globetrotter94 wrote:

How do people feel about the choice of architects for Navi Mumbai Airport? I am personally not a fan of Zaha Hadid's work.

Zaha Hadid is no longer with us. To be sure, her legacy lives on through the firm that bears her name.

The earlier comparisons to EWR/JFK are jaw-dropping--and in not a good way. A sane person would not attempt to equate the level of economic activity in the NYC region to the BOM region. At this point BOM is not even comparable to places like Shanghai, Sao Paulo, or Mexico City. Split hubs create all kinds of problems for airlines, and they are a hassle for transfer passengers as well. For those who are virulently anti-Emirates, Qatar, etc., split operations will only embolden the role of the GCC airport hubs to carry Indian transfer passengers. Ditto for the ASEAN hubs.

Now if one existing airport is in an outlying region and serves LCCs than, yes, it can coexist with the "main" airport, but no regional planner is going to plan things this way. Same would go for a split between a close-in domestic airport and a further-off international airport. Places that have these splits are a result of legacy growth and development. In the BOM case there are only slums, and the state (i.e., government) should be able to handle this issue as it would in other countries.

If the new airport location is undesirable to its key constituencies of wealthy and powerful corporations and individuals, it will be an epic fail. As it stands the environmental degradation will result in terrible long-term costs.

If expansion of the current facility is so challenging, that speaks volumes about statecraft capability in India.

vadodara wrote:

Didn’t your insider contacts tell u that Jet CEO is a former Delta guy?

Regarding JNB and A340: it seems to me that BOM has only Premium traffic. So Jet must be rather incompetent if it could not make money in that market given its deep political connections.

I have no "insider contacts" nor do I have access to WhatsApp University feeds.

I understand your point now! DL is a super airline whose management has been known to make very rational choices. That is why they are the undisputed market leader in the US market! I am sure with ex-Delta guys at the helm, Jet will now make very rational decisions and become the worlds best airline!

Slash787 wrote:

I only had a problem with 9W once, they forgot to load my bag and they said it will come on the next flight and they will deliver it to my house, the Airhostess personally came with my bag to my house, well this was 10 years ago,

vadodara wrote:

Didn’t your insider contacts tell u that Jet CEO is a former Delta guy?

Regarding JNB and A340: it seems to me that BOM has only Premium traffic. So Jet must be rather incompetent if it could not make money in that market given its deep political connections.

Jet Airways has a rather awful record with its international route launches. Most have become JetFails. I am not quite sure why this site has viewed the airline as such a great success when the chatter among airline people is far less charitable. Most regional flying works for them (SAARC, GCC, BKK, SIN); otherwise it's just HKG and LHR. Even the AMS/CDG services are largely just replacements for partners who really are not too interested, and have never been too successful in India.

For example perhaps the best possible route launch for 9W would be BOM-PVG-BOM. Even with desirable slots and MU as a partner one can be confident it will be another JetFail. To be sure the split between PVG/SHA complicates things.

One should be quite sceptical of the BLR-HKG rumour discussed earlier simply because AM slots are nearly impossible to get at HKG. Just ask AI, who have been trying to launch BOM-HKG for a while now. The other thing to consider is that the India-HKSAR bilateral is restrictive, and one can be sure CX is making sure that nobody will get anything at HKG unless they have more rights. (They are only 10x at BOM whereas 14x at DEL.) Plus, their recent financial results are not so great, so this only emboldens their stance. In any case, there really is not the trade and finance linkages between HKG and BLR as compared to BOM and DEL.

upwardfacing wrote:

Jet Airways has a rather awful record with its international route launches. Most have become JetFails. I am not quite sure why this site has viewed the airline as such a great success when the chatter among airline people is far less charitable. Most regional flying works for them (SAARC, GCC, BKK, SIN); otherwise it's just HKG and LHR. Even the AMS/CDG services are largely just replacements for partners who really are not too interested, and have never been too successful in India.

THANK YOU!

Regional flying and domestic is where Jet excels at. They can do this well with a fleet standardized around the 737-8MAX which will dramatically lower costs and improve their bottom line.

Do the one thing that you are good at and do it well! Try to do too many things at the same time and you are bound to fail. Regardless of which genius from so and so international airline is currently heading the airline.

In the past too, Jet Airways has had CEO's with illustrious careers heading the airline. Vinay is a kal-ka-launda in comparison to the stalwarts who have headed the airline in the past and failed to have an impact.

The one big issue for any CEO is going to be the fact that Naresh Goyal has treated the airline like his baby and has a very set idea on how his baby girl has to be treated. But perhaps he should realise that his little girl has grown up now and is ready to fly. Let go daddy!

And then there is the acidic influence of Mrs.Goyal - PURE ACID! No CEO, no matter how talented can work with that woman!

Slash787 wrote:

the Airhostess personally came with my bag to my house, well this was 10 years ago, I guess this does not happens now, but it was very sweet of her.

Can't speak of 9W, but I had a similar experience with 6E. A ground staff brought my bag home after 6E had missed loading it at MAA

BawliBooch wrote:

THANK YOU!

Regional flying and domestic is where Jet excels at. They can do this well with a fleet standardized around the 737-8MAX which will dramatically lower costs and improve their bottom line.

Do the one thing that you are good at and do it well! Try to do too many things at the same time and you are bound to fail. Regardless of which genius from so and so international airline is currently heading the airline.

Well then, you are suggesting that 9W become mostly a domestic/regional airline for India. The problem is, how many of those can the Indian market support?

[quote="BawliBooch"]THANK YOU! /quote]

You are quite welcome.

And let me thank you for your informative comments about the proposed new airport, particularly regarding its ecological impact. As you can see from my posts above, I am not exactly positive about the whole exercise.

