Airports and Aviation - part 2 [Archive]

skystar320

May 20th, 2008, 01:06 PM

The domestic growth for air travelling isn't going to be worthwhile for the current type of operations. As discussed earlier, the relatively high fares compared to other modes offsets whatever time saving advantage travelling by air offers. A low-cost operation model, however, might workAs for anyone getting an L-1011, I saw an ex-ATA Tristar last week at ZIA and had seen this one a few times before. I was of the idea that it was on a military charter service, and would be surprised if a local carrier really brought it for intl pax services!

Wow, I am out of the country and I know more than you :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: Apparently they have brought two L1011's for commerical international operations and they are currently in the middle east for A-Check & periodic checks.

So far, I haven't come across a single private airline in BD with a sound business plan (and I've had sneak peeks on the plan and financials of each ).

I have seen RBA's and part of GMG's..... particularly like RBA's one and we all now their intentions for international operations....

The domestic growth for air travelling isn't going to be worthwhile for the current type of operations. As discussed earlier, the relatively high fares compared to other modes offsets whatever time saving advantage travelling by air offers. A low-cost operation model, however, might work

So your saying that for a short 45min hop Jet's are the question?

AeroGeeK

May 20th, 2008, 05:04 PM

amar11372

May 20th, 2008, 07:12 PM

Boeing Sr. Vice President expresses satisfaction over purchase of Boeing aircraft by Biman, Asia continues to be the biggest driver of aviation growth in next five years

May 16, 2008

A Monitor Special
Dhaka : Over the next five years Asia will continue to be the biggest driver of aviation growth Given by the economies of China and India, Asia is growing economically. So will its traffic.

This was observed by Marty A. Bentrott, Senior Vice President, Middle East and Africa sales, Commercial Airplanes, Boeing said while talking to The Bangladesh Monitor in Dhaka during his recent visit on the occasion of signing aircraft agreement with Biman Bangladesh Airlines. People can now afford to travel, or have to travel for business or employment, he said

Expressing satisfaction about signing aircraft deal with Biman Bentrott said that it is exciting to see Biman turning around. The choice of Biman shows the airline has chosen the strategy for flying point to point, and people do like flying point to point. This deal will make the airline younger, he opined.

He said that Biman signing the definitive agreements for Boeing aircraft was the result of 12 years of persevering efforts of top Boeing executives, one of whom made as many as 57 trips to Bangla-desh in that period. "There was skepticism. So many times we thought it would never happen," he said, adding, "it proves that all about building elationships and allowing them to be crowned with success."

Asked who are the leading customers of Boeing in neighbouring India, Bentrott said Air India and Jet Airways. The leading Boeing customers in Gulf region are Emirates, Qatar Airways and Saudi Arabian Airlines. Bentrott said Boeing-Airbus enjoy 50: 50 share of the Asian aircraft market. In Middle East it is 60pc Airbus: 40pc Boeing. It (the business) is in cycles. Boeing is doing pretty well in Middle East this year.

In Europe, Boeing: Airbus share was 50:50. Here too business in three year cycles. In US: we're stronger than Airbus. Replying to a query on the best selling aircraft of his company, Bentrott said Boeing B777-300ER was the best selling aircraft, the market leader for a wide-body aircraft. SIA, Emirates, JAL are the leading buyers of the aircraft in Asia. Little over 1,000 has been built and the production target is 2000 - there are orders already for 300 to 400 of them.

Boeing B777LR is the best aircraft for point to point flight. Airlines can choose between more seats or extra range. Air India and Emirates have gone for extra range. Air India is using this aircraft for New Delhi- New York flights and Emirates for Dubai-Los Angeles flights.

Regarding the delay of Dreamliner s, he said, getting the first Dreamliner built and rolling it out caused delays to the latter aircraft. We tried a different business model, which turned out to be more complex than thought. There was the problem of system integral and in final assembly at Puget Sound - three days was target after receiving all the components, now it is five (very fast for a wide-body)- is at Puget Sound. Major parts come from Italy, Japan (major producer Mitsubishi, Kawasaki) and China. Parts will be made in India in future.

