Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

The Technology & Economic Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to Technological and Economic developments in India. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
deejay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3357
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby deejay » 29 Jun 2017 16:36

Prasad wrote:The UDAN scheme could use a smaller jet/turboprop desi aircraft too if properly envisioned.


Oh Boy! I am in the middle of this. We are trying to bat for Single Engine (SE) (non piston) commuter aircraft under NSOP to be allowed under UDAN (RCS). The whole problem is in the use of world "scheduled operators" in the scheme. Single Engines are not allowed in scheduled operations.

In fact this has disqualified all helicopter operators since helicopters the world over fly only non scheduled. And in hills, we need helicopters for RCS to make an impact.

So far multiple meetings at MoCA and DGCA have borne little fruit. The big boyz ( Airlines) really bulldoze the small NSOP guys. At least Airbus and Textron are putting their weight behind as OEM.

Looks tough for the SE. Many operators have bid with 18-20 seater twin engines with the Polish M 28 Skytruck (Sikorsky owned) being a popular choice.

ragupta
BRFite
Posts: 302
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby ragupta » 29 Jun 2017 17:23

deejay wrote:
Prasad wrote:The UDAN scheme could use a smaller jet/turboprop desi aircraft too if properly envisioned.


Oh Boy! I am in the middle of this. We are trying to bat for Single Engine (SE) (non piston) commuter aircraft under NSOP to be allowed under UDAN (RCS). The whole problem is in the use of world "scheduled operators" in the scheme. Single Engines are not allowed in scheduled operations.

In fact this has disqualified all helicopter operators since helicopters the world over fly only non scheduled. And in hills, we need helicopters for RCS to make an impact.

So far multiple meetings at MoCA and DGCA have borne little fruit. The big boyz ( Airlines) really bulldoze the small NSOP guys. At least Airbus and Textron are putting their weight behind as OEM.

Looks tough for the SE. Many operators have bid with 18-20 seater twin engines with the Polish M 28 Skytruck (Sikorsky owned) being a popular choice.


Dornier 228NG is another option.

deejay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3357
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby deejay » 29 Jun 2017 17:38

ragupta wrote:...

Dornier 228NG is another option.


Dornier is not making headway with commercial buyers. Hope it changes.

pandyan
BRFite
Posts: 327
Joined: 31 Jul 2006 05:12

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby pandyan » 29 Jun 2017 19:51

IA used to fly dorniers right? I remember flying in one

nandakumar
BRFite
Posts: 718
Joined: 10 May 2010 13:37

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby nandakumar » 29 Jun 2017 21:31

pandyan wrote:IA used to fly dorniers right? I remember flying in one

yes. The Indian Airlines subsidiary Vayudoot.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60156
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Singha » 29 Jun 2017 21:58

being unpressurized and low ceiling it was a bit scary in turbulent weather. my father flew on vayudoot once from silchar to gau in heavy rainstorm and SWORE never to fly it again.
he said unlike regular jets it not only moved up and down , but side to side as well
the flt engineer is in a seat just behind the two pilots....and the cockpit is open plan no door.
suddenly a huge sound that scares the already nervous passengers...someones bottle had burst in a bag it was found.

my grandparents few in Dc3 dakota with bench seating along the sides.

even the fokker friendship of IA which i flew from silchar to gau had its moments in the thick clouds over meghalaya. silchar airport runway ends and a series of deep ravines were there falling away...my balls were shrunk back in my body being a young kid in class2

Indranil
Forum Moderator
Posts: 5558
Joined: 02 Apr 2010 01:21

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Indranil » 30 Jun 2017 02:53

The Airvan 10 is now certified.

deejay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3357
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby deejay » 30 Jun 2017 08:51

Indranil wrote:The Airvan 10 is now certified.


Yes it is in Australia and US. DGCA certification awaited. It is funnily called Letter of Type Acceptance or LoTA. Runs into the Single Engine limitations.

Airvan 8 is fairly popular in Australia. Competes with the Cessna Caravan 206 and 208B.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3456
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Karthik S » 30 Jun 2017 21:13

Any chance that new company that acquires AI now will increase its fleet size? Spicejet placed orders for its fleet, if we buy from same vendor, may be that will be good incentive for Boeing to setup a manufacturing plant in India.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15590
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby chetak » 30 Jun 2017 21:14

nandakumar wrote:
pandyan wrote:IA used to fly dorniers right? I remember flying in one

yes. The Indian Airlines subsidiary Vayudoot.


yamadoot it was called.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15590
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby chetak » 30 Jun 2017 21:21

Karthik S wrote:Any chance that new company that acquires AI now will increase its fleet size? Spicejet placed orders for its fleet, if we buy from same vendor, may be that will be good incentive for Boeing to setup a manufacturing plant in India.