And yes, I have heard the same about Ms PURE ACID from airline professionals.

We could go on and on about the foibles of Jet Airways and how the whole Delta/AF-KLM thing is hardly a game-changer--in fact it could be quite constraining and negative, given how much Jet likes to sleep around. Nobody wants to be stuck in Skyteam, after all.

Yes, in the late 2000s post-merger AI was totally clueless. Many profitable routes to ME and SEA were cut that 9W could take over. There was a very pro-9W aviation minister in office. Most of AI's longhauls were making a loss.

9W had opportunites handed to it on platter. AI was doing poorly, there was no other international carrier, let alone long-haul one. But they failed to capitalize on it. Their Brussels scissor-hub was a failure. If they had tied up with the skyteam or others at a major hub for onward connections, would have worked better. If they had tried the CDG/AMS hub then, maybe they would have had better success. LH/BA/AF etc all had services to India which they continued non-stop. But 9W was cancelling flights and its widebodies were lying idle. Their flawed strategy to acquire Sahara and their poor integration plans further dragged them down. They rushed into acquiring Sahara without understanding how it will fit their strategy. Post-acquisition, they couldn't decide whether to keep it as LCC or merge it into mainline. Their JetLite was a flawed plan where it was not a true LCC but projected as such and did nothing to rein in costs.

If it was any other airline, they would have been the dominant domestic and international player by now, given the conditions and the 9w-friendly govt at that time. But they wasted it away, and today are a distant second to Indigo!

Not to mention their JetKonnect fiasco. I never understood their branding strategy back then. A JetKonnect flight on BOM-BLR will get you meals while a JetKonnect flight on BOM-CJB will get you nothing.

A320Neo fiasco is having some impact on passenger perspective now as well. People are double checking and trying to avoid flying a NEO.
Must be hurting IndiGo's rep badly too.

All that is now history. 9W has understood its mistakes and are making every move with utmost caution. Yes we might not be able to see that ambitious 9W any more but a profitable and well run 9W .
And talking about long haul market from India in the early 2000s, 9W well understood where AI lacked i e having proper domestic connections. They knew well that the market is not just from Mumbai and Delhi so you need nice domestic network to feed your int'l one. They even knew that the market had good potential to grow . We keep on imagining that Indian carriers were scared of EK because they could not provide world class services. However that was not the case. 9W was one of the first airlines in the world to introduce those doors in first class suites. So they knew how to pamper the customer with all kinds of amenities. Their failure was a different story and has nothing to do with passenger demand.
Finally about Indigo I would like to say that they have had a unique low cost business model which today 9W is trying to replicate. In 2005 6E placed an order of 100 A320s which was more than 9W 's entire fleet at that time. The latter could not order so many crafts at once as their orders were not backed up by lessors. 9W did not know that unlike air deccan, indigo won't be an easy prey for them. That was their biggest mistake which cost them ten years of losses. Had 9W tried to reduce operational costs like they are doing today, they could've been saved.

anshabhi wrote:

A320Neo fiasco is having some impact on passenger perspective now as well. People are double checking and trying to avoid flying a NEO.
Must be hurting IndiGo's rep badly too.

That can be seriously bad for indigo's business given their neo orders.

upwardfacing wrote:

vadodara wrote:

Didn’t your insider contacts tell u that Jet CEO is a former Delta guy?

Regarding JNB and A340: it seems to me that BOM has only Premium traffic. So Jet must be rather incompetent if it could not make money in that market given its deep political connections.

Jet Airways has a rather awful record with its international route launches. Most have become JetFails. I am not quite sure why this site has viewed the airline as such a great success when the chatter among airline people is far less charitable. Most regional flying works for them (SAARC, GCC, BKK, SIN); otherwise it's just HKG and LHR. Even the AMS/CDG services are largely just replacements for partners who really are not too interested, and have never been too successful in India.

For example perhaps the best possible route launch for 9W would be BOM-PVG-BOM. Even with desirable slots and MU as a partner one can be confident it will be another JetFail. To be sure the split between PVG/SHA complicates things.

One should be quite sceptical of the BLR-HKG rumour discussed earlier simply because AM slots are nearly impossible to get at HKG. Just ask AI, who have been trying to launch BOM-HKG for a while now. The other thing to consider is that the India-HKSAR bilateral is restrictive, and one can be sure CX is making sure that nobody will get anything at HKG unless they have more rights. (They are only 10x at BOM whereas 14x at DEL.) Plus, their recent financial results are not so great, so this only emboldens their stance. In any case, there really is not the trade and finance linkages between HKG and BLR as compared to BOM and DEL.

CX is operationally VERY profitable- they just screwed up on a fuel bet

All Indian carriers should be banned from getting slots at HKG until CX is allowed at least 180 weekly frequencies between HKG and India

CX wants to expand and the Indian government blocks it- Kochi, Jaipur,Ahmedabad and Pune are all on the agenda internally- DEL and BOM 3 daily as well
CX wants to swap KA for CX at BLR- Indian government blocks it ( we all know that if CX send their flatbeds to BLR- Premium traffic would switch over to CX from SQ/EK)

as long as CX is blocked- 6E etc should all be blocked

and it is not like CX is not helping India- on the Cargo side where CX has freedom to do as it wishes it has the largest network for a foreign cargo carrier on routes in and out of India

Kashmon wrote:

upwardfacing wrote:

vadodara wrote:

Didn’t your insider contacts tell u that Jet CEO is a former Delta guy?

Regarding JNB and A340: it seems to me that BOM has only Premium traffic. So Jet must be rather incompetent if it could not make money in that market given its deep political connections.

