The Narrow Margin of Safety: Ajit Pawar’s Plane and the 28-Day Gap

​The aviation world is often a game of inches and minutes, but rarely is it a game of exactly four weeks. Following the tragic plane crash that claimed the life of Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar on January 28, 2026, a chilling detail has emerged from the preliminary investigation. It appears the aircraft—a 16-year-old Learjet 45—may have missed a life-saving satellite safety mandate by just 28 days.

​This small window of time highlights a massive gap between being "legally compliant" and "technically safe." While the aircraft met every rule in the book at the time of its registration, it lacked a specific piece of technology that experts believe could have changed the outcome of that foggy morning in Baramati.

​

The Silent Savior: What is GAGAN?

​To understand why 28 days matter, we have to talk about GAGAN. This stands for GPS Aided GEO Augmented Navigation. It is India’s homegrown satellite-based system designed to help pilots land safely, especially when visibility is poor or when an airport lacks expensive ground-based landing systems.

​In simple terms, GAGAN acts like a hyper-accurate "eye in the sky." Traditional GPS can sometimes be off by several meters, which is a big deal when you are trying to touch down a multi-ton jet on a narrow strip of tarmac. GAGAN corrects those errors, providing vertical and horizontal guidance. It tells the pilot exactly where they are in 3D space, even if they can’t see the ground.

​The Regulatory Near-Miss

​The investigation has revealed a heartbreaking irony. The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) eventually mandated that all aircraft registered in India must be equipped with GAGAN-enabled hardware. However, because Ajit Pawar’s aircraft (registered as VT-SSK) was registered just 28 days before this specific safety mandate became a hard requirement for its category, it was "grandfathered" in.

​This means the plane was allowed to fly without the most modern satellite guidance gear because it was technically an older registration. It was a legal aircraft, but it was flying with yesterday’s technology in a world that has already moved toward tomorrow's safety standards.

​What Happened in the Cockpit?

​On the morning of the crash, the weather in Baramati was challenging. Reports indicate that visibility was hovering around 3,000 meters. While that sounds like a lot, for a high-speed jet like a Learjet 45, it is right on the edge of safety protocols for a manual approach.

​The pilots were reportedly attempting a second approach after an initial "go-around." This is a standard safety maneuver where the pilot climbs back up because the landing doesn't look right. During the second attempt, the plane reportedly tilted sharply before losing control.

​If GAGAN had been active and integrated into the cockpit, the pilots would have had a digital "glide path" to follow. Instead of relying purely on what they could see through the windshield or older instruments, they would have had satellite-backed precision guiding them to the center of the runway.

​The Visibility Trap

​Baramati is what aviation experts call an "uncontrolled" or "small-scale" airfield. Unlike major hubs like Mumbai or Delhi, these smaller strips often lack an Instrument Landing System (ILS)—the gold standard for landing in fog.

​At airports like Baramati, GAGAN is designed to be the primary safety net. It provides an "ILS-like" experience using satellites instead of ground antennas. By missing this gear by just 28 days, the aircraft was forced to rely on older, less precise methods of navigation during a high-stakes landing in subpar weather.

​A Pattern of Risk in Charter Flights

​This tragedy has also turned the spotlight on the "Non-Scheduled Operator" (NSO) sector—the world of private charters often used by politicians. Because these flights don't follow the same rigid schedules as commercial airlines, they sometimes fly into smaller, less-equipped airfields at odd hours.

​The aircraft involved in this crash was operated by VSR Ventures. Interestingly, another plane from the same operator had a similar crash-landing in Mumbai back in 2023. While everyone survived that incident, the recurring theme of technical snags and visibility issues suggests that the "28-day gap" might be part of a larger conversation about how we maintain and upgrade older private jets.

​Why the 28 Days Will Haunt Investigators

​In the coming months, the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) will pore over the "black box" and cockpit voice recorder. They will look at the maintenance logs and the pilot's final words. But the most difficult question will remain a hypothetical one: if the plane had been registered a month later, would it still be in the air today?

​Aviation safety is built on the lessons of the past. Usually, these lessons come from disasters. This 28-day technicality is a glaring reminder that safety mandates aren't just bureaucratic red tape—they are often the difference between a routine landing and a national tragedy.

​The Road Ahead for VVIP Safety

​The death of a high-ranking official like Ajit Pawar usually triggers a massive overhaul of safety norms. We can expect the DGCA to move away from "grandfathering" clauses for older aircraft, especially those used for VVIP transport.

​There is a growing demand that if a safety technology like GAGAN exists, it should be mandatory for all planes, regardless of when they were registered. The cost of retrofitting an old plane is high, but as we have seen this week, the cost of not doing it is infinitely higher.

​Ajit Pawar was known as a leader who valued efficiency and results. It is a cruel twist of fate that his life was cut short by a 28-day gap in a safety rule—a tiny sliver of time that proved to be a mountain too high to climb.