AI+IA have some pretty crazy staff (including life time perks for retired staff and their dependants, plenty of lifetime free first class unlimited passes to freeloading Av Min unconnected officials ) liabilities and pretty strong unions who will extract the steepest possible price for the sale from the govt.

no company will touch AI with all these hangers on freeloading in perpetuity

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2116
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Marten » 30 Jun 2017 21:26

chetak wrote:
nandakumar wrote:yes. The Indian Airlines subsidiary Vayudoot.

yamadoot it was called.

Used to dread the trips to Jamnagar, Baroda.

Did they operate both Fokkers and Dorniers/some other props? I remember vaguely being terrified by the swaying and pitching. Made a theist of me.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15590
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby chetak » 30 Jun 2017 21:29

Marten wrote:
chetak wrote:yamadoot it was called.

Used to dread the trips to Jamnagar, Baroda.


they had some really hairy pilots. crazy yahoos, hence yamadoot

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15590
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby chetak » 30 Jun 2017 21:32

Marten wrote:
chetak wrote:yamadoot it was called.

Used to dread the trips to Jamnagar, Baroda.

Did they operate both Fokkers and Dorniers/some other props? I remember vaguely being terrified by the swaying and pitching. Made a theist of me.


a theist?? really?? :)

most people turned staunch Hindus, beleiving in every single one of the 33 crore gods.

Marten
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2116
Joined: 01 Jan 2010 21:41
Location: Engaging Communists, Uber-Socialists, Maoists, and other pro-poverty groups in fruitful dialog.

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Marten » 30 Jun 2017 22:22

chetak wrote:
Marten wrote:Used to dread the trips to Jamnagar, Baroda.

Did they operate both Fokkers and Dorniers/some other props? I remember vaguely being terrified by the swaying and pitching. Made a theist of me.


a theist?? really?? :)

most people turned staunch Hindus, beleiving in every single one of the 33 crore gods.

Same thing, Sir. Not atheist, but a (person who is) theist.
Can't remember the airfield at Jamnagar because inevitably, we would be so happy to get out and head into the waiting jeeps.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15590
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby chetak » 30 Jun 2017 22:37

Marten wrote:
chetak wrote:
a theist?? really?? :)

most people turned staunch Hindus, beleiving in every single one of the 33 crore gods.

Same thing, Sir. Not atheist, but a (person who is) theist.
Can't remember the airfield at Jamnagar because inevitably, we would be so happy to get out and head into the waiting jeeps.


sorry, old chap.

Slow night. :oops:

SriKumar
BRFite
Posts: 1535
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby SriKumar » 03 Jul 2017 01:40

Cross-post from Nukkad.
US laptop ban lifted for Etihad Airways out of Abu Dhabi

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/laptop-ban- ... bi-lifted/

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2275
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JayS » 04 Jul 2017 11:30

IndiGo had another rejected take off due to engine fire. Its not clear what exactly it was. Could be stall could be internal fire. Could be blade out as well.
http://www.zeebiz.com/companies/news-in ... hurt-18084

GoAir had similar incidence a few months ago when the fire was observed on the engine after the TO. The jet landed safely.

I am posting a few articles here just to highlight some of the problems being faced with PW1100G series engines on the A320Neo. In turn this is to highlight how every new product comes with teething problems and how those are handled, particularly in Aerospace industry. The point being, if OEMs like Airbus, GE, PW can have such problems, we should have realistic expectations any Indian company in its ab initio project in Aerospace, be it in civil or in Defence domain.

http://www.bangaloreaviation.com/2017/0 ... 20neo.html

A brief submitted to aviation regulator Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) confirms Bangalore Aviation’s earlier analysis on the ongoing challenges with the Pratt & Whitney PW1100 G-JM Geared Turbo Fan (GTF) engines which power the Airbus A320NEOs of Lufthansa, IndiGo and Go Airlines.

Problems with PW1000G GTF engine

The brief, which was reviewed by Bangalore Aviation, traces problems to three root causes:
1.Combustion chamber failures, 25% degradation in coastal environments
2.Number 3 bearing failures
3.Main Gear Box (MGB) failures

Premature engine removals

The brief confirms our report that both Indigo and Go Air have carried out premature engine removals. As of February 24, 2017 :
•13 premature removals due to combustion chamber distress
•28 premature removals due to number 3 bearing distress
•One premature removal due to main gear box failure




Note that this is for a small fleet (<50 jets) of new A320NEOs with PW engines.
Current status

The brief further confirms that all three issues are in the knowledge of, and are being actively addressed by the engine manufacturer, including:
•improved combustion chambers currently under test, expected to be delivered by September 2017
•re-design of the bearing compartment and retrofits expected by April 2017
•a re-working of the Trouble Shooting Manual (TSM) and Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) which would need approvals from the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).


