Airbus has ordered an urgent global fleet action that will require software rollbacks and, for some jets, hardware work on roughly 6,000 A320-family aircraft — more than half of the worldwide fleet — after an in-flight flight-control incident that regulators say may be linked to intense solar radiation corrupting critical flight data.

The European Union Aviation Safety Agency has issued an emergency airworthiness directive making the fix mandatory.

The problem centers on the ELAC (Elevator and Aileron Computer) flight-control system. Airbus said analysis of a recent event found intense solar radiation can corrupt data the system uses, and the immediate prescribed action for most aircraft is to revert to a previous software version before the jets fly again, other than repositioning flights to repair centers. The change typically takes around two hours per aircraft, though older aircraft may also need hardware replacement, which could take much longer.

The recall followed an October 30 flight in which a JetBlue A320 en route from Cancun to Newark experienced a sudden, uncommanded drop in altitude and made an emergency landing at Tampa; several passengers were hurt, and that incident triggered the subsequent probe. Regulators and airlines say the software reversal is precautionary but necessary to ensure continued safe operations while further analysis and any needed hardware changes proceed.

Operational impact has been immediate and global. Airbus and EASA’s directive came at the start of a major U.S. travel weekend and affected carriers across all regions.

The British Civil Aviation Authority said it expects some disruptions to airlines and flights operating in the country.

“We have been made aware of an issue that may affect some of the A320 family of aircraft and the precautionary action that EASA has taken,” Giancarlo Buono, director of aviation safety at the UK Civil Aviation Authority, said.

American Airlines initially said about 340 A320s would need the update, then revised the figure to 209 after clarification from Airbus; as of late Friday, most of those had been completed.

Carriers from Air France and ANA to IndiGo, Avianca, and numerous low-cost carriers have reported cancellations or delays, and some—Avianca in particular—temporarily stopped ticket sales for affected dates. Experts warn maintenance shops and hangar capacity will be tested, since many carriers are already facing backlogs and staffing constraints going into the peak season.

“The timing is definitely not ideal for an issue like this to arise on one of the most ubiquitous aircraft around the (U.S.) holidays,” Mike Stengel of AeroDynamic Advisory said.

Why this is sensitive: the A320 family is ubiquitous — about 11,300 A320-family jets are in service, including roughly 6,440 of the core A320 model — and it only recently became the most-delivered single-aisle model worldwide. That ubiquity means even a short, two-hour update at scale can cause cascade effects across schedules, crew rostering, and passenger connections, while the subset needing hardware work could be out of service for much longer.

The FAA and other national authorities are following EASA’s lead; airlines are balancing speed with safety by doing updates between flights where possible.

What to watch next: Airlines will publish rolling operational updates as they sequence repairs and identify aircraft requiring hardware changes. Regulators and Airbus will continue fault analysis and may require further measures for older ELAC hardware. The real test over the next week will be how quickly carriers can complete the updates without stranding passengers, and how many aircraft ultimately need the longer hardware fixes — that number will determine whether disruption is short-lived or stretches deeper into the holiday travel period.

A sharp division has emerged among India’s biggest carmakers over proposed changes to the country’s Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) norms, with major manufacturers including Tata Motors, Mahindra & Mahindra, JSW MG Motor, and Hyundai urging the government to scrap a weight-based emission concession for small cars.

These companies argue in letters seen by Reuters that this specific provision would unfairly benefit a single competitor—identified by industry data and three auto executives as Maruti Suzuki—and could ultimately hinder India’s progress toward its Electric Vehicle (EV) goals.

The Proposed Leniency and Industry Rift

India’s current CAFE norms apply to all passenger cars under 3,500 kg (7,716 lb). The proposed new rules aim to significantly tighten the permissible average fleet CO2 emissions to 91.7 grams/km, a substantial reduction from the earlier target of 113 grams/km. This tightening makes it more challenging for all manufacturers, especially those relying on Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicles, and is designed to push companies to accelerate sales of cleaner technologies, particularly EVs, to meet the fleet-average target.

The proposed leniency that sparked the current conflict is contained in the latest draft, which suggests an exemption for petrol cars weighing 909 kg or less, measuring under four meters in length, and with an engine capacity of 1200 cc or below. The government justified this specific concession by claiming these vehicles offer “limited potential for efficiency improvements.”

This arbitrary 909 kg threshold has created a sharp split, as the opposing automakers, many of whom are leading the nation’s EV transition, contend that it is not aligned with any global standards and is designed to disproportionately aid Maruti Suzuki. Industry data indicates that over 95% of cars under 909 kg sold in India come from a single carmaker, which is Maruti Suzuki—for whom about 16% of sales still come from cars in this category, despite a general market shift toward larger SUVs.

Opposition Argues EV Goals and Safety

The opposing carmakers have articulated several concerns across their respective letters to the ministries of power, transport, and industries.

Tata Motors, Mahindra, and JSW MG Motor are concerned that the concession provides an easy path for one manufacturer to meet the stricter CAFE norms without significant investment in electrification or advanced powertrain technologies, thereby slowing the overall national transition to cleaner vehicles. Mahindra requested the omission of any “special category” or definitions based on size or weight, warning of “adverse effects in terms of the nation’s progress towards safer, cleaner cars.”

Three company executives stated the 909 kg threshold was arbitrary. Hyundai argued that the exemption may be viewed internationally as a step backward at a time when global markets are moving toward stricter, zero-emission standards. Hyundai also warned that “abrupt policy changes favoring a specific segment risk undermining industry stability” since future investments are planned based on established norms.

While not explicitly mentioned in the primary report, other public comments by opponents (such as Tata Motors Passenger Vehicles MD) have highlighted that lighter vehicles, particularly those around the 909 kg mark, may have lower safety ratings, and the exemption risks jeopardizing the significant safety advancements made by the industry.

Maruti Suzuki’s Defense

Maruti Suzuki, the main beneficiary of the proposal, defended the measure by stating that global car markets, including Europe, the U.S., China, Korea, and Japan, all have some provisions in their emission regulations to protect “very small cars.” The company argued that small cars inherently consume much less fuel and emit less carbon dioxide than bigger cars, and having this “safeguard” would actually help both CO2 reduction and fuel saving overall.

This impasse has led to delays in finalizing the regulation, which is vital for all automakers as they plan future product portfolios and make necessary investments in powertrain technology.