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.
arshyam
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2615
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby arshyam » 07 May 2017 14:33

Deans wrote:Runway length in most airports is too short to accommodate a Boeing 737 or a A320. Patna and Leh operate these aircraft, but sometimes
with a payload penalty due to shorter runways.

This probably explains the high fares to Leh, combined with the requirement of flying in the morning only.

nachiket
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5767
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49
Location: Соединенные Штаты Америки

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby nachiket » 07 May 2017 14:48

Deans, thanks for the informative post. One question about Delhi. It already has three runways now, although they are not perfectly parallel causing problems of its own. Plus T2 is currently unused and it has Terminal 1C or D being used for some domestic flights I think in addition to the new T3. So why does it still not have free slots left? Inefficient utilization?

As for fog, Delhi still has huge fog delays despite the CATIIIB ILS since most of our pilots aren't trained to use it. The complete lack of any other big airport anywhere in Northern India is another glaring shortcoming.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 523
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Deans » 07 May 2017 16:57

Nachiket,
You are correct. Delhi has 3 runways (4th being commissioned by 2019). However, the constraint is lack of capacity in peak hours at terminal ID.
The total no of flights (take off + landing) Delhi can handle in an hour, with 3 runways, in theory, is 78. In practice, it is a max of 68.
However, of these 68, 6 are IAF/VIP flights/private jets, leaving no more than 62 movements per hour.
The reason flights cannot increase from 68 to 78 is poor infrastructure around the runways - taxiways are limited and terminal 1D operates
at peak capacity for about half the day, so any additional flight has to be from T3 only.

Mumbai operates a peak of 45 movements per hour with 1 runway. Ironically, the capacity goes DOWN (to around 38-40 movements)
when 2 runways operate, due to poor infrastructure and inefficient runway management. At peak hours, Mumbai manages 50+ movements (which is how the schedule is planned), but the slightest delay causes cascading delays.

Airlines do have a critical mass of pilots trained for CAT 3B. Fog delays happen when the other airport does not have CAT 3, which would mean an aircraft can leave Delhi but cannot land, if the destination is another fog bound airport. Or, the aircraft cannot take off from a fog bound airport to land in Delhi.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 523
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Deans » 07 May 2017 16:59

arshyam wrote:
Deans wrote:Runway length in most airports is too short to accommodate a Boeing 737 or a A320. Patna and Leh operate these aircraft, but sometimes
with a payload penalty due to shorter runways.

This probably explains the high fares to Leh, combined with the requirement of flying in the morning only.


Winds across the mountain passes pick up after 1100 and this prevents flight operations after 1200 (I think) for safety reasons.
An additional factor in summer is that at high altitudes, warmer temperatures restrict payloads. There are several instances of luggage being
offloaded when flights are full.
Apart from limited operating hours, a reason for the high fares is that the tourist season is short and demand is higher than the capacity of flights that can land in Leh. The parking space on the apron and flight movements are shared by the IAF.
Last edited by Deans on 07 May 2017 17:13, edited 2 times in total.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 523
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Deans » 07 May 2017 17:06

Mumbai and Delhi have roughly the same demand for flights. As explained in my previous post, Delhi has a capacity of 62 movements per hour and Mumbai 45. However, it is very difficult for a national carrier to have a Pan India network if slots are available in Delhi (off peak) but not in Mumbai.

Moreover, Bangalore, Chennai, Pune and Hyderabad are also saturated at peak times.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58678
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Singha » 07 May 2017 21:16

nachiket wrote:The lack of runways in our airports is truly astonishing. I doubt any airport besides Delhi has parallel runways which can be used simultaneously. BLR has only 1. Super busy Mumbai has two cross runways only one of which is active at a time.


blr 2nd runway will be parallel and about 1km spaced so parallel takeoff+landing can be done bideshi style. we could see those line of ac at 2 min intervals coming down the glide slope.

Dileep
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4963
Joined: 04 Apr 2005 08:17
Location: Dera Mahab Ali धरा महाबलिस्याः درا مهاب الي

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Dileep » 08 May 2017 08:39

Go for the Kerala model!! We have one international airport every 200km. DEL should have four airports at four sides already. BLR should have one to the south at least (or develop Hosur). BOM should have three more. Take example of frugal buildup of Cochin. They recently built a non gold plated new terminal with no UDF.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58678
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Singha » 08 May 2017 13:31

ideally BLR should have 2 more ring road expressways and a good metro rail network to make such things viable. putting a airport with no proper connectivity is not good.

it is better mysore airport be developed as its the entry gate for a lot of tourism in all directions. if it can manage 737 size, it will find traffic from all sides for domestic tourism. mysore should become a more industrial city like coimbatore and salem. there is no lack of education there for decades now.

goes without saying the proposed state govt owned blr-mysore expway needed to happen long ago. the new govt will take it up.