Market reaction

It is learnt that Pratt & Whitney representatives have met both with the regulator and airlines to help ease challenges. The increased premature engine removals would cause airlines to demand for additional spare engines, but given the ongoing delivery challenges, it remains to be seen how well will Pratt & Whitney respond to these requests.

Having said this, both IndiGo and Go Air are reportedly satisfied with the support being received from Pratt & Whitney and have confidence the vendor will resolve the issues by the end of this year.

Problems are bound to happen in initial stages of any new Aircraft or engine family. What really matters is how well the OEM can handle the problems.

Analysis

As the capacity wars in the Indian market heat up and with rising fuel prices, the PW1100 GTF powered A320NEO poses a unique dilemma for operators. The GTF engine problems will increase with the rising temperatures of India’s summer.
.
.
On one side is the 15%+ improvement in fuel efficiency (the CFM engines are lower), but the cost benefits will be traded-off with reduced capacity induction due to delivery issues, despatch reliability and network performance due to the engine issues.


India offers a tough environment for Aviation to operate in, and has some unique challenges of its own. Reliability of the product matters as much as the performance, or even more many times.


http://www.livemint.com/Companies/6vsfh ... eo-pl.html
InterGlobe Aviation Ltd-run IndiGo and Go Airlines (India) Ltd-run GoAir, among to first to fly the new Airbus A320neo, have been forced to find ways to deal with vexing technical snags with the Pratt & Whitney engines that power the aircraft.

IndiGo has asked its pilots to fly snag-hit A320neo planes at a lower altitude, 30,000 feet, and not the usual 36,000 feet, to reduce strain on engines even though it will mean higher fuel burn. GoAir CEO Wolfgang Prock-Schauer said in an interview in February that Pratt & Whitney “will support us properly with spare engines and other support needs to be there so we can overcome the initial phase and don’t have any flight disruptions”.


This probably will off-set the benefit of GTF in fuel efficiency to some extent, increasing the cost of operation substantially for the airlines. Interesting point to note here that while a jet engine makes only about a quarter of the trust in cruise as compared to the thrust at Sea Level during Take off, the cruise phase is much more strenuous for the engine. Often its the end of climb which is the most challenging (it being slightly more than the Max Cruise Thrust at the same altitude).

In January, an IndiGo flight had a so-called rejected take-off at Mumbai. In February, a GoAir flight from Delhi had to return to the airport after an engine fire 15 minutes into the flight. In the same month, a GoAir flight had to make an emergency landing and an IndiGo flight had to fly minus passengers to Delhi from Baroda.

Spokespersons for GoAir and IndiGo declined to comment for this story.

Analysts say the two airlines are facing teething troubles that early buyers of new aircraft do. They point to Air India’s troubles with Boeing’s Dreamliner. Usually, such problems are sorted out within the first two years of a new aircraft being launched.


Quite a bit of incidences in a short period for a small fleet. Typically around 2yrs of pain. Note that this is after the aircraft is pushed in the service. Even after such problems the sales are not affected as such. May be some postponements or 1-2 cancellations. But nothing more that that. The order book for this engine is very strong at 8000 engines IIRC.


Apart from this there had been some other serious issues such as
- high Engine start interval time
- Turbine blade out due to internal fire on a BA CS-100 prototype jet which damaged the prototype significantly
- Gearbox related issue ("metal chip detection warning")
- delayed deliveries forcing Airbus to have 35 A320NEO as hanger queens or in Airbus's words "powerless gliders"
- Deliveries of engines without Fan blades..!!

The list goes on and on. Not that LEAP or GEnX are any better stories. Understandably since PW1100G is a first of the GTF architecture, it is having more issues. While LEAP or GEnX are a part of continuous improvement of their existing 2-spool design. But they still have/had issues. One needs to appreciate complexities involved in products in Aerospace domain (or even automotive for that matter). Any product has quite a long product cycle in Aerospace. And a couple of years of issues is not a big deal. What really matters is how the OEMs and customers handle the issues together. One cannot have an attitude thinking its like an FMCG product. A key thing for HAL or any other Indian company would be to get into the habit of proper product support and customer care. The kind of attitude that we typically see from most of the pvt companies in India - once a product is sold its the customer's problem - will not lead them too far in complex engineering fields like Aerospace. On the other hand customers (and the layman as well) need to appreciate the technical complexities and work with the OEM continuously.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1187
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Zynda » 04 Jul 2017 15:08

JayS wrote:Interesting point to note here that while a jet engine makes only about a quarter of the trust in cruise as compared to the thrust at Sea Level during Take off, the cruise phase is much more strenuous for the engine. Often its the end of climb which is the most challenging (it being slightly more than the Max Cruise Thrust at the same altitude).