Jet Airways has a rather awful record with its international route launches. Most have become JetFails. I am not quite sure why this site has viewed the airline as such a great success when the chatter among airline people is far less charitable. Most regional flying works for them (SAARC, GCC, BKK, SIN); otherwise it's just HKG and LHR. Even the AMS/CDG services are largely just replacements for partners who really are not too interested, and have never been too successful in India.

For example perhaps the best possible route launch for 9W would be BOM-PVG-BOM. Even with desirable slots and MU as a partner one can be confident it will be another JetFail. To be sure the split between PVG/SHA complicates things.

One should be quite sceptical of the BLR-HKG rumour discussed earlier simply because AM slots are nearly impossible to get at HKG. Just ask AI, who have been trying to launch BOM-HKG for a while now. The other thing to consider is that the India-HKSAR bilateral is restrictive, and one can be sure CX is making sure that nobody will get anything at HKG unless they have more rights. (They are only 10x at BOM whereas 14x at DEL.) Plus, their recent financial results are not so great, so this only emboldens their stance. In any case, there really is not the trade and finance linkages between HKG and BLR as compared to BOM and DEL.

CX is operationally VERY profitable- they just screwed up on a fuel bet

All Indian carriers should be banned from getting slots at HKG until CX is allowed at least 180 weekly frequencies between HKG and India
...

India doesn't owe anything to any international carrier. CX has no rights to demand whatever they please. If they try to use strong-arm tactics to block Indian carriers from getting slots at HKG which will allow Indian carriers to utilize the existing bilateral fully, then there is no way CX will get additional frequencies.

EK tried something similar at DXB and the Indian govt refused even to discuss any additional frequencies till Indian carriers got the slots that EK was preventing behind the scenes. Same will apply to CX as well.

Kashmon wrote:

CX is operationally VERY profitable- they just screwed up on a fuel bet

All Indian carriers should be banned from getting slots at HKG until CX is allowed at least 180 weekly frequencies between HKG and India

CX wants to expand and the Indian government blocks it- Kochi, Jaipur,Ahmedabad and Pune are all on the agenda internally- DEL and BOM 3 daily as well
CX wants to swap KA for CX at BLR- Indian government blocks it ( we all know that if CX send their flatbeds to BLR- Premium traffic would switch over to CX from SQ/EK)

as long as CX is blocked- 6E etc should all be blocked

and it is not like CX is not helping India- on the Cargo side where CX has freedom to do as it wishes it has the largest network for a foreign cargo carrier on routes in and out of India

Do we have any data on how much of CX traffic is P2P?

Kashmon wrote:

CX wants to expand and the Indian government blocks it- Kochi, Jaipur,Ahmedabad and Pune are all on the agenda internally- DEL and BOM 3 daily as well

Do you have latest data on India -HK bilateral entitlements and their utilisation?

Kashmon wrote:

CX is operationally VERY profitable- they just screwed up on a fuel bet

And AI is also operationally VERY profitable -- they just GOT screwed over by a corrupt aviation ministry to buy more planes than they had any idea what to do with. We can all caveat and make exceptions until the crows come home. The fact of the matter is that CX is under enormous pressure from mainland Chinese carriers and also hamstrung by Hong Kong's declining (still big--but declining) relative importance in the Asia-Pacific region.

February 2018 domestic traffic growth is at 24.1% (22.2 m pax). This is the 42nd consecutive month of double digit air traffic growth!

upwardfacing wrote:

globetrotter94 wrote:

How do people feel about the choice of architects for Navi Mumbai Airport? I am personally not a fan of Zaha Hadid's work.

Zaha Hadid is no longer with us. To be sure, her legacy lives on through the firm that bears her name.

The earlier comparisons to EWR/JFK are jaw-dropping--and in not a good way. A sane person would not attempt to equate the level of economic activity in the NYC region to the BOM region. At this point BOM is not even comparable to places like Shanghai, Sao Paulo, or Mexico City. Split hubs create all kinds of problems for airlines, and they are a hassle for transfer passengers as well. For those who are virulently anti-Emirates, Qatar, etc., split operations will only embolden the role of the GCC airport hubs to carry Indian transfer passengers. Ditto for the ASEAN hubs.

Now if one existing airport is in an outlying region and serves LCCs than, yes, it can coexist with the "main" airport, but no regional planner is going to plan things this way. Same would go for a split between a close-in domestic airport and a further-off international airport. Places that have these splits are a result of legacy growth and development. In the BOM case there are only slums, and the state (i.e., government) should be able to handle this issue as it would in other countries.

If the new airport location is undesirable to its key constituencies of wealthy and powerful corporations and individuals, it will be an epic fail. As it stands the environmental degradation will result in terrible long-term costs.

If expansion of the current facility is so challenging, that speaks volumes about statecraft capability in India.

I think you misunderstood the JFK/EWR comparison. Firstly BOM is full up, there is no choice but to build another airport (or move the slums, which the government doesn't want to do). No one is proposing a split hub like Milan or LGA/JFK. I predict the new airport will be like EWR is to JFK - another airport meant to serve the huge number of people that live near it (for many in New Jersey, JFK is really not a viable airport option). There will be some overlapping areas (which could grow if the trans harbor link is built) and some people will travel to the further airport for what ever reason. The only difference between EWR and JFK will be that the new airport will be more LCC focused (given the income disparity in the BOM region). As the Mumbai metro region develops, the new airport will increase the number of FSC flights. What's wrong with this? In fact it gives a very price sensitive market a potentially cheaper airport option. A lot of flights to the gulf should probably leave from the new Mumbai airport and not BOM. Look even if BOM clears the slums and builds a parallel runway with simultaneous flights, BOM will still need another airport. Also if the new airport is done right, it should have long distance trains depart from its terminal, like Europe, going to neighboring cities in Maharashtra, Gujarat and Goa. Now if the government decided to make BOM domestic and the new airport international, that would be a disaster.