Dilli and Mumbai can support 2 airports

Sachin
Webmaster BR
Posts: 6674
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Undisclosed

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Sachin » 08 May 2017 14:21

Singha wrote:it is better mysore airport be developed as its the entry gate for a lot of tourism in all directions. if it can manage 737 size, it will find traffic from all sides for domestic tourism.

Mysore airport has a big draw back. Its run way cannot be extended in an easy way. The run way ends right next to the Mysore-Nanjangud road, and extending the run away means the road has to be re-worked. And this road is quickly becoming a four lane highway.

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4071
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Neshant » 08 May 2017 14:35

Austin wrote:HAL has to study the civilian market first and put up some numbers on who would be their prospective serious buyers no matter what type of aircraft we built be it 18 seater or 50/100 seater.

A serious study of market is needed and also HAL/NAL and other org ability to develop such aircraft what they can do what they cant what needs to be imported , who are the tier 1 , 2 3 suppliers in India and abroad that can supply components to HAL , If any consultancy is needed for the program.

Once they do such studies they need to put this up and do some brain storming if they should and can proceed ahead with the program.

Civilian Aircraft makers in the game have these kind of study rigorously done and presented in Civil Aviation Conference and at various air shows Civilian Aircraft markets are very highly competitive and time sensitive loose a one year or two and you can have a project that does not even get a break even or can just make marginal profit.

All I have seen since 1998 Air Show are PPT that shows we need a 50 and 100 seater and every airshow it progress with some little more information and then it goes off the air only arrive at next aero india.

Nothing serious has been done that would give confidence about the project other then chal lets make a 50 and 100 seater we would need xyz number by 2030 in Indian civil market.

I am afraid with such casual approach this will either end up as Saras demonstrator project or IAF will have to bite the bullet and buy it.


Is there any likelyhood of India building a C919 class regional passenger jet in the not too distant future?

It can't be done alone due to a total lack of experience. So perhaps selecting a second tier partner like Bombardier or Embraer might be an option? Then again, why would these companies want to create their own competition.

Perhaps focus on commercial airliner engine development instead of the plane making business? If only GTRE was more competent.

With Boeing, Airbus as first tier and Bombardier, Embraer, Russia and now China as second tier aircraft producers, one wonders if there might be a glut of aircraft coming soon on the next economic downturn.

Perhaps ready a sack of money to buy out Bombardier as Tata bought Jaguar? That might be an option to get things rolling quickly.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58678
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Singha » 08 May 2017 16:28

Sachin wrote:
Singha wrote:it is better mysore airport be developed as its the entry gate for a lot of tourism in all directions. if it can manage 737 size, it will find traffic from all sides for domestic tourism.

Mysore airport has a big draw back. Its run way cannot be extended in an easy way. The run way ends right next to the Mysore-Nanjangud road, and extending the run away means the road has to be re-worked. And this road is quickly becoming a four lane highway.


a 500m shallow underpass section should solve the problem. there is a underpass when we come from delhi T3 toward T1.

dusseldorf airport http://c8.alamy.com/comp/G1MTJK/duessel ... G1MTJK.jpg

there is hardly any civil engineering challenge in making a shallow underpass under a extended runway.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58678
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Singha » 08 May 2017 16:31

Dileep wrote:Go for the Kerala model!! We have one international airport every 200km. DEL should have four airports at four sides already. BLR should have one to the south at least (or develop Hosur). BOM should have three more. Take example of frugal buildup of Cochin. They recently built a non gold plated new terminal with no UDF.


kerala has more air travellers per capita than most due to gulfies
kerala has high and uniformish pop density
kerala has airlines interested in this ready market
kerala has a long frontage but a shallow depth
kerala rail connections to rest of country is poor
kerala gets lots of tourists from all over

these are advantages which say vast tracks of north and central india do not have. UP has hardly any civil airports - kanpur does not have a domestic airport!! only lucknow and benaras do i think...for a "country" of 200 mil!! bihar has a grand total of 1 airport in patna? another "80 million country". byt they have dense rail networks.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 523
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Deans » 08 May 2017 21:43

There can be good domestic demand for a 70-120 seater for the Indian domestic market. In 2011, I was the `Industry representative' on a ministry team to evaluate this. As Austin suggests in his previous post, the Govt's approach was very casual.
What we need is a medium range jet (like the Embaraer or Su-100 of Russia) rather than a prop like the Bombardier Q400 or the ATR.