Per my understanding, the peak operating conditions i.e. full-thrust is when the engine parts are stressed most and hence critical. How is cruise more strenuous when as you say, the thrust is very low? Please explain onlee...

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2275
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JayS » 04 Jul 2017 16:26

Zynda wrote:
JayS wrote:Interesting point to note here that while a jet engine makes only about a quarter of the trust in cruise as compared to the thrust at Sea Level during Take off, the cruise phase is much more strenuous for the engine. Often its the end of climb which is the most challenging (it being slightly more than the Max Cruise Thrust at the same altitude).

Per my understanding, the peak operating conditions i.e. full-thrust is when the engine parts are stressed most and hence critical. How is cruise more strenuous when as you say, the thrust is very low? Please explain onlee...


Its counter-intuitive. :D
Higher altitude = Thinner air. If you normalise operational conditions, at higher altitude the engine received lesser incoming air, thus for every unit of thrust it needs to put more energy into every unit of the incoming stream. Also the cooling effectiveness is reduced due to reduced intake. In short, the engine hits higher temperatures post HPC, for same thrust as you go higher. Higher the temperature, worse is the material properties and thus more debit on life of components for similar stress values. Also things like creep, over-aging also come into picture.

In fact TSFC at the Take off is slightly lower than the TSFC in cruise...!!

From Aerothermo POV the engine is simply working harder to generate a unit thrust value in cruise at altitude as compared to the Sea Level. So when I said strenuous it was more from Aerothermo POV or for the jet engine as a system. But rom Structural POV, even if stress values and temperatures are high at TO, the total time exposure is only a few seconds. While in the Cruise phase its for hours per cycle. Even few degrees increase in temperature can be bad.

Another interesting this is the engine hits higher temperatures during Thrust reversal (generally the hottest Op point in entire mission cycle, particularly at the rear half side of the engine) than the Take off Op point..!! I'll leave it to you to figure out why. Its an easy one.

rahulm
BRFite
Posts: 1121
Joined: 19 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby rahulm » 11 Jul 2017 10:48

Good news and progress on the new Goa airport GMR raises Rs 1,900 crore for phase-I of Mopa airport

The GMR Goa International Airports Limited (GGIAL), a subsidiary of GMR Airports Limited, has secured funds worth Rs 1,900 crore for the development of the greenfield airport at Mopa. The company has executed a debt facility agreement with private lender Axis Bank for Rs 1,330 crore, while Rs 570 crore has been infused as equity, all of which will be utilized to develop the first phase of the airport


Having tied up funding for the project, we are working towards starting on-ground construction activities post monsoon


It will be a full-service airport catering to domestic and international passengers besides freight services


According to the directorate of civil aviation and the government of Goa, Mopa airport is expected to handle 13.1 million passengers by 2036.
hopefully, these estimates are accurate. With the expected boom in air travel and the release of pent up demand maybe they should plan for increased numbers sooner.

Anything will be better than the current Dabolim mess.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60156
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Singha » 11 Jul 2017 20:50

Dabolim has limited morning and evening slots and prices are hence high. Real demand is higher and ability to fly in 24x7 might help those russian charters too

Vips
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 84
Joined: 14 Apr 2017 18:23

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Vips » 13 Jul 2017 08:38

On a wing and a prayer.

It's been a 17-year-wait. Amol Yadav made his first airplane in 2003. It went as far as a taxi test. His third aircraft – a six-seater named TAC003 – has done a taxi test and is awaiting permission from the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), which regulates who flies in India's airspace, to take off. Says the Senior Commander with Jet Airways: "Building an airplane is not impossible. It's difficult, but not impossible." The impossible bit appears to be getting it off the ground.

His six-seater TAC003 has a 350 horse-power engine, capable of reaching speeds of 192 knots (about 355 km per hour). It can reach an altitude of 13,000 feet and has a range of up to 1,200 km.