[quote="CaliguyNYC]
I think you misunderstood the JFK/EWR comparison. Firstly BOM is full up, there is no choice but to build another airport (or move the slums, which the government doesn't want to do). No one is proposing a split hub like Milan or LGA/JFK. I predict the new airport will be like EWR is to JFK - another airport meant to serve the huge number of people that live near it (for many in New Jersey, JFK is really not a viable airport option). There will be some overlapping areas (which could grow if the trans harbor link is built) and some people will travel to the further airport for what ever reason. The only difference between EWR and JFK will be that the new airport will be more LCC focused (given the income disparity in the BOM region). As the Mumbai metro region develops, the new airport will increase the number of FSC flights. What's wrong with this? In fact it gives a very price sensitive market a potentially cheaper airport option. A lot of flights to the gulf should probably leave from the new Mumbai airport and not BOM. Look even if BOM clears the slums and builds a parallel runway with simultaneous flights, BOM will still need another airport. Also if the new airport is done right, it should have long distance trains depart from its terminal, like Europe, going to neighboring cities in Maharashtra, Gujarat and Goa. Now if the government decided to make BOM domestic and the new airport international, that would be a disaster.[/quote]
No that is impossible....then what will happen to the code F gates at current BOM?
I think what you suggest about the gulf flights is right. That would even clear lot of slots at BOM. Plus it will be wise if the airport operator ( which is same for both) shifts one out of the 3 LCCs there. That will also help 9W have a good hub at the current airport.

IndiGo will start at AUH/KWI/BAH/DAC/Chittagong/ flights within the next 12 months. Most of the GCC flights meant for the labour traffic from Kerala/MAA/HYD/BLR.

upwardfacing wrote:

vadodara wrote:

Didn’t your insider contacts tell u that Jet CEO is a former Delta guy?

Regarding JNB and A340: it seems to me that BOM has only Premium traffic. So Jet must be rather incompetent if it could not make money in that market given its deep political connections.

Jet Airways has a rather awful record with its international route launches. Most have become JetFails. I am not quite sure why this site has viewed the airline as such a great success when the chatter among airline people is far less charitable. Most regional flying works for them (SAARC, GCC, BKK, SIN); otherwise it's just HKG and LHR. Even the AMS/CDG services are largely just replacements for partners who really are not too interested, and have never been too successful in India.

For example perhaps the best possible route launch for 9W would be BOM-PVG-BOM. Even with desirable slots and MU as a partner one can be confident it will be another JetFail. To be sure the split between PVG/SHA complicates things.

One should be quite sceptical of the BLR-HKG rumour discussed earlier simply because AM slots are nearly impossible to get at HKG. Just ask AI, who have been trying to launch BOM-HKG for a while now. The other thing to consider is that the India-HKSAR bilateral is restrictive, and one can be sure CX is making sure that nobody will get anything at HKG unless they have more rights. (They are only 10x at BOM whereas 14x at DEL.) Plus, their recent financial results are not so great, so this only emboldens their stance. In any case, there really is not the trade and finance linkages between HKG and BLR as compared to BOM and DEL.

So one thing is the size of the market. Based on where India stands on the economic ladder, it is likely that the LCC will be attractive. So as a policy, having a smallish long-haul fleet with premium seats is not going to be very profitable.

Having said that, 9W can choose where they want to fly. However, it might be better to view the available options where they can scale profitably. It is in the short/medium range market.

binayak wrote:

All that is now history. 9W has understood its mistakes and are making every move with utmost caution. Yes we might not be able to see that ambitious 9W any more but a profitable and well run 9W .
....
Had 9W tried to reduce operational costs like they are doing today, they could've been saved.

Shouldnt this be the first thing a business should do?

They should thank their political connections that they are still in the game.

sand26391 wrote:

IndiGo will start at AUH/KWI/BAH/DAC/Chittagong/ flights within the next 12 months. Most of the GCC flights meant for the labour traffic from Kerala/MAA/HYD/BLR.

First let's see when do they restart the grounded NEOs!!

vadodara wrote:

binayak wrote:

All that is now history. 9W has understood its mistakes and are making every move with utmost caution. Yes we might not be able to see that ambitious 9W any more but a profitable and well run 9W .
....
Had 9W tried to reduce operational costs like they are doing today, they could've been saved.

Shouldnt this be the first thing a business should do?
They should thank their political connections that they are still in the game.

Yes this must be one of the first things .
Little did 9W know that the market will turn out to be so price sensitive. They still thought that they will win the heart of travellers with good service. Well their survival is more of a luck else they would have had the same fate like KF .

unrave wrote:

Not to mention their JetKonnect fiasco. I never understood their branding strategy back then. A JetKonnect flight on BOM-BLR will get you meals while a JetKonnect flight on BOM-CJB will get you nothing.

Actually sometimes Jet airways brand used JetKonnect liveried planes. According to Naresh Goyal the difference b/w an FSC and LCC is meals and deployment of a crew member!! This was one of the biggest blunders committed by the airline.

Is there any development between India and Turkey for more destinations and frequencies?

^^ AFAIK theres no development as Turkey (acc to GoI) always takes sides with Pakistan in geopolitical situations. What I heard last time is that Turkish wanted to start to BLR/HYD atleast 2x weekly initially if they were granted permission. If any1 else knows any update, it would be good to hear.

anshabhi wrote:

sand26391 wrote:

IndiGo will start at AUH/KWI/BAH/DAC/Chittagong/ flights within the next 12 months. Most of the GCC flights meant for the labour traffic from Kerala/MAA/HYD/BLR.