I believe our best bet would be to get Embraer (or Sukhoi) to set up an assembly line here, with an Indian partner. Both companies need the business.
For Embraer, this could well provide offsets for its sale of EW aircraft to the IAF.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4248
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby SBajwa » 09 May 2017 00:29

Vast majority of the traffic to Delhi Airport ends up in Punjab-Haryana.
Vast majority of the traffic to Mumbai airport ends up in Gujarat.

I travel to India at least 2+ times every year and will save a day if a flight takes me to Amritsar or Chandigarh anywhere from the europe or middle east at a reasonable rate.

Right now New York to Delhi is $900., while direct flight to Chandigarh is $1400 with a stoppage at Delhi. Why pay extra $500 for a short distance?

And I would even pay that extra $500.00 for a direct flight to Chandigarh. The problem is the hotels, taxis, etc lobby which is forcing people to land at Delhi/Mumbai. Amritsar,Chandigarh, Ahmedabad, Surat all need direct flights from europe/middle east.

Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 381
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Atmavik » 09 May 2017 02:17

Singha wrote:
Dileep wrote:Go for the Kerala model!! We have one international airport every 200km. DEL should have four airports at four sides already. BLR should have one to the south at least (or develop Hosur). BOM should have three more. Take example of frugal buildup of Cochin. They recently built a non gold plated new terminal with no UDF.


kerala has more air travellers per capita than most due to gulfies
kerala has high and uniformish pop density
kerala has airlines interested in this ready market
kerala has a long frontage but a shallow depth
kerala rail connections to rest of country is poor
kerala gets lots of tourists from all over

these are advantages which say vast tracks of north and central india do not have. UP has hardly any civil airports - kanpur does not have a domestic airport!! only lucknow and benaras do i think...for a "country" of 200 mil!! bihar has a grand total of 1 airport in patna? another "80 million country". byt they have dense rail networks.


Lucknow and Kanpur share the Amusi Airport which was recently upgraded. will be going there to visit in laws in July. Patna Airport is the worst and very unsafe.
my cousins in massa prefer to fly to delhi and take a train home.

Delhi is the only International airport for the Entire Northern plain

Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 381
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Atmavik » 09 May 2017 02:22

Deans wrote:There can be good domestic demand for a 70-120 seater for the Indian domestic market. In 2011, I was the `Industry representative' on a ministry team to evaluate this. As Austin suggests in his previous post, the Govt's approach was very casual.
What we need is a medium range jet (like the Embaraer or Su-100 of Russia) rather than a prop like the Bombardier Q400 or the ATR.

I believe our best bet would be to get Embraer (or Sukhoi) to set up an assembly line here, with an Indian partner. Both companies need the business.
For Embraer, this could well provide offsets for its sale of EW aircraft to the IAF.


Deans Ji,

whats wrong with the Bombardier Q400? i flew this on HYD- Tirupathi trip and was quite comfortable. I thought a turboprop would do well for such trips where distance is around 500 Miles.

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 523
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Deans » 09 May 2017 09:16

Atmavik wrote:Deans Ji,

whats wrong with the Bombardier Q400? i flew this on HYD- Tirupathi trip and was quite comfortable. I thought a turboprop would do well for such trips where distance is around 500 Miles.


Props like the Q400 and the ATR are the best option upto 400 Miles. Beyond that, jets are more viable both in terms of speed and cost per seat km basis. If we consider routes where there is a demand for 50-120 pax per day (not viable for the A320 or B-737) and/or short runways that cannot accommodate larger aircraft, the number of routes which are longer than 400 miles, are more than those <400 miles.