Despite the delay, Yadav is hopeful. Since building the TAC003 (a reference to his aviation company Thrust Aircraft Pvt Ltd), he has been liaising with the Maharashtra Government, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis and former Union Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar. He believes it’s a matter of time before the DGCA clears TAC003's maiden flight. Meanwhile, Yadav has begun work on the prototype for TAC005, a 19-seater aircraft that already has potential buyers showing interest. Like his earlier attempts, Yadav will build this one too on the terrace of his building in Charkop, a suburb in Mumbai.(In case you are wondering, the TAC004 is a design for an indigenous fighter jet. :shock: )

"My team (of 42 members) works on the body, and we get a fabricator to build the parts from aluminium alloy. The TAC005 is designed with a Pratt and Whitney engine and Rockwell Collins navigations systems. The prototype will take another 12 months or so to build, if the finance comes through. After that, we plan to start producing more for buyers."

He has won admirers. “Capt Yadav had the guts to dream; he comes from a middle-class family but he has put his all resources into this,” says Kapil Kohal, Senior Captain at Air India. Kohal, who has seen the TAC003, says that despite the ‘crude’ finish and look of a ‘makeshift aircraft, “we should remember that what he has created is a test platform that needs to be encouraged and taken forward.”

But the bigger challenge is ahead. “I would say that out of 100 steps that he needs to achieve before being able to sell an aircraft, he has completed the first three,” adds Kohal who has over 15,000 hours of flying experience.

A lot of Yadav's plan are hinged on a wing and a prayer. The TAC003, the completed six-seater, is now parked at Mumbai's international airport because GVK, the airport's operator, is lending him space for free. Building the TAC005 prototype – even after most of the research and development and design is being done by friends and acquaintances pro bono – will cost Yadav ₹50 crore, money that he doesn't have yet.

The Maharashtra government has promised to give Yadav access to 159 acres of land in Palghar, 87 km north off Mumbai. "While the State wants to support me, it can't give money to private individuals. So the Chief Minister's office is trying to loan me money through a bank and once that comes through, I will be able to build aircraft on this land through a joint venture with the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation," Yadav explained.

What about corporate sponsorships? Or even financing from MAB Aviation, an air charter company that has shown interest in the TAC005? "Not really, nobody's come forward yet," Yadav said, although he is strangely confident that his plans to manufacture and sell aircraft will work out.

"The difficulty is in convincing people that I can build a safe aircraft, getting permissions to build it and then proving to them that it can fly. People accepting that this can be done in India, that's really the problem," says the 41-year-old.

Yadav's timing with the TAC005 may just be right, though, as the Modi Government is keen to encourage air transport with the UDAN scheme that will promote low-cost regional connectivity.

The possibilities for smaller aircraft in India are endless, Yadav says as he lays them out. "There are more than 30 airports in Maharashtra; nearly every district has one and if these are brought up to speed, you need smaller airplanes that can connect every single district in the state.

That will help Yadav build a safety record, says Kohal, as this is critical for corporate airlines to be interested.

“He needs the help of a public institution or the government to buy the first 10 products.... Why is it that Boeing and Airbus have the monopoly in aircraft manufacturing? They have built a safety and performance record over decades,” says Kohal.

Meanwhile, Yadav is waiting to make India’s Boeing or Airbus.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1187
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Zynda » 13 Jul 2017 18:17

^^Hope they get to achieve their goals. Challenging will be to get the FAR 23 TC. Experimental aircraft, which is what it is now can fly as many times as required but cannot ferry passengers on a commercial basis.

BTW, I hope they establish their goals more carefully...what is the need to rush to 19-seater plane before getting their current model tested? But it is good that TAC has completed manufacturing of the first prototype...a huge step forward. What should happen now is that one of these MII companies should buy them out, probably move them to BLR (since much of the aviation related infra is kinda of set up in Govt labs and they can make use of the same) and start moving forward towards certification attempts at least. Will be a huge learning of engineering challenges and processes. Also MII company can attract professionals who have had experience with aircraft design, analysis, testing, manf & certification. This would give MII company an increased & visible foot print in to aerospace scene in India as a product developer along with build to blueprint efforts.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19427
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Austin » 14 Jul 2017 12:16

Several IndiGo A320neos Sitting Idle Due to GTF Glitches

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... f-glitches

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2275
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JayS » 14 Jul 2017 14:31

Austin wrote:Several IndiGo A320neos Sitting Idle Due to GTF Glitches

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... f-glitches


I wonder what would have been the reaction in India if this was due to an Indian OEM's aircraft or engine say from HAL.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2275
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JayS » 14 Jul 2017 14:37

Vips wrote:On a wing and a prayer.

