A new report has surfaced claiming that the Air India aircraft involved in the tragic crash in Ahmedabad—which killed all 241 passengers on board—was among those flagged by late Boeing whistleblower John Barnett, who had raised serious concerns about the 787 Dreamliner’s manufacturing practices.
According to Gizmodo, Barnett, a former quality manager with Boeing who spent 30 years at the company, had repeatedly warned that the 787s were being assembled using “sub-standard” parts amid a culture prioritizing speed over safety. His internal reports and later public testimony accused Boeing of compromising on quality control in favor of meeting production deadlines.
Barnett’s warnings, which reportedly included specific concerns about certain aircraft being flown today, were largely dismissed at the time. However, following the recent crash, renewed attention has been drawn to his claims, especially as the ill-fated Air India jet was allegedly one of the aircraft he had singled out during his whistleblower disclosures.
A Career of Integrity Ends in Controversy
John Barnett retired from Boeing in 2017, citing health issues, but remained vocal about what he described as systemic problems within the company’s production facilities—particularly at the plant manufacturing the 787 Dreamliner. In March 2024, just weeks after giving legal testimony in his ongoing case against Boeing, Barnett was found dead in a motel room in Charleston, South Carolina. Authorities ruled his death a suicide from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
His sudden death, coming amidst a high-profile legal battle, quickly ignited conspiracy theories, with critics suggesting the possibility of foul play. At the time of his passing, Barnett was reportedly in Charleston for further legal interviews connected to his case. According to the BBC, Barnett had accused Boeing of retaliating against him by damaging his professional reputation and stalling his career—allegations Boeing denied.
Boeing’s Manufacturing Woes
The 787 Dreamliner was launched in 2011 with the promise of greater fuel efficiency and lower production costs. But it was also criticized for adopting a highly decentralized production model, outsourcing a significant portion of its components to numerous contractors across the globe. Aviation analysts warned that this approach could lead to mismatched parts and compromised assembly quality.
The Gizmodo report highlights this manufacturing gamble, quoting an industry commentator who bluntly described Boeing’s strategy as, “F*ck it. Let’s throw out everything we’ve ever known or used in airplane production and use this new, unproven method.”
Critics within and outside the aviation sector expressed concern that Boeing’s shift toward aggressive cost-cutting and speed may have come at the expense of safety and long-term reliability. Barnett was one of the most vocal insiders pointing to this very risk, having refused to fly on the 787 himself due to what he claimed were critical defects.
Renewed Scrutiny
While official investigations into the Ahmedabad crash are still underway, the possible connection to Barnett’s prior warnings has sparked renewed scrutiny of Boeing’s practices and raised troubling questions about regulatory oversight and corporate accountability.
If proven true, the link between Barnett’s whistleblower reports and the aircraft that crashed would not only lend credibility to his warnings—it would also mark a grim validation of his claims, placing Boeing once again at the center of a global safety controversy.