First let's see when do they restart the grounded NEOs!!

Ha!! True that..

Third IndiGo plane grounded in 24 hours....
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/in ... 363219.cms
Frankly speaking I've started to feel pity for them.

^^True.. feel bad for as the issue is not caused by the airline. Hopefully they bonce back by the end of the month as peak season beiGns shortly.
BTW does any1 know why is AI deploying 777s (AI-173 & AI-087)to BLR all of a sudden? Havent heard of AI having any issues with its NEOs..... or are they deploying the 777s as they have a spare lying with them outta nowhere?

sand26391 wrote:

^^True.. feel bad for as the issue is not caused by the airline. Hopefully they bonce back by the end of the month as peak season beiGns shortly.
BTW does any1 know why is AI deploying 777s (AI-173 & AI-087)to BLR all of a sudden? Havent heard of AI having any issues with its NEOs..... or are they deploying the 777s as they have a spare lying with them outta nowhere?

I think AI is trying to match the BLR-DEL-SFO route to be similar to the HYD-DEL-ORD route, possibly because they plan to convert the DEL-SFO leg to 77W sometime soon (when the additional frequency is put in). AI NEOs have CFM engines and are not affected by the PW GTF issues plaguing 6E and G8.

Yakamoz wrote:

Is there any development between India and Turkey for more destinations and frequencies?

Unfortunately not Yakamoz, but it is nothing to do with geopolitics as people here are claiming, but rather that absolutely NO Indian carriers have any flights to Turkey whatsoever, leaving the Indian side of the bilaterals totally unused.

sand26391 wrote:

^^True.. feel bad for as the issue is not caused by the airline. Hopefully they bonce back by the end of the month as peak season beiGns shortly.
BTW does any1 know why is AI deploying 777s (AI-173 & AI-087)to BLR all of a sudden? Havent heard of AI having any issues with its NEOs..... or are they deploying the 777s as they have a spare lying with them outta nowhere?

They recently got 2 B77W for VIP use, which are going back to US for retrofitting in June. Trying to find some use for them probably, in the meantime. (VT-ALV & ALW)

Wondering why the government of India does not take two older AI frames for their VIP fleet? Certainly they could do the job for years as they will not put on the number of cycles and hours a widebody would for an airline.

It would be a win win situation for both the Indian Government and Air India. The government would get a younger VIP fleet with many years of life left and Air India would have 3 relatively young 77W'S in their fleet.

Your thoughts

georgiabill wrote:

Wondering why the government of India does not take two older AI frames for their VIP fleet? Certainly they could do the job for years as they will not put on the number of cycles and hours a widebody would for an airline.

It would be a win win situation for both the Indian Government and Air India. The government would get a younger VIP fleet with many years of life left and Air India would have 3 relatively young 77W'S in their fleet.

Your thoughts

Because the Government of India likes to leech off the best of AI, even when it makes no financial, operational, or even common sense, and this is just a continuation of that. I originally thought that it might be because the business class on the new birds is better than the older 77Ws, but even that does not make sense, since it is the Business class cabin that is converted for VIP use when the aircraft is serving as Air India One.

globetrotter94 wrote:

Yakamoz wrote:

Is there any development between India and Turkey for more destinations and frequencies?

Unfortunately not Yakamoz, but it is nothing to do with geopolitics as people here are claiming, but rather that absolutely NO Indian carriers have any flights to Turkey whatsoever, leaving the Indian side of the bilaterals totally unused.

Very sad, really. There are only 2 daily flights with 77W. It could be much more.

Yakamoz wrote:

globetrotter94 wrote:

Yakamoz wrote:

Is there any development between India and Turkey for more destinations and frequencies?

Unfortunately not Yakamoz, but it is nothing to do with geopolitics as people here are claiming, but rather that absolutely NO Indian carriers have any flights to Turkey whatsoever, leaving the Indian side of the bilaterals totally unused.

Very sad, really. There are only 2 daily flights with 77W. It could be much more.

Indeed. I am particularly disgruntled about the lack of TK flights to one of my home cities of Kolkata (previously Calcutta). Kolkata is not a business-heavy destination, so most EU carriers are not able to justify operating a route that requires 2 long haul aircraft per round trip. Since India-Turkey is a shorter distance than India-EU, TK would be able to do it with 1 aircraft/RT, and indeed, did express interest in IST-CCU. However, bilaterals are really standing in the way of such expansion. In my wildest dreams, TK would express interest in Air India (that is what my profile picture actually refers to--it combines TK's goose logo with AI's swan) which is up for privatization, and that may help move the situation forward. Would be win-win for both TK and AI. But like I said, in my wildest dreams...

Not sure of CCU, but AFAIK the airline did almost get permission to start to HYD,BLR,MAA. The airline reps even met & had discussions with BIAL in past 18 months, but it's a dud due to bilaterals unfortunately. Fingers crossed and let's hope for the best

devmapper wrote:

sand26391 wrote:

^^True.. feel bad for as the issue is not caused by the airline. Hopefully they bonce back by the end of the month as peak season beiGns shortly.
BTW does any1 know why is AI deploying 777s (AI-173 & AI-087)to BLR all of a sudden? Havent heard of AI having any issues with its NEOs..... or are they deploying the 777s as they have a spare lying with them outta nowhere?

I think AI is trying to match the BLR-DEL-SFO route to be similar to the HYD-DEL-ORD route, possibly because they plan to convert the DEL-SFO leg to 77W sometime soon (when the additional frequency is put in). AI NEOs have CFM engines and are not affected by the PW GTF issues plaguing 6E and G8.

Ah I thought it's just like a one off or they must be getting very high number of pax btw the 2 cities all of a sudden.

globetrotter94 wrote:

Indeed. I am particularly disgruntled about the lack of TK flights to one of my home cities of Kolkata (previously Calcutta). Kolkata is not a business-heavy destination, so most EU carriers are not able to justify operating a route that requires 2 long haul aircraft per round trip. Since India-Turkey is a shorter distance than India-EU, TK would be able to do it with 1 aircraft/RT, and indeed, did express interest in IST-CCU. However, bilaterals are really standing in the way of such expansion. In my wildest dreams, TK would express interest in Air India (that is what my profile picture actually refers to--it combines TK's goose logo with AI's swan) which is up for privatization, and that may help move the situation forward. Would be win-win for both TK and AI. But like I said, in my wildest dreams...

TK IST-CCU would work pretty well, similar to the KA HKG-CCU service, but the political situation in Turkey isn't really winning many friends for TK. That new IST airport is going to be a massive boondoggle.

While I definitely want AI to be privatized (hopefully in 2018), I am having a hard time figuring out any airline investor for AI. I don't think the DL-AF-KL-9W bid is serious. AI's only profitable routes (apart from the Gulf trunk routes) are the non-stops to North America. DL very rarely operates non-stop long-haul routes, preferring instead to operate scissor hubs at AMS and CDG. So apart from removing a competitor, there is no benefit. 6E is serious about international expansion, but while the LCC model works on medium-haul, it doesn't work on long-haul. UK-SQ might be serious, but wouldn't a proper hub operation at DEL cannibalize a significant chunk of traffic from SIN? Without a sensible transit visa policy (i.e. not have transit visas), SQ can't route passengers to eastern US through DEL.

devmapper wrote:

While I definitely want AI to be privatized (hopefully in 2018), I am having a hard time figuring out any airline investor for AI. I don't think the DL-AF-KL-9W bid is serious.

Agree with you 100%.

In the current environment, neither AI nor 9W will have investors scrambling to invest. Both will be distress sales at best.

For AI, what I have been saying is that the Nauratna model adopted for VSNL and others should be applied. Give full autonomy for operations, allow them to induct capacity for domestic/regional flying, where they are being artificially squeezed by the Govt due to pressure from the SpiceJet/Indigo lobbies. They are already operationally profitable. The one thing that is weighing them down is the interest payments on the aircraft inducted in the 2007-2010 timeframe. Let the Govt clear the balance dues of 7000 crore as a one time exception (still less of a burden on the taxpayer than the 25000 crore writeoff required for the sale). I see an autonomous AI recapture domestic market share to 25% at the expense of Vistara & Indigo. I see them building a powerful hub at DEL with seamless domestic feed.

In 2 years, list 24% stake on the BSE/NSE for sale to the public. Over a period of 5 years, offload more & more stake to the extent of 51%. Finally around 2025 timeframe, offload the remaining 49% using the strategic sale route. This is the practical calendar that will work.

As opposed to the hare-brained project of writing off 25000+ crores and then cutting up AI and selling the assets piecemeal for a song to the Govt's cronies.

BawliBooch wrote:

For AI, what I have been saying is that the Nauratna model adopted for VSNL and others should be applied. Give full autonomy for operations, allow them to induct capacity for domestic/regional flying, where they are being artificially squeezed by the Govt due to pressure from the SpiceJet/Indigo lobbies. They are already operationally profitable. The one thing that is weighing them down is the interest payments on the aircraft inducted in the 2007-2010 timeframe. Let the Govt clear the balance dues of 7000 crore as a one time exception (still less of a burden on the taxpayer than the 25000 crore writeoff required for the sale). I see an autonomous AI recapture domestic market share to 25% at the expense of Vistara & Indigo. I see them building a powerful hub at DEL with seamless domestic feed.

If only the Government of India had something commonly known as "common sense"...

Yakamoz wrote:

Is there any development between India and Turkey for more destinations and frequencies?

Unlikely, partly due to lack of interest amongst Indian carriers to fly to Turkey and more importantly Turkey votes against India and Indian interest in every international forum. Whats in for India to help them gain more business?

globetrotter94 wrote:

If only the Government of India had something commonly known as "common sense"...

The comment that you have linked makes zero economic sense. It is easy to conjure up a 25% market share on paper, but the kind of investment required to attain that is staggering.

Indian domestic market size in 2017 was 117m. Assuming a modest growth rate of 9% the size of the market in 2025 will be 234m - or double the size of the 2017 market. In 2017 AI operated a narrow body fleet of 75 aircraft and had a market share of 13%. For the purposes of simplicity, if we assume that all narrow body aircraft are employed only in domestic ops, then just to hold on its present market share in 2025 AI will have to operate a fleet of 150 aircraft. To increase its market share to 25% as suggested, it will need a fleet of ~300 aircraft! How does an airline that is insolvent for all practical purposes find the capital to induct 225 narrow body aircraft? Add to that the proportionate increase in personnel costs.

It will have to rely on government money - billions of dollars that can be spent on much more pressing issues than trying to run an airline. AI is a bloated, inefficient, tax payer money guzzling mess. Nobody would bat an eyelid if it were to completely shut its domestic ops tomorrow, and its international routes - most of which are loss making are hardly a reason to throw good money after bad into this pit.

unrave wrote:

globetrotter94 wrote:

If only the Government of India had something commonly known as "common sense"...

The comment that you have linked makes zero economic sense. It is easy to conjure up a 25% market share on paper, but the kind of investment required to attain that is staggering.