It's been a 17-year-wait. Amol Yadav made his first airplane in 2003. It went as far as a taxi test. His third aircraft – a six-seater named TAC003 – has done a taxi test and is awaiting permission from the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), which regulates who flies in India's airspace, to take off. Says the Senior Commander with Jet Airways: "Building an airplane is not impossible. It's difficult, but not impossible." The impossible bit appears to be getting it off the ground.

His six-seater TAC003 has a 350 horse-power engine, capable of reaching speeds of 192 knots (about 355 km per hour). It can reach an altitude of 13,000 feet and has a range of up to 1,200 km.

Despite the delay, Yadav is hopeful. Since building the TAC003 (a reference to his aviation company Thrust Aircraft Pvt Ltd), he has been liaising with the Maharashtra Government, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis and former Union Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar. He believes it’s a matter of time before the DGCA clears TAC003's maiden flight. Meanwhile, Yadav has begun work on the prototype for TAC005, a 19-seater aircraft that already has potential buyers showing interest. Like his earlier attempts, Yadav will build this one too on the terrace of his building in Charkop, a suburb in Mumbai.(In case you are wondering, the TAC004 is a design for an indigenous fighter jet. :shock: )

"My team (of 42 members) works on the body, and we get a fabricator to build the parts from aluminium alloy. The TAC005 is designed with a Pratt and Whitney engine and Rockwell Collins navigations systems. The prototype will take another 12 months or so to build, if the finance comes through. After that, we plan to start producing more for buyers."

He has won admirers. “Capt Yadav had the guts to dream; he comes from a middle-class family but he has put his all resources into this,” says Kapil Kohal, Senior Captain at Air India. Kohal, who has seen the TAC003, says that despite the ‘crude’ finish and look of a ‘makeshift aircraft, “we should remember that what he has created is a test platform that needs to be encouraged and taken forward.”

But the bigger challenge is ahead. “I would say that out of 100 steps that he needs to achieve before being able to sell an aircraft, he has completed the first three,” adds Kohal who has over 15,000 hours of flying experience.

A lot of Yadav's plan are hinged on a wing and a prayer. The TAC003, the completed six-seater, is now parked at Mumbai's international airport because GVK, the airport's operator, is lending him space for free. Building the TAC005 prototype – even after most of the research and development and design is being done by friends and acquaintances pro bono – will cost Yadav ₹50 crore, money that he doesn't have yet.

The Maharashtra government has promised to give Yadav access to 159 acres of land in Palghar, 87 km north off Mumbai. "While the State wants to support me, it can't give money to private individuals. So the Chief Minister's office is trying to loan me money through a bank and once that comes through, I will be able to build aircraft on this land through a joint venture with the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation," Yadav explained.

What about corporate sponsorships? Or even financing from MAB Aviation, an air charter company that has shown interest in the TAC005? "Not really, nobody's come forward yet," Yadav said, although he is strangely confident that his plans to manufacture and sell aircraft will work out.

"The difficulty is in convincing people that I can build a safe aircraft, getting permissions to build it and then proving to them that it can fly. People accepting that this can be done in India, that's really the problem," says the 41-year-old.

Yadav's timing with the TAC005 may just be right, though, as the Modi Government is keen to encourage air transport with the UDAN scheme that will promote low-cost regional connectivity.

The possibilities for smaller aircraft in India are endless, Yadav says as he lays them out. "There are more than 30 airports in Maharashtra; nearly every district has one and if these are brought up to speed, you need smaller airplanes that can connect every single district in the state.

That will help Yadav build a safety record, says Kohal, as this is critical for corporate airlines to be interested.

“He needs the help of a public institution or the government to buy the first 10 products.... Why is it that Boeing and Airbus have the monopoly in aircraft manufacturing? They have built a safety and performance record over decades,” says Kohal.

Meanwhile, Yadav is waiting to make India’s Boeing or Airbus.


Inspiring. So while a single motivated person without much backing is dreaming of making airplanes, our big biz power houses are busy waiting for easy screwdrivergiri deals to fall in their laps, or happy showing off manufacturing of some component for some heli or a/c which they have got only by the grace of offsets from defence deals.

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1187
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Zynda » 18 Jul 2017 00:08

It seems like end of the road for Airbus A380, A350 fleet, at least with Emirates.

“Done Deal” – Emirates Selects 787s Over A350s

Highlights

> Order Is “Done Deal” – A Question Of “When”, Not “If” – 2017 Dubai Air Show Is A Possibility
> Mix Includes 787-9s & 787-10s – Switchable As Needed
> A380 Phase Out With Arrival Of 777-9
> Further 777Xs Sought Post-DWC Move
> GE Aviation & Rolls-Royce Battling It Out To Power Emirates’ 787 Fleet

After sensationally dumping the A350-900 and A350-1000, Airbus knew it had a massive task to try and win back business from Emirates. The airline has canned orders before and never re-orders jets it ditches – like the A340-600, Emirates is not going back to the A350 family either.