Boeing B737 is assembled at Renton, Washington while B747s, B767s, B777s, B787s are at Everett, Washington. About naming 787 as Dreamliner, he said, we invited names. We found that most of the people suggested Dreamliner for the 7E7 aircraft. The Dreamliner's body is aerodynamic, made of composite materials, and is 20 per cent fuel efficient than other aircraft of the present days and makes long distance travel easier and makes it an enjoyable experience -ensuring higher humidity and lower cabin pressure. Dreamliner's engines are powered either by GE's Genex or Rolls Royce's Trent 100.

On the US aviation scenario, he said, demand for travel will slow in US due to higher unemployment and slower GDP growth. Legacy carriers in US are under lot of pressure specially due to higher fuel prices as costs cannot be kept down because of it. Some are responding by creating own subsidiary companies to run LCCs. He said low cost carriers are good for the people as they have more options to fly.

Headquartered in Chicago, Boeing employs more than 160,000 people across the United States and in 70 countries, with major operations in the Puget Sound area of Washington State, southern California and St. Louis. Total company revenue for 2007 was $66.4 billion.

Boeing has been the premier manufacturer of commercial jetliners for more than 40 years. With the merger of Boeing and McDonnell Douglas in 1997, Boeing's leadership in commercial jets, joined with the lineage of Douglas airplanes, gives the combined company a 70-year heritage of leadership in commercial aviation. Today, the main commercial products are the 737, 747, 767 and 777 families of airplanes and the Boeing Business Jet. New product development efforts are focused on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, and the 747-8.

The company has nearly 12,000 commercial jetliners in service worldwide, which is roughly 75 percent of the world fleet. Through Boeing Commercial Aviation Services, the company provides unsurpassed, around-the-clock technical support to help operators maintain their airplanes in peak operating condition.

http://www.bangladeshmonitor.net/aviation_story.php?recordID=1436

QGR

May 20th, 2008, 07:14 PM

Wow, I am out of the country and I know more than you :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: Apparently they have brought two L1011's for commerical international operations and they are currently in the middle east for A-Check & periodic checks.

I hope you people are not serious about this :ohno:.... A couple of L1011 for international pax service!!! I would also want to know which carrier is this? It would perhaps make some sense for Bismillah...but for pax service...

Though I also know this for fact that non of the private airline in BD have any decent business plan, but, as they have put their money at stake, I hope sanity should prevail at the end.

TIslam

May 20th, 2008, 09:46 PM

^^
I wasn't even aware that L1011s are still available for passenger service! Money must have not been any object! :lol:

shatilislam

May 20th, 2008, 11:25 PM

L1011 is not a bad aircraft......though would be very old, thus causing high operating cost.

skystar320

May 21st, 2008, 01:41 AM

L1011 is not a bad aircraft......though would be very old, thus causing high operating cost.

How do you consider OLD? 1984 with low hours / cycles just that the fuel burn is shocking! The maintenance 'high operating costs' as you put it shouldnt really be a problem

A - There are plenty of spares available for this type of aircraft
B - The only high operating cost in the fuel burn
C - Maintenance is done in the ME
D - Pretty sure that these aircraft have gone through the A - spar check saving them $$$$$$

skystar320

May 21st, 2008, 02:02 AM

I hope you people are not serious about this :ohno:.... A couple of L1011 for international pax service!!! I would also want to know which carrier is this? It would perhaps make some sense for Bismillah...but for pax service...

Though I also know this for fact that non of the private airline in BD have any decent business plan, but, as they have put their money at stake, I hope sanity should prevail at the end.

Hang on so your saying that you have seen all three business plans of GMG / United / RBA are you think they are wrong?

P.S United's prospectes on the internet doesnt consitute as a business plan

I'd be septical if you have seen them all, due to the fact I know one of them is pretty much confidential [It was hard getting my copy]

Truth is there is only one I reckon will make it and that is RBA, they know what they are doing :cheers:

skystar320

May 21st, 2008, 02:04 AM

^^
I wasn't even aware that L1011s are still available for passenger service! Money must have not been any object! :lol:

Quoted a price of US$1.5million each, with truckloads of spares

skystar320

May 21st, 2008, 02:06 AM

Somebody bought 2 L-1011's?:rofl:
Some people in Bangladeshare trying to get rid of DC-10's & some other are buying DC-10's contemporary jets?:rofl:
Which buggar airlines is in question? Best Air maybe? They are Middle-East backed & their lovely tristars are in ME right now!:hilarious

They had a website until the server went caput last year

*hint* when you die you go to heaven......... somepeople reckon ****** look after us

*I am sorry if this isnt your relgion views - but just trying to make a point on who the carrier is*

TIslam

May 21st, 2008, 03:07 AM

skystar320

May 21st, 2008, 03:12 AM

^^
There must be very good reasons as to why the L1011s were put out to pasture. In today's world a startup airline cannot be successful using equipment from the salvage yard.

However, as the saying goes, the proof is in the pudding. :)

True - but I know these aircraft [sort of] & these aircraft were not from the salvage yard however already in operations

I think that this personally wont last long......... but i'll sit and drink to it

:cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers::cheers:

TIslam

May 21st, 2008, 03:27 AM

skystar320

May 21st, 2008, 03:34 AM

skystar320

May 21st, 2008, 04:19 AM

^^
While all of you guys being aviation enthusiasts (I am as well) dream up all kinds of possibilities, step back for a moment and think from a consumer's point of view: If I can fly in a spanking brand new aircraft where the HVAC isn't questionable, where the ride is smooth, where there is per seat inflight entertainment, why should I bother flying in an old craft that is kept together with duck tape, where I would be either sweating or freezing, with nothing to kill my time? Unless there is a HUGE demand for seats on a daily basis as opposed to the supply, startups with prehistoric flying machines will not succeed. As simple as that.

Alright then I want to ask you something, your on an international flights for 8 hours which cabin would you rather fly in

A)

http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/9059/295381056480307yu7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/9059/295381056480307yu7.0aa59bb511.jpg (http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=392&i=295381056480307yu7.jpg)

or B)

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/2190/835341169990882zy4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/2190/835341169990882zy4.6fe9f58f3d.jpg (http://g.imageshack.us/g.php?h=296&i=835341169990882zy4.jpg)

TIslam

May 21st, 2008, 04:47 AM

Alright then I want to ask you something, your on an international flights for 8 hours which cabin would you rather fly in

A)

or B)

Very clever, skystar! For me the answer would be neither but I can see what you're driving at. So, you're trying to say, what if I can provide you with a better and more comfortable cabin and ambience than the standard cattle class, never mind the age of the aircraft? Yes, that works to a certain extent but I must go back to my earlier statement. You better have more demand than supply. Only then it may succeed. It could also succeed to a degree, if the price is SIGNIFICANTLY lower than your competition. Show me a sector, any sector whether regional or international to/from DAC, where there is more demand than supply on a sustained basis?

skystar320

May 21st, 2008, 05:25 AM

TIslam

May 21st, 2008, 06:25 AM

Why thankyou………… At the end of the day most of the time it boils down to ‘who has the best customer preference’ if you supply

I have to disagree with this point “It could also succeed to a degree, if the price is SIGNIFICANTLY lower than your competition”

Yes price is an important factor but………. If you are known to operate a better cabin ambience, treat passengers like guests and your airline is generally well known & liked then you will find that passengers will keep flying you regardless of price [to some extent] repeat customers. Second to none if you operate a better product than your immediate carrier at the same price then 4

Take for example one of my sectors Perth – Melbourne with four competitors, Virgin Blue, Qantas, Tiger and Jetstar. With an average low cost fare operating 2x daily, Virgin Blue & Jetstar & one daily Tiger. Where as Qantas operates up to six return flights a day with three of them being 450 seater B747-300 type aircraft, these aircraft nearly operate full capacity and do you know why Qantas flights are always full. For a five hour sector they offer a far better standard of comfort than the immediate carrier who is on the low cost model [albeit Virgin Blue is slowly creeping away from this model]

This is also false “You better have more demand than supply. Only then it may succeed” Who thought of this? – if you play you cards right if say for example DAC – DUB is riding at 85% load factor, using two aircraft you could grab a nice slice of that market without making the overall load factor slip that much, remember your complimenting this service. Of course, at the start you will pitch your airline at cheaper than the others then slowly increase it to bring it in line with the major carrier who will also lower the price . Remember, decreasing the price will increase demand as more people can afford to fly. Take for example when EU went to Low Cost airlines, how much extra demand that created. Its all about yield & economics.