More significantly, the improvement in our roads and increase in rail speeds is reducing demand for short haul, high density sectors.
So, the demand for long haul sectors will only increase relative to short haul ones.
If we consider B'lore (BLR) as an example, the demand for BLR-MAA flights has dropped, as road speeds have improved and trains have become
more punctual. On the other hand, several long distance routes (e.g. BLR-SXR) can only be served by a jet.
Last edited by Deans on 09 May 2017 23:26, edited 1 time in total.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2008
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JayS » 09 May 2017 12:44

Deans wrote:
Props like the Q400 and the ATR are the best option upto 400 Miles. Beyond that Jets, are more viable both in terms of speed and cost per seat km basis. If we consider routes where there is a demand for 50-120 pax per day (not viable for the A320 or B-737) and/or short runways that cannot accommodate larger aircraft, the number of routes which are longer than 400 miles, are more than those <400 miles.

More significantly, the improvement in our roads and increase in rail speeds is reducing demand for short haul, high density sectors.
So, the demand for long haul sectors will only increase relative to short haul ones.
If we consider B'lore (BLR) as an example, the demand for BLR-MAA flights has dropped, as road speeds have improved and trains have become
more punctual. On the other hand, several long distance routes (e.g. BLR-SXR ) can only be served by a jet.



Interesting points.

Deans Saar, what is your take on utility of 70-90 seater Regional Jet that NAL's NCAD was suppose to have started making some time ago (but the project went nowhere) for Indian market...?? We have MRJ and Embraer in this segment in international market, with new jets coming up by 2020 for Entry Into Service.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58678
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Singha » 09 May 2017 13:19

Amritsar,Chandigarh, Ahmedabad, Surat all need direct flights from europe/middle east.

^^^
Even smallish places in south like kozhikode and mangalore have direct gulf flights. Are you sure these do not have gulf flights?

JohnTitor
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JohnTitor » 09 May 2017 14:15

India should go for small commuter airports that accommodate prop and light aircraft - capacities of 100 or less for domestic use only.

These could be well within city limits. It would allow for short distance flights, so between blr-mys. The large airports need only be used for international flights - with transport connections to these small airports. Problem with the large airports outside city limits is that they don't make sense to travel to if you're traveling say between blr-maa. Getting to devanahalli is a nightmare! Takes at least 90-120mins depending on distance and time.

These small commuter airplanes would usher in new economic growth and bring air-travel to the masses like never before

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58678
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Singha » 09 May 2017 14:17

There is no room in middle of cities for bus or rail stations to expand and you want a commuter airport with a 2km runway :(

JohnTitor
BRFite
Posts: 1195
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JohnTitor » 09 May 2017 14:28

It can happen if there is will. Didn't BBMP buy out pieces of private land to enable the metro to be built?

Because most of india is unplanned, there was no loogical development model. Everyone just kept buying and building. Blr used to have so much greenery. Now there is almost none! Just have a look at how it looks on google maps (satellite) and compare it to other tier2/3 cities in india (or even abroad).

If the govt can buy out people's property and build public spaces and transport links, it would lead to much better living standards for all. KA should encourage IT companies to move to other cities by providing tax incentives etc.

These things are not unrealistic, they are tough, but they need will power and a determination to bring out change. Of course, it will cost money, but if you think about it - the return the city would get would be several fold more!

A good example of local airports is in the US.. even in the UK, the london city airport is within the city. It is used by businessmen to take short haul trips within the UK and EU. Without efficient transport, there cannot be efficient growth.

JTull
BRFite
Posts: 1979
Joined: 18 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JTull » 09 May 2017 14:45

Heliports are possible, but fixed wing planes need lot more land than just the runway. Then there are restrictions on surrounding areas such as height of buildings, types of businesses (e.g., open air abattoirs). Also, noise complaints may restrict operating hours. Just not worth it.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6347
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Prasad » 09 May 2017 15:28

Time isn't much of a problem as the ease/hassle of travel. If you have a good metro network that takes the same 90minutes to the airport but is a lot more comfortable, you wont hear as much whining. That is what is lacking.

Atmavik
BRFite
Posts: 381
Joined: 24 Aug 2016 04:43

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Atmavik » 09 May 2017 20:52

Deans wrote:
Props like the Q400 and the ATR are the best option upto 400 Miles. Beyond that Jets, are more viable both in terms of speed and cost per seat km basis. If we consider routes where there is a demand for 50-120 pax per day (not viable for the A320 or B-737) and/or short runways that cannot accommodate larger aircraft, the number of routes which are longer than 400 miles, are more than those <400 miles.