Detailed intelligence states that the 787 will be Emirates’ smaller widebody airplane choice. Snaring Emirates is a massive coup for Boeing – something we’ve predicted for over three years now.

With Sir Tim Clark confirming that Airbus has killed the A380neo, Emirates’ fleet of existing A380s will start to be withdrawn when the 777-9 fleet reaches double digits.

The 2013 launch of the 777X effectively killed the A380 program and future of the A380 position within Emirates. Singapore Airlines has also taken the first steps to nixing the A380 with 777-9s.

Emirates’ new 777-9 will replace both A380 and 777-300ER fleets. Beneath that, Emirates has selected the 787-9 and 787-10 for its smaller twin-aisle, medium-to-long haul route network to provide it with better competitive capabilities on thinner city pairs where the A380 and 777-300ER are too much airplane.

In tandem with its new focus and relationship with sister airline flydubai, Emirates will forgo buying narrowbody airplanes and instead deploy 787s on routes where flydubai’s 737 MAX 8s aren’t big enough.

Emirates is equipped with all the data it needs and to those in the know, the Chairman and Chief Executive of this bellwether airline, His Highness Sheikh Ahmed bin Saeed Al Maktoum has long since been an admirer of the 787s vaunted capabilities – now he’s on the verge of gaining a true game-changing airplane family to help turn around Emirates’ fortunes in the face of recent economic and financial challenges.


I wonder why Emirates is turning towards Boeing fleet from Airbus? Surely A350 is not a bad plane...perhaps Boeing is able to afford to provide massive discounts along with discounted maintenance support which Airbus could not match? I can understand A380 going in to extinction...perhaps they wanted all one-OEM fleet to ease logistics & supply-chain issues. And who knows what else hidden goodies Massa has thrown to nudge Emirates towards Boeing fleets.

Vashishtha
BRFite
Posts: 263
Joined: 12 Jun 2010 23:06
Location: look behind you

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Vashishtha » 18 Jul 2017 01:00

Strategicaeroresearch is run by some hardcore boeing fanboy. His previous articles were verified bs and pulled from his own musharraf.

The whole a350 v 787 for ek rumor circles are getting too tiring now...

The 380 isint going extict anytime soon and price wise both A359/10 and 788/9 are extremely competitive...

ssundar
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 02:33

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby ssundar » 18 Jul 2017 01:40

Zynda wrote:I wonder why Emirates is turning towards Boeing fleet from Airbus? Surely A350 is not a bad plane...perhaps Boeing is able to afford to provide massive discounts along with discounted maintenance support which Airbus could not match? I can understand A380 going in to extinction...perhaps they wanted all one-OEM fleet to ease logistics & supply-chain issues. And who knows what else hidden goodies Massa has thrown to nudge Emirates towards Boeing fleets.


The widebody aircraft market is getting closer to a perfect duopoly - the level of differentiation between the aircraft is coming down and decisions are getting made mostly on price, perks and delivery timing. Each OEM will give up a good amount of margin to win marquee airlines who have massive fleets of the other. It would not be wise of the airlines NOT to take up those offers.

Emirates has one massive hub in Dubai that plays to their expansion plan and Open Skies agreements all along North America and Europe. It is now time for them to increase frequencies to the same markets and also open long, thin markets. The 777-X family can be used to increase frequencies to LAX, SFO, ORD, JFK, EWR, etc. while the smaller 787s can open up many Tier2 cities in the USA and Canada. The capacity coverage of the 777-X and 787 families is much more comprehensive than the A350 and A380 families.

Airbus needs an extremely efficient aircraft family between the capacities of the A350 and A380. This is a coverage hole for them. The A380-800 and larger aircraft will only sell to airlines operating in slot-controller airports with no more slots to expand into.

arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2679
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby arshyam » 18 Jul 2017 08:28

ssundar wrote:The capacity coverage of the 777-X and 787 families is much more comprehensive than the A350 and A380 families.

True. Seattle is a classic example, there is enough demand to operate an A-380 daily like to SFO, but Emirates chose to use 2x777s daily instead, one morning and one evening departure. This gives them more patronage due to more flexible options opening up, to ppl bound for SEA and to connect to other nearby cities like Portland and Vancouver. So why then put all eggs into one basket?

Of course, the above does not apply to larger markets like JFK or LAX where they could potentially operate 2xA380s daily. But such markets will be fewer in number.