Indian domestic market size in 2017 was 117m. Assuming a modest growth rate of 9% the size of the market in 2025 will be 234m - or double the size of the 2017 market. In 2017 AI operated a narrow body fleet of 75 aircraft and had a market share of 13%. For the purposes of simplicity, if we assume that all narrow body aircraft are employed only in domestic ops, then just to hold on its present market share in 2025 AI will have to operate a fleet of 150 aircraft. To increase its market share to 25% as suggested, it will need a fleet of ~300 aircraft! How does an airline that is insolvent for all practical purposes find the capital to induct 225 narrow body aircraft? Add to that the proportionate increase in personnel costs.

It will have to rely on government money - billions of dollars that can be spent on much more pressing issues than trying to run an airline. AI is a bloated, inefficient, tax payer money guzzling mess. Nobody would bat an eyelid if it were to completely shut its domestic ops tomorrow, and its international routes - most of which are loss making are hardly a reason to throw good money after bad into this pit.

It would not be financially insolvent for long if the Government of India owned up to its past mistakes and paid off the debt that THEY forced AI to take on in the 2000s (in addition to pending charges for VIP flights, etc.), as the linked poster mentioned. And I 100% agree that government investment will be required to build AI up to that sort of level. But frankly, if India wants to try clawing back its aviation industry from the likes of the MEB3, then that is inevitable no matter which way you look at it--because in all seriousness, I don't see any of the other Indian private sector airlines having the capability to grow into that sort of large-scale international-domestic/international-international connector. 9W because they keep shooting themselves in the foot and 6E because I doubt their business model is really scalable.

And I also don't buy the "more pressing issues" argument. It's not like if the money was taken out of AI, that GOI would all of a sudden become a caring, efficient, financially-responsible utopia of an institution and India would become a Sweden-like welfare state overnight. I see it this way (and maybe this is a bit simplistic statement, but whatever): if my government cannot even run a small-medium-sized airline, then I don't really trust it to run one of the largest education or public healthcare systems in the world either.

unrave wrote:

globetrotter94 wrote:

If only the Government of India had something commonly known as "common sense"...

The comment that you have linked makes zero economic sense. It is easy to conjure up a 25% market share on paper, but the kind of investment required to attain that is staggering.

Indian domestic market size in 2017 was 117m. Assuming a modest growth rate of 9% the size of the market in 2025 will be 234m - or double the size of the 2017 market. In 2017 AI operated a narrow body fleet of 75 aircraft and had a market share of 13%. For the purposes of simplicity, if we assume that all narrow body aircraft are employed only in domestic ops, then just to hold on its present market share in 2025 AI will have to operate a fleet of 150 aircraft. To increase its market share to 25% as suggested, it will need a fleet of ~300 aircraft! How does an airline that is insolvent for all practical purposes find the capital to induct 225 narrow body aircraft? Add to that the proportionate increase in personnel costs.

It will have to rely on government money - billions of dollars that can be spent on much more pressing issues than trying to run an airline. AI is a bloated, inefficient, tax payer money guzzling mess. Nobody would bat an eyelid if it were to completely shut its domestic ops tomorrow, and its international routes - most of which are loss making are hardly a reason to throw good money after bad into this pit.

Considering most of India's aviation sector, with the notable exception of 6E, hasn't really been able to make profits consistently, why not junk the entire industry and hand everything over to 6E? All I am saying is, AI has managed to get a somewhat respectable international network (and domestic connections) going especially after having aircraft and route decisions forced upon it by politicians for many many years. That is more than what the other major FSC has managed inspite of a favorable regulatory regime. It might be worthwhile not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I can understand why some people hold hope out for a large AI domestic network. Looking back in history, it was the unavailability of a domestic network to feed its international operations that contributed to PanAm's downfall. However, I don't think it will be worthwhile for AI to try and build a domestic network to compete with 6E. While current fleet levels (and a decent management) might allow AI to have a domestic network similar to SG, that is not really AI's niche. It is time for a privatized AI under professional airline management to carve out its niche and focus on it. I would be perfectly happy for AI to just run international feeders to DEL and perhaps early morning-late evening widebody flights on trunk routes between major metro cities (AI in my opinion has too many 788s and not enough 789s ). And perhaps retain the DEL-BOM shuttle service. That should be AI's bread and butter domestically. AIX can focus on point-to-point services to the Gulf and South-East Asia, perhaps even expand its operations within that niche.

Don't forget that any buyer has to start working on fleet renewal (and hopefully expansion) plans for the AI's long haul fleet. The oldest 77Ws are 10 years old now. Neither 77X nor 359ULR is in service yet, and there are plenty of launch customers who have the early delivery slots. I don't see anything available for AI before 2025, by when AI would be flying nearly 15+ year old aircraft.

globetrotter94 wrote:

It would not be financially insolvent for long if the Government of India owned up to its past mistakes and paid off the debt that THEY forced AI to take on in the 2000s (in addition to pending charges for VIP flights, etc.), as the linked poster mentioned.

The 'Government' here is not a single entity. The policies and moves that were taken which led to the current state of affairs at AI are a cumulative result of decades of bad policy making by many different aviation ministers belonging to multiple parties. Who do you think should own up to it? And the government is actually paying off part of the debt in the current proposal - that is why significant portion of the debt is proposed to be hived off into an SPV. And while the merger was botched up and AI was forced to take on aircraft beyond what was requested then, there were other factors which led to the decline of AI - mainly the opening up of Indian aviation market which led to the proliferation of private carriers. AI was a monopoly that simply couldn't compete against more agile competitors when the market was opened for private players. Letting AI continue is simply anti competitive.

And I 100% agree that government investment will be required to build AI up to that sort of level. But frankly, if India wants to try clawing back its aviation industry from the likes of the MEB3

Government investment of orders of magnitude higher than what it spends on social causes, and with no assurance of returns. And what is wrong with the ME3? They have competitive fares, far better service and actually fly to places that are determined by aviation demand than the whims of
a government babu. The ME3 has played a huge role in improving the international connectivity for millions of Indians. They are not the villain here.

I don't see any of the other Indian private sector airlines having the capability to grow into that sort of large-scale international-domestic/international-international connector.

So essentially you're saying no homegrown carrier is capable of running a global carrier/ Fair enough, in a globalised world you have to perform or perish, but there is no point in holding the taxpayers and fliers hostage to delusions of grandeur.

It's not like if the money was taken out of AI, that GOI would all of a sudden become a caring, efficient, financially-responsible utopia of an institution and India would become a Sweden-like welfare state overnight.

No it won't, not overnight, not in the next several decades. But that no justification for wasting money on trying to run an airline.

I see it this way (and maybe this is a bit simplistic statement, but whatever): if my government cannot even run a small-medium-sized airline, then I don't really trust it to run one of the largest education or public healthcare systems in the world either.

Let us ignore the fact that India currently does neither: we don't have a world class airline, we don't have a world class eduction or healthcare system. But if my tax money were to be spent inefficiently anyway, I would rather it be done on social causes than on an utterly unprofitable business enterprise.

devmapper wrote:

I can understand why some people hold hope out for a large AI domestic network. Looking back in history, it was the unavailability of a domestic network to feed its international operations that contributed to PanAm's downfall. However, I don't think it will be worthwhile for AI to try and build a domestic network to compete with 6E. While current fleet levels (and a decent management) might allow AI to have a domestic network similar to SG, that is not really AI's niche. It is time for a privatized AI under professional airline management to carve out its niche and focus on it. I would be perfectly happy for AI to just run international feeders to DEL and perhaps early morning-late evening widebody flights on trunk routes between major metro cities (AI in my opinion has too many 788s and not enough 789s ). And perhaps retain the DEL-BOM shuttle service. That should be AI's bread and butter domestically. AIX can focus on point-to-point services to the Gulf and South-East Asia, perhaps even expand its operations within that niche.

Agreed on the 789s. Once again, it seems the wishes of AI management are falling on deaf ears when it comes to our "babus" and buying big, expensive airplanes. But in essence, you are suggesting that AI cut back on most point-to-point domestic operations, and focus instead on hub operations at DEL. Under the current state of things, I largely agree, and it would also enable AI to continue holding on to marketshare between big cities. It is just a shame that India's "second cities" are not yet so well developed that AI can adopt more of a strategy like UA (TPAC hub at SFO, TATL hub at EWR, LATAM hub at IAH, etc.--i.e. using geography to its advantage).

unrave wrote:

The 'Government' here is not a single entity. The policies and moves that were taken which led to the current state of affairs at AI are a cumulative result of decades of bad policy making by many different aviation ministers belonging to multiple parties. Who do you think should own up to it?

Okay, maybe I should rephrase. I do not so much care for an admission of guilt from any party, as that would be politically difficult, so much as I care that at the end of the day, the financial responsibility for the mess that happened post-2007 is borne by the government (be that the civil aviation ministry or whatever), and not kept on AI's shoulders.

unrave wrote:

And what is wrong with the ME3? They have competitive fares, far better service and actually fly to places that are determined by aviation demand than the whims of a government babu. The ME3 has played a huge role in improving the international connectivity for millions of Indians. They are not the villain here.

I never intended to cast them as the villain. They are doing well for themselves, and bless them for it. However, it cannot be denied that they are the biggest beneficiaries of the shenanigans that have been played around AI, from curtailment of its international reach to hawking off basically brand new 77Ls to EY for peanuts (and then finding out later thay hey, they could actually use some 77Ls at this point). That was my reason for singling them out; not anything else.

unrave wrote:

Let us ignore the fact that India currently does neither: we don't have a world class airline, we don't have a world class eduction or healthcare system. But if my tax money were to be spent inefficiently anyway, I would rather it be done on social causes than on an utterly unprofitable business enterprise.

So in essence, we are disagreeing on where the GOI should spend money inefficiently. It was never my intention to frame an argument to such a ridiculous end. However, I would just say that at least with regard to AI, it is not necessary that GOI spend money inefficiently forever. I don't think it's deniable that ever since AI hit rock-bottom in 2012 with the weeks-long pilot strike, suspension of talks to join Star Alliance, etc., that it has been on the uptick. Particularly with the acquisition of the 787s and recent network expansion. So, with what seems like a stretch of good times, why risk all of that at this exact moment with a hastily-planned, ill-thought-out privatization?

I feel like we have the same debate on AI. Look AI's Del hub with nonstops to EU and NA showed that people will fly an Indian airline (even a bad one). The issue with AI is not that they don't spend money on things. It is that there is rampant corruption. The money that would go to proper catering or cleaning or new seat fabric just disappears. Labor is so cheap in India, how AI can have a dirty plane or one without proper repairs shocks me (in India they literally fix anything and everything). This is why it needs to be privatized. Anyone against privatization is probably an AI employee in IMHO. Sorry that is how I feel. I'm just waiting for someone to bring up IA and what a great airline it was. Let's look to the future. The GOI has no business being in the airline business. If it wants to subsidize routes to small cities (like the US does) or international cities (like China does), great. No need for these subsidies to be eaten up by the bureaucracy. And the buyer should be an Indian company (partnered with foreign airline is ok, not 100% owned - sorry Qatar).