More significantly, the improvement in our roads and increase in rail speeds is reducing demand for short haul, high density sectors.
So, the demand for long haul sectors will only increase relative to short haul ones.
If we consider B'lore (BLR) as an example, the demand for BLR-MAA flights has dropped, as road speeds have improved and trains have become
more punctual. On the other hand, several long distance routes (e.g. BLR-SXR ) can only be served by a jet.


Thank you for the detailed explanation. shows the huge gap between Theory and Practice

Deans
BRFite
Posts: 523
Joined: 26 Aug 2004 19:13
Location: Moscow

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Deans » 09 May 2017 23:35

JayS wrote:
Interesting points.

Deans Saar, what is your take on utility of 70-90 seater Regional Jet that NAL's NCAD was suppose to have started making some time ago (but the project went nowhere) for Indian market...?? We have MRJ and Embraer in this segment in international market, with new jets coming up by 2020 for Entry Into Service.


It takes decades to develop the capability to design and produce a passenger aircraft. That's why there are so few manufacturers. Even when the aircraft is produced, it has to be at an economical cost - which is difficult, when competition has depreciated facilities producing a higher volume of
aircraft. If that is managed, you still have to have assured availability of spares, type rated pilots, engineering support etc.
In my view the way forward should be local assembly of a proven design with steadily increasing local content. I don't see why Embraer or Sukhoi (for say the Superjet-100) would not want to partner with us to set up an assembly line for a small passenger jet.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2008
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JayS » 10 May 2017 10:41

Deans wrote:
JayS wrote:
Interesting points.

Deans Saar, what is your take on utility of 70-90 seater Regional Jet that NAL's NCAD was suppose to have started making some time ago (but the project went nowhere) for Indian market...?? We have MRJ and Embraer in this segment in international market, with new jets coming up by 2020 for Entry Into Service.


It takes decades to develop the capability to design and produce a passenger aircraft. That's why there are so few manufacturers. Even when the aircraft is produced, it has to be at an economical cost - which is difficult, when competition has depreciated facilities producing a higher volume of
aircraft. If that is managed, you still have to have assured availability of spares, type rated pilots, engineering support etc.
In my view the way forward should be local assembly of a proven design with steadily increasing local content. I don't see why Embraer or Sukhoi (for say the Superjet-100) would not want to partner with us to set up an assembly line for a small passenger jet.


Point taken and I fully agree. Let me rephrase my question - what is the utility of 70-90 seater class aircraft for Indian market..?? Not necessarily an Indian aircraft to start with. Currently we see that IndiGO and Spicejet have taken up huge numbers of A320 and B737. But I have a feeling that even these aircrafts are little bigger for point-to-point travel between tier-1 and tier-2 cities. Also we don't have big enough airports to start with. Can we leverage smaller 70-90 seater class to kick start air travel with smaller airports and low volumes to start with to reduce initial investment but with proper planning to expand the infra in future as and when situation allows for it. (not like now build small airport only to realise in 10yrs its totally inadequate and it can't even be expanded)

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1111
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby chola » 10 May 2017 11:25

You know, we CAN make a large aircraft if there were any direction from GOI or even from private enterprise.

Our current industrial base must be many times greater than 1970s PRC's. They were able to build a 178 passenger craft and flew it 130 times (before it was killed off by politics and a screwdrivergiri project with the DC-10.)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Y-10

Three aircraft were built by the Shanghai Aircraft Factory, (now known as Shanghai Aviation Industrial Company, or SAIC), the first prototype (01) was used for static testing, the second prototype (02) was used for flight testing and the third (03) for fatigue testing. The plane first flew on September 26, 1980, making 130 flights with 170 hours of flying time, visiting Beijing, Harbin, Urumqi, Zhengzhou, Hefei, Guangzhou, Kunming, Lhasa and Chengdu before its retirement in 1984.[1]

The Y-10 is an indigenous Chinese design.[2] While rumors stated that the planes were reverse-engineered copies of the Boeing 707—one report claimed that after Chinese engineers disassembled a 707 to study it, neither the reassembled original nor the copy would fly[3]—both the Y-10's designers and Boeing denied this. While the Y-10 resembles the 707, its dimensions are closer to the Boeing 720 than the 707, and the internal design is very different.[2]

By the time the prototype was first flown, debate about its viability surfaced, based on a design that was already 30 years old, CAAC, which already owned a modest Western fleet, would not purchase the plane. China was beginning to embrace trade with the West, and some saw the isolationist design as an inefficient throwback to Maoism. China in the early reform era was ruled by rehabilitated cadres previously persecuted in the Cultural Revolution by Wang Hongwen, the project initiator, resulting in the cancellation of the project in 1983, officially due to cost and market concerns. During its maiden flights, no governmental officials attended the ceremonies for fear of the connection to Wang Hongwen and the Gang of Four. By 1985, SAMF had been granted production licensing for the McDonnell Douglas MD-80 and shifted all efforts towards that program.


chola
BRFite
Posts: 1111
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby chola » 10 May 2017 11:29

They were even working on an AWACS version before the whole thing got axed.

Image

Image
Last edited by chola on 10 May 2017 11:39, edited 1 time in total.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2008
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JayS » 10 May 2017 11:34

chola wrote:You know, we CAN make a large aircraft if there were any direction from GOI or even from private enterprise.



Which we do not have. Both GoI and Pvt Industry are equally clueless and worse - ignorant about this.

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2008
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JayS » 10 May 2017 11:36

IndiGo opts for up to 50 ATR turboprops
http://atwonline.com/airframes/indigo-o ... turboprops

Indian low-cost carrier (LCC) IndiGo has signed a letter of intent for up to 50 ATR 72-600 regional turboprops.

The deal is valued at more than $1.3 billion at list prices and the initial aircraft are anticipated to start operations by the end of 2017.


India’s rapidly expanding domestic market represented close to 100 million passengers in 2016 and has been steadily growing by more than 20% annually. At that rate, it is expected to become the world’s third largest market by 2020. Under the RCS, 100 new airports will be created within the next two to three years and airlines will receive financial support and other incentives to make air travel affordable.


“We are embarking on a journey to build a nationwide regional network and connect cities that have not benefitted from the growth in Indian aviation,” IndiGo president Aditya Ghosh said, adding, TThe ATRs’ low operating costs will help us build a large regional air travel network with reasonable fares.”

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1111
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby chola » 10 May 2017 11:41

JayS wrote:
chola wrote:You know, we CAN make a large aircraft if there were any direction from GOI or even from private enterprise.



Which we do not have. Both GoI and Pvt Industry are equally clueless and worse - ignorant about this.



That is only a state of mind. It can be and must be changed.

The infrastructure and building blocks are already there in our economy.

We have everything we need. It is just the will. There is no way you can tell me that we today do not have the capacity to do this.

What we need is direction and support. Support from Air India at the very least and some from the privates for national devlopment.

And no screwdrivergiri project to throw wrench into this endeavor.

Even chinis fell to screwdrivergiri during its honeymoon with Unkil. And it took them 40 years to get back to that state. lol

It can be done. Once we build a large aircraft of our own, then we can have an AWACS, tanker, strategic bomber, etc. It all starts here.

We need to make something like this a national project. A "Make in India" crown jewel.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58678
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Singha » 10 May 2017 11:50

this is where the RTA was supposed to fill the void, a doable level of technology without uber curvy wings and LEAPx engines needed to ease the curve.

but it landed in a mess of trying to make NAL a science agency as the project leader and HAL who seems to have little interest in such developmental projects which involve going beyond licensed assembly to spec.

a well funded SPV perhaps lead by a combination of M&M, maini, Tatas and any other private agency interested backed by a guaranteed order of 150-200 from air india would be needed. NAL etc can provide the scientific testing and designing but expecting them to produce a commercial product will only lead to the sad spectacle of the Saras.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 58678
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: X,L,S,VHF band radars fully on

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Singha » 10 May 2017 11:52

perhaps we will need to wait another 10 years for the above domestic aerospace major to emerge...by assembling the 1-engine fighter jet whatever it is ..... HAL simply has no DNA or interest in RTA it seems though it has all the manpower and production capability!!

JayS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2008
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby JayS » 10 May 2017 12:11

chola wrote:
JayS wrote:
Which we do not have. Both GoI and Pvt Industry are equally clueless and worse - ignorant about this.



That is only a state of mind. It can be and must be changed.

The infrastructure and building blocks are already there in our economy.

We have everything we need. It is just the will. There is no way you can tell me that we today do not have the capacity to do this.

What we need is direction and support. Support from Air India at the very least and some from the privates for national devlopment.

And no screwdrivergiri project to throw wrench into this endeavor.

Even chinis fell to screwdrivergiri during its honeymoon with Unkil. And it took them 40 years to get back to that state. lol

It can be done. Once we build a large aircraft of our own, then we can have an AWACS, tanker, strategic bomber, etc. It all starts here.

We need to make something like this a national project. A "Make in India" crown jewel.


We are slaves of our state of mind, sadly.

I want to rant a lot about this, but well, all of it is already said here many times. Unless Modi says we want to make our own jet liner, nothing is gonna happen. And he is busy right now bringing up the bottomline. Sadly he doesn't have time to look at the topline, neither has he picked some guy to look at this, which is rather disappointing.

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1111
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby chola » 10 May 2017 12:58

JayS wrote:
chola wrote:

That is only a state of mind. It can be and must be changed.

The infrastructure and building blocks are already there in our economy.

We have everything we need. It is just the will. There is no way you can tell me that we today do not have the capacity to do this.

What we need is direction and support. Support from Air India at the very least and some from the privates for national devlopment.

And no screwdrivergiri project to throw wrench into this endeavor.

Even chinis fell to screwdrivergiri during its honeymoon with Unkil. And it took them 40 years to get back to that state. lol

It can be done. Once we build a large aircraft of our own, then we can have an AWACS, tanker, strategic bomber, etc. It all starts here.

We need to make something like this a national project. A "Make in India" crown jewel.


We are slaves of our state of mind, sadly.

I want to rant a lot about this, but well, all of it is already said here many times. Unless Modi says we want to make our own jet liner, nothing is gonna happen. And he is busy right now bringing up the bottomline. Sadly he doesn't have time to look at the topline, neither has he picked some guy to look at this, which is rather disappointing.


The one thing I am grateful to Cheen is that they are able to light a fire under our arse every time they perform something lunderful like the C919.

So the C919 is unlikely to be missed by Modi since he had publicly made it a point to model Cheen during his tenure in Gujarat. So hopefully this can germinate in his mind and we see something from him.

If not, we can start a campaign here!

chola
BRFite
Posts: 1111
Joined: 16 Dec 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby chola » 10 May 2017 13:12

Singha wrote:perhaps we will need to wait another 10 years for the above domestic aerospace major to emerge...by assembling the 1-engine fighter jet whatever it is ..... HAL simply has no DNA or interest in RTA it seems though it has all the manpower and production capability!!


HAL needs to be grabbed by the back of the neck and have its face pushed into a plateful of RTA and other civilian projects. Ultimately it must do more than screwdrivergiri of phoren planes.

Maybe we should hand the prestige of a large aircraft project to the private sector to ignite some ambition in HAL.

Wasn't Tata and M&M involved in small jet project? Remember reading this and then nothing more.

kvraghav
BRFite
Posts: 691
Joined: 17 Apr 2008 11:47
Location: Some where near the equator

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby kvraghav » 10 May 2017 14:10

HAL Already has the Dornier-228 which can compete with the ATR. The marketing is lacking.

amol
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 77
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 10:44

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby amol » 10 May 2017 14:54

The new UDAN route of Mumbai-Nashik is doomed to fail before it even gets off the ground. They've attempted this route multiple times in the past and it's failed each time. Wonder why anyone in their right mind thinks it'll succeed this time around.

The problem is that Nashik is located only 180km from Mumbai. It takes about 3.5 - 4 hours by road today. That's about the same time it'll take someone to get to their destination by air - About an hour to get to the airport, get there an hour before the flight, 40 minutes for the flight and another hour or so to get home from there. Plus its more expensive and timings will be not be flexible.

Instead, they should have started off connecting Nashik to other out-of-the way destinations like Nagpur, Indore, Ahmedabad etc. Even hopping flights like BOM-Nashik-Indore/Nagpur might work.

With an abundance of religious pilgrimage places (also wine tourism) in the vicinity, this is one city that could have been on the national air map a long time ago with some pragmatic planning, but alas!

Zynda
BRFite
Posts: 1105
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 00:37
Location: J4

Re: Civil Aviation Development & Discussion

Postby Zynda » 10 May 2017 15:05

JayS wrote:Unless Modi says we want to make our own jet liner, nothing is gonna happen. And he is busy right now bringing up the bottomline. Sadly he doesn't have time to look at the topline, neither has he picked some guy to look at this, which is rather disappointing.

^100+.

Don't have much hopes but our path on civil aeroplane lies with Saras-NG. I think the outcome of Saras-NG will shape the direction of indigenous air platform in India.


Return to “Technology & Economic Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: debadutta, Google [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, KJo and 14 guests