@Zynda saar, As for sweeteners given by Boeing, how about danda instead, courtesy the gotus? Remember the laptop ban?

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60156
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 Jul 2017 08:31

is it possible to create a A350-Max to cover this hole?

the 737 has morphed into a giant new avatar with 230 seats, up from the usual 180 in that segment.

I doubt the A380 can be short-chassis in any form...its just too beefy

ssundar
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 02:33

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby ssundar » 18 Jul 2017 09:08

Singha wrote:is it possible to create a A350-Max to cover this hole?

the 737 has morphed into a giant new avatar with 230 seats, up from the usual 180 in that segment.

I doubt the A380 can be short-chassis in any form...its just too beefy


I believe A350-1000 is as long as it can get without having to add weight just to strengthen the tube. The A340-600 was a stretch too far and it suffered inefficiencies due to reinforcements of the tube.

A true Airbus competitor to the Boeing 777-X will likely be a 10-abreast aircraft but one without the circular fuselage that inherently has a lot of empty unusable space. It will need to start just above the A350-1000.

putnanja
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4324
Joined: 26 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: searching for the next al-qaida #3

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby putnanja » 18 Jul 2017 09:58

The aircraft requirement above A350-1000 is not that big. Even 777-X has few orders and more than half of that is from middle-eastern carriers. Airbus has a good spread of widebody aircraft. The A330 is still pretty competitive and is much cheaper than 787 to operate.

The market for Very large aircrafts(VLA) of the size of 777-X and A380 is still small. I don't think Airbus will invest anymore into anything between A350 and A380. The middle eastern carriers are facing pressure too. Emirates is laying off some people. Qatar airlines is facing issues due to ME drama. And the big US carriers have cut off interline/codeshare agreements with many ME carriers. Recently AA terminated its codeshare with Etihad and Qatar airlines. So the feed they were getting from different US cities on these airlines has reduced. If they cut or reduce any more of 777-X orders, it will be doubtful if Boeing can fully recover the investment it has made on them. It has still not recovered the investment made on 787 production line after delivering more than 500 aircraft. VLAs are useful only for slot-limited airports like London Gatwick, Frankfurt, New York, Dubai etc. Its a problem filling those many seats profitable. Its easier to fill 80% of 280 seater plane than 80% of 545 seater aircraft.

jayasimha
BRFite
Posts: 400
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 17:31

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby jayasimha » 19 Jul 2017 16:30

Performance of domestic airlines for the year 2017.

http://pibphoto.nic.in/documents/rlink/ ... 771901.pdf

jayasimha
BRFite
Posts: 400
Joined: 09 Feb 2011 17:31

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby jayasimha » 24 Jul 2017 17:09

Ministry of Civil Aviation
24-July-2017 16:51 IST
Airport Authority of India signs MoU with Govt. of Uttarakhand for development for aviation sector in the State may be keeping lizards in mind. AAI will also assist UCADA in obtaining necessary clearances for airport operations starting with the upgraded airport at Pithoragarh and later at Chiniyalisaur.


http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease. ... lid=168908

vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2877
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby vera_k » 24 Jul 2017 18:35

ssundar wrote: The capacity coverage of the 777-X and 787 families is much more comprehensive than the A350 and A380 families.


A380 is ahead of its time. Currently the A380 is problematic because of the level of investment airports need to make. Most have not invested in supporting the A380 for an optimal passenger experience. Flying the 380 pretty much assures one of a long wait to wade through immigration and another interminable wait at baggage claim. More people may be willing to fly the A380 potentially as new terminals are built with better infrastructure to handle an aircraft of this size.

Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 451
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Atmavik » 24 Jul 2017 20:57

Just flew the A380. There are good standing areas in front

ssundar
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 02:33

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby ssundar » 25 Jul 2017 10:40

vera_k wrote:A380 is ahead of its time. Currently the A380 is problematic because of the level of investment airports need to make. Most have not invested in supporting the A380 for an optimal passenger experience. Flying the 380 pretty much assures one of a long wait to wade through immigration and another interminable wait at baggage claim. More people may be willing to fly the A380 potentially as new terminals are built with better infrastructure to handle an aircraft of this size.


Boeing's argument is that such massive infrastructure need not be built if you begin enabling smaller airports for intercontinental flights. For example, United is opening up secondary cities in China. In India, if airlines play their strategy well, they could operate US non-stops out of BLR, HYD or MAA profitably. They do not all have to pile up on BOM or DEL. Boeing is looking to make A380 a niche market aircraft while they can sell lots of 787s for newly opened up routes.



Return to “Technology & Economic Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests