it doesn't count for this market as it's outside the time frame)
Current provisional count: 3 (possible operator errors still not excluded)
1,000
1.00This probably also counts:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna167317
Technically there were multiple incidents on different planes, but I'm not sure how many of them meet the definition.
someone died due to turbulence today on a 777
Another one added to the list, pending outcomes of investigations as usual: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce5ljpnggp4o
@Jwags Provisional yes under "FAA opens an investigation" criterion. ETA: also qualifies under "emergency landing" as the plane returned to the airport of origin.
@TimothyJohnson5c16 The question description says "Major incident = any sort of emergency landing, re-routing, cabin pressure breach, or serious injury to 1+ people on board." That's "or" injuries, not "and." Although there appears to have been no emergency landing or rerouting either.
@TimothyJohnson5c16 However the description also says "Anything not on this list that causes the FAA to ground planes and/or open an investigation would also count." While the BBC article says "The US Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) said it was investigating how the panel came apart."
So I believe that is a yes.
@HarrisonNathan I am counting this as a yes. I put the FAA clause in there as a catch-all for cases that slipped through the cracks of my other criteria. I'm not an aviation expert, so I thought this would be a good proxy for something serious happening, which it is in this case.
ETA: the only thing that would cause me to change my decision here is an investigation coming back with a clear operator error, such as skipped maintenance or something.
There was one on Monday: https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/11/australia/new-zealand-latam-airlines-intl-hnk/index.html
@VitorBosshard A good source is https://aviation-safety.net/database/, though it's not easy to filter between technical failure vs. operator error