There was a detailed report in The Times of India on Sunday, about a go-around executed on Thursday, June 4th, by an IndiGo Airbus A321, flight 6E2155 (registration VT-IBB), operating from Pune to Ahmedabad.
The newspaper reported that passengers were left panicked when the aircraft climbed away after appearing to be close to landing. According to the report, the pilot later announced that air traffic control (ATC) had found the aircraft’s speed too high for landing, raising the possibility that it could overshoot the runway. The aircraft therefore discontinued the approach and attempted a second landing.
This prompted a review of the flight data, particularly the aircraft’s approach profile as recorded by Flightradar24, a popular flight-tracking platform.
According to Flightradar24 data, the aircraft was approaching Ahmedabad’s Runway 23 on Thursday morning when it initiated a go-around at 10:23:09 a.m., at an altitude of approximately 425 feet. At that time, its speed was 137 knots (253.7 km/h).
For an Airbus A321 on final approach, a speed of 137 knots is not unusually high. Depending on aircraft weight, wind conditions and configuration, the normal final approach speed for this type typically ranges between 135 and 150 knots. An altitude of 425 feet is also well within the normal range for a stabilized final approach.
Despite this, the aircraft discontinued the landing and climbed away.
To understand why, a replay of aircraft movements at Ahmedabad Airport around that time was examined.
As the IndiGo aircraft descended towards Runway 23 and reached 425 feet, a Tecnam P2010 TDI aircraft (registration VT-XIA), operated by Ahmedabad-based Air Taxi, was seen moving at about 11.1 km/h near a taxiway connected to the runway.
At that moment, the distance between the IndiGo aircraft and the Tecnam aircraft was approximately 1.12 km. The Tecnam was about 131 metres from the runway centreline when the IndiGo aircraft initiated the go-around.
These measurements indicate that, assuming both aircraft maintained their respective speeds and directions, the Tecnam would not have entered the runway before the IndiGo aircraft reached that section of the airfield. However, changes in speed or clearance instructions could have altered the situation.
The available flight-tracking data therefore do not conclusively establish why the go-around was carried out. While the aircraft’s recorded speed does not appear unusually high for an Airbus A321 on final approach, the presence of another aircraft near the runway environment raises questions that cannot be conclusively answered without access to ATC recordings, airport movement data or the airline’s operational information.
However, with the data available, a more plausible explanation of the go-around is the possible conflict between the movements of the Indigo plane and the Tecnam aircraft.
08/06/2026 Jacob K Philip/Decision Height