I’d suggest you read up on airline economics to get a good handle on airline’s economics – its interesting to read up on and we all can learn from this

P.S – Can I ask why you wouldn’t fly in either aircraft?

Okay, I see your point (or points). Then again, the examples do not quite fit the Bangladesh environment. DAC-DXB load factor may be 85% but you cannot make profits just making revenue one-way. Also, while DAC-DXB load factor is 85%, which carrier gets the lion's share and which carrier has to cancel flights owing to poor booking level? Among BG, EK and Z5, EK still has the superior product that draws loyal customer (as you put it: repeat loyal customer for a better product). So, unless a Bangladeshi carrier comes along that can give EK a run for its money, that 85% load factor wouldn't do much.

Muddying up the water (air?) with LCCs on a same sector is always that --- you never know what you'll end up with. While most Aussies may prefer Qantas over the LCC, the opposite appears to be true in the US. Of course, these days there's not much distinction between an LCC and a full service airline, unless you're flying business/first class, in the US. If I'm flying coach, I'd rather choose Southwest, the LCC, over American or Northwest, because the fare is significantly lower, and I'm not missing anything. That is why SW is making money while everybody else is losing their shirt. It remains to be seen what will happen if LCCs begin operation on the DAC-DXB-DAC sector.

I'd have to be tied up and drugged to fly on either A) or B) for 8 hours as there are no IFE/seat. One can read for only so long and I have a hard time sleeping on flights. :)

iasif

May 21st, 2008, 02:15 PM

Wow, I am out of the country and I know more than you :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: Apparently they have brought two L1011's for commerical international operations and they are currently in the middle east for A-Check & periodic checks.

I have seen RBA's and part of GMG's..... particularly like RBA's one and we all now their intentions for international operations....

So your saying that for a short 45min hop Jet's are the question?

A good number of people knows a lot more than me...hence you're lost in a crowd, whereas I being less knowledgeable am a standout! ;) :lol:

Humour aside (which makes it rather boring!), I can't see how any private airline from Bangladesh can actually make a good business plan that can actually work...not because of their own capabilities (or lack thereof) but more because of the regulatory immaturity and inconsistencies. For example, you could have a great organization and spanking new planes, but there's just no rationale that the GoB/CAAB follows that will entitle you to the right to fly where you want to fly! This is exactly the reason why I think Biman should be a competent airline by itself, so that the GoB/CAAB eventually realize the pointlessness og giving it unending protection.

I didn't understand what you meant by me talking about 45 mins flights and jets. I meant to say that I don't think operating aircraft like Dash-8s (which are fine aircraft by all means) for domestic routes in Bangladesh can be a great commercial success if the road & rail infrastructure across the country achieves and maintains even an average standard. Like I said, the 'value' of the couple-odd hours saved (by air travelling) would be negated by the cost of doing so, to most people. There'll still be people who'd fly by air, to whom saving those few hours will mean more than the money they spend, but I can't imagine that group of people growing into a number large enough to keep 3/4 airlines flying. Maybe if someone uses smaller, reliable turboprop aircraft, which would operate lesser to operate (than the Dash-8s) and if the fares are about 35% lower than the current going rates, they can address a market that is large enough to sustain profitable operations.

iasif

May 21st, 2008, 02:42 PM

for example DAC – DUB is riding at 85% load factor, using two aircraft you could grab a nice slice of that market without making the overall load factor slip that much, remember your complimenting this service. Of course, at the start you will pitch your airline at cheaper than the others then slowly increase it to bring it in line with the major carrier who will also lower the price.

The traffic between DAC-DXB is purely seasonal as far as the labour traffic is concerned. The current season sees massive outbound traffic from DAC, which is evident in BG and Z5's 747's running at nearly 100% load factors (barring a few cases with Z5). On the inbound flight from DXB, the recent (last 6 weeks) traffic has been under 50 pax/flight for both BG and Z5. So if you add 540+50 it comes to 590 pax/roundtrip against 1,080 seats offered by BG and Z5 each, resulting in an average round-trip load factor of about 54%. With fuel prices where they are and promising to be getting to, it's going to be anything but a walk in the park for any private airline to make money from the route. Just ask Z5 about it!

EK is on a different league altogether. They draw a lot of traffic to/from other points into the DXB-DAC-DXB flight, and the business/leisure travellers (the ones who actually yields more money for the airline) are almost entirely flying on EK as well.

So whoever is getting the Tristars, my honest best wishes for them (no fingers crossed!)

amar11372

May 21st, 2008, 03:02 PM

iasif

May 21st, 2008, 03:12 PM

The maintenance 'high operating costs' as you put it shouldnt really be a problem

A - There are plenty of spares available for this type of aircraft
B - The only high operating cost in the fuel burn
C - Maintenance is done in the ME
D - Pretty sure that these aircraft have gone through the A - spar check saving them $$$$$$

Tell that to ATA, who went broke though! They had a terrible time keeping their Tristars flying, due to extremely difficult spares availability and mx issues for the type, so much so they bought 4x ex-Northwest DC-10s which were much easier to fly.

The spares 'availability' from the deserts don't help much! The L-1011 is technologically a superior aircraft to the DC-10, but sadly it went out of service long before the Diesel 10s, therefore making availability of serviceable spares and mx scarce as time passed by. And the 'only high operating cost in the fuel burn' will represent the single-biggest cost to any airline's operations, and should be taken equally seriously!

Hang on so your saying that you have seen all three business plans of GMG / United / RBA are you think they are wrong?

P.S United's prospectes on the internet doesnt consitute as a business plan

I'd be septical if you have seen them all, due to the fact I know one of them is pretty much confidential [It was hard getting my copy]

Truth is there is only one I reckon will make it and that is RBA, they know what they are doing :cheers:

I had looks into the business plans of GMG, United, Royal Bengal, and Best Air, and as QGR stated, [B]none[B] looks good! They are also riding a rough tide finance-wise, and a rescure isn't looking imminent!

And you think RBA really knows what they're doing? I think they're far from it! Only time will tell! :)

They had a website until the server went caput last year

*hint* when you die you go to heaven......... somepeople reckon ****** look after us

*I am sorry if this isnt your relgion views - but just trying to make a point on who the carrier is*

Your hints are going over my head (I'm kinda dumb)! This Air Bangladesh once screwed up trying to do the Hajj with a Tristar, and I'm not sure if they still exist. If Bismillah is getting them for pax services, oh well, I gotta start saying my prayers!

TIslam

May 21st, 2008, 03:27 PM

The traffic between DAC-DXB is purely seasonal as far as the labour traffic is concerned. The current season sees massive outbound traffic from DAC, which is evident in BG and Z5's 747's running at nearly 100% load factors (barring a few cases with Z5). On the inbound flight from DXB, the recent (last 6 weeks) traffic has been under 50 pax/flight for both BG and Z5.

That is really dismal. Why can't carriers other than EK achieve higher load factor outbound from DXB? What happens to all the expats who live in the UAE when they visit home? What could these airlines do increase their load factor/market share from DXB/UAE (outbound)?

AeroGeeK

May 21st, 2008, 03:34 PM

I still can't figure out which idiot bought the tristars [despite the hints]. Can somebody decipher the coded message?

iasif

May 21st, 2008, 04:41 PM

Hey Asif I have a question...... A couple of days ago we were having discussion about the new Chinese company formed to make Jumbo jets. My question is if Brazil's Embraer (grew out of Brazilian govt agency) is successful in commercial Aviation, why don't you think the newly created China Commercial Aircraft Corporation can be successful. China with its large domestic market already has key advantage, in addition China already has a history of very capable Aviation/Aerospace sector. And this is not just another Chinese state organization, it was formed into a corporation with the mandate to produce commercially viable Airplanes. Any input is welcomed, Thanks.

1. Bombardier and Embraer are not competing with Airbus and Boeing. They are offering a product line that Airbus/Boeing doesn't (<110 seater jets and turboprops meant for pax carriage only).

2. The Chinese, in that news release, were calling their proposed 150-seaters as [B]Jumbo's![B] I thought that adjective was meant for anything of or beyond the size of the 747! Anyways, let's assume they do produce a 150-seater (they had tried it before with their licensed production of the MD-80s) which will end up competing with the B737NG and the A320 families of aircraft, that too in no less than 6 years from now (EIS) if they start doing the R&D right now.

In less than a decades time, both Boeing and Airbus will be on the drawing board firming up a new generation of narrowbodies to replace the B737NG/A320s.

The Chinese manufacturers, in order to really succeed, will have to "leapfrog" the current technologies available to match Boeing and Airbus at par with their new line of narrowbodies. The crucial factor here is the R&D resources that are available to the Chinese to accomplish such a design. Boeing takes advantage of NASA, and Airbus gets generous funding from the participating states apart from the R&D resources available in Europe (particularly in Germany, France and the UK).

Even if you assume that they'll end up matching Boeing and Airbus, it'd still be a tough game for them to beat the big ones on the support and mx end. Airlines won't buy planes just by looking at the performance specs, as issues like crew commonality across the fleet, mx facilities available, et al will have a huge influence on the decisionmaking.

Everything mentioned above are purely my own speculations and opinions. I highly admire the Chinese bunch of folks, and sincerely hope they become a formidable C next to A and B! :D

iasif

May 21st, 2008, 04:51 PM

That is really dismal. Why can't carriers other than EK achieve higher load factor outbound from DXB? What happens to all the expats who live in the UAE when they visit home? What could these airlines do increase their load factor/market share from DXB/UAE (outbound)?

EK has the advantage of their impeccable network that feeds pax on their DXB-DAC-DXB flight both ways. The expats and the labour inbound traffic are also seasonal (the holiday season at UAE) during which period the volume of new labour recruits going outbound from DAC are low.

BG can improve their bi-directional loads on the route using their network, but they'll have to get hold of the required capacity and sort out the scheduling issues to make it work, which I presume may take a while! :)

AeroGeeK

May 21st, 2008, 06:05 PM

Will BG still be continuing their DAC-DXB-LHR flight in the future when they receive new planes? Or will they fly non-stop DAC-LHR with 77W's?

amar11372

May 21st, 2008, 06:31 PM

Oil just passed $130 per Barrel, the Private airlines and Biman better come up with updated Business strategies.

QGR

May 21st, 2008, 06:47 PM

Hang on so your saying that you have seen all three business plans of GMG / United / RBA are you think they are wrong?

P.S United's prospectes on the internet doesnt consitute as a business plan

I'd be septical if you have seen them all, due to the fact I know one of them is pretty much confidential [It was hard getting my copy]

Truth is there is only one I reckon will make it and that is RBA, they know what they are doing :cheers:

The adjective of right or wrong is hardly relevant for a business plan, because it can not be all wrong or all right. Also, I am aware of the fact that, a business plan is unlikely to appear in the website.

I am not an aviation expert, but a business plan has to do a lot on the management, planning, marketing and finance side than only the technical side of it (I am not saying that technical is less important though...). A good mix of these criteria in the right direction can qualify a business plan to be an effective and lucrative one for investors/lenders/stakeholders (not much for customers as general customers are unlikely to have access to the original business plan). Unfortunately, like iasif, I also found none of the business plans of the private airlines are really attractive (this is again, my own judgment, and may not be agreed by all).

Now, why and how I have got access to those is a different question all together which, I believe we should not be discussing here.

QGR

May 21st, 2008, 07:09 PM

Everything mentioned above are purely my own speculations and opinions. I highly admire the Chinese bunch of folks, and sincerely hope they become a formidable C next to A and B! :D

For a large country with population of one and a half billion and purchasing power of these people going up all the time, I also recon the China to be a formidable force. Unless these aircrafts they are planning to manufacture have a really bad safety standard (which is unlikely even without much leapfrog in technology) and terrible fuel efficiency (again unlikely to a great extent...) they should be doing well in the large enough domestic market, even without matching them with Boeing or Airbus products. Also if the price is competitive (as in case of many other Chinese products simply due to their economy of scale), this may well get market in other developing countries that do not have a very strict aviation rules/authority.

If airlines can go for L1011 primarily for price (I can't find any other reason even with the very healthy discussion on the topic here...), what's wrong with a Chinese 'Jumbo'?

iasif

May 21st, 2008, 07:10 PM

Will BG still be continuing their DAC-DXB-LHR flight in the future when they receive new planes? Or will they fly non-stop DAC-LHR with 77W's?

Filling up a 777-300ERs 460-odd seats for the DAC-LHR nonstop flight would be an imposing task for Biman. Hence, I think BG would be better off operating it through DXB (since 5th freedom is allowed, at least until now).

AeroGeeK

May 21st, 2008, 07:34 PM

I thought taking EK head-to-head was spine-chilling!

iasif

May 21st, 2008, 07:41 PM

For a large country with population of one and a half billion and purchasing power of these people going up all the time, I also recon the China to be a formidable force. Unless these aircrafts they are planning to manufacture have a really bad safety standard (which is unlikely even without much leapfrog in technology) and terrible fuel efficiency (again unlikely to a great extent...) they should be doing well in the large enough domestic market, even without matching them with Boeing or Airbus products. Also if the price is competitive (as in case of many other Chinese products simply due to their economy of scale), this may well get market in other developing countries that do not have a very strict aviation rules/authority.

If airlines can go for L1011 primarily for price (I can't find any other reason even with the very healthy discussion on the topic here...), what's wrong with a Chinese 'Jumbo'?

China is a formidable force already, but I just think it'll take them a while to make it big in the aircraft manufacturing thingy! Here are a few important points:

1. Its extremely unlikely that China will be able to build a plane all by themselves. Just like US or Europe can't. Its the match of quality and cost that is difficult to achieve, and although China is a great manufacturer per se, it just hasn't got what it takes to build an airplane yet. This is not to say that they won't ever get it, but its still a long shot.

2. The real cost behind every new airplane is in its design (R&D) and not the actual manufacturing. China doesn't have that level of knowledge yet either as far as aircraft designing is concerned. Again, they could get it over time but will take them some time!

3. Selling exclusively to China, in my opinion, won't be good enough. They'll still have to buy fuel for the planes which won't be nearly as cheap as anything made in China! :) At current growth rates, the price of jet fuel will get at par with diamonds in our lifetime I guess! If the Chinese planes end up drinking too much, even the Chinese carriers won't buy them and lose their global competitiveness. Purchase prices of aircraft will fast become the least important factor for aircraft procurement decisions as the prices of fuel would go up, making the planes' operating efficiencies the strongest factor - just ask the airlines who has ordered the huge lot of 787s and are still hanging on despite the delays!

4. If you take CAAB's as the standard bar (on the low ;) ), the countries whose civil aviation rules/authorities are at par or lower would be: Belize, Bulgaria, Cote D' Ivoire, Congo, Gambia, Ghana, Guayana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Kiribati, nauru, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Serbia & Montenegro, Swaziland, Ukraine, Uruguay, and Zimbabwe. You think they add up to potentially large enough market for the Chinese exclusively (even if you ignore the political issues)?

Conversing is fun, when mature people agrees to disagree...and the ball is yours now! :)

QGR

May 21st, 2008, 08:58 PM

China is a formidable force already, but I just think it'll take them a while to make it big in the aircraft manufacturing thingy! Here are a few important points:

1. Its extremely unlikely that China will be able to build a plane all by themselves. Just like US or Europe can't. Its the match of quality and cost that is difficult to achieve, and although China is a great manufacturer per se, it just hasn't got what it takes to build an airplane yet. This is not to say that they won't ever get it, but its still a long shot.

2. The real cost behind every new airplane is in its design (R&D) and not the actual manufacturing. China doesn't have that level of knowledge yet either as far as aircraft designing is concerned. Again, they could get it over time but will take them some time!

3. Selling exclusively to China, in my opinion, won't be good enough. They'll still have to buy fuel for the planes which won't be nearly as cheap as anything made in China! :) At current growth rates, the price of jet fuel will get at par with diamonds in our lifetime I guess! If the Chinese planes end up drinking too much, even the Chinese carriers won't buy them and lose their global competitiveness. Purchase prices of aircraft will fast become the least important factor for aircraft procurement decisions as the prices of fuel would go up, making the planes' operating efficiencies the strongest factor - just ask the airlines who has ordered the huge lot of 787s and are still hanging on despite the delays!

4. If you take CAAB's as the standard bar (on the low ;) ), the countries whose civil aviation rules/authorities are at par or lower would be: Belize, Bulgaria, Cote D' Ivoire, Congo, Gambia, Ghana, Guayana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Kiribati, nauru, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Serbia & Montenegro, Swaziland, Ukraine, Uruguay, and Zimbabwe. You think they add up to potentially large enough market for the Chinese exclusively (even if you ignore the political issues)?

Conversing is fun, when mature people agrees to disagree...and the ball is yours now! :)

Unfortunately the fun can not be prolonging because I mostly agree with you regarding the time required for China to become a formidable force in aviation market. However, following are some food for thought:

1. China has so far hardly built/manufactured anything all by themselves starting from complex military equipments to home electronics. They are good in reverse engineering and also good in copying (legal or illegal way).

2. Unless I am much mistaken, R&D cost will improve only when you try to introduce newer technology. I don't think this Chinese Aircraft will have composite supercritical wing design or anything near to the Yellowstone project of Boeing. Rather whatever I have read so far in the net and media, their focus will be much more on cost of the aircraft (through reducing the R&D cost I guess…).

3. So far Asia is the biggest market for both Boeing and Airbus. By Asia now-a-days it primarily indicates China and India, to some extent Middle East for this case. Keeping the political thing aside, this is indeed a fairly large market for Chinese Aircraft (source: orders in the pipe line for Boeing and Airbus products). Also, if the oil price hit the price of diamond in our lifetime, we will be fortunate enough to see people's purchasing power is also increased substantially, especially in Asia that consists half of the world’s population. Otherwise, overall future of the oil driven civilization is not too bright (unless some dramatic invention happens in near future).

4. Even though aviation rules/authority of most developing/middle income countries' are nowhere near to CAAB, they will be different from FAA or aviation authority of EU countries simply because the stage of development in those country and focus of the government. For example, FAA can be very rigid about noise pollution level (as the stage of development in US as well as EU has reached a point where simple environmental pollution like air, water and noise are much under control... though needless to mention that they have actually caused majority of these pollution during their phase of industrialization), I hardly think China or India will care much on this unless the flight is US-bound. This is supplemented by the fact that travel within Asia is increasing and will continue to increase due to economic boom in the Asian country.

Knowing your passion (!!!) for CAAB I will rather refrain from making any comment on them. :D

Let’s see some more comments on this one...Cheers!

Moin

May 21st, 2008, 09:31 PM

Could it be Anmol Albab Airlines??

iasif

May 21st, 2008, 10:48 PM

Unfortunately the fun can not be prolonging because I mostly agree with you regarding the time required for China to become a formidable force in aviation market. However, following are some food for thought:

1. China has so far hardly built/manufactured anything all by themselves starting from complex military equipments to home electronics. They are good in reverse engineering and also good in copying (legal or illegal way).

2. Unless I am much mistaken, R&D cost will improve only when you try to introduce newer technology. I don't think this Chinese Aircraft will have composite supercritical wing design or anything near to the Yellowstone project of Boeing. Rather whatever I have read so far in the net and media, their focus will be much more on cost of the aircraft (through reducing the R&D cost I guess…).

3. So far Asia is the biggest market for both Boeing and Airbus. By Asia now-a-days it primarily indicates China and India, to some extent Middle East for this case. Keeping the political thing aside, this is indeed a fairly large market for Chinese Aircraft (source: orders in the pipe line for Boeing and Airbus products). Also, if the oil price hit the price of diamond in our lifetime, we will be fortunate enough to see people's purchasing power is also increased substantially, especially in Asia that consists half of the world’s population. Otherwise, overall future of the oil driven civilization is not too bright (unless some dramatic invention happens in near future).

4. Even though aviation rules/authority of most developing/middle income countries' are nowhere near to CAAB, they will be different from FAA or aviation authority of EU countries simply because the stage of development in those country and focus of the government. For example, FAA can be very rigid about noise pollution level (as the stage of development in US as well as EU has reached a point where simple environmental pollution like air, water and noise are much under control... though needless to mention that they have actually caused majority of these pollution during their phase of industrialization), I hardly think China or India will care much on this unless the flight is US-bound. This is supplemented by the fact that travel within Asia is increasing and will continue to increase due to economic boom in the Asian country.

Knowing your passion (!!!) for CAAB I will rather refrain from making any comment on them. :D

Let’s see some more comments on this one...Cheers!

1. Reverse engineering aircraft isn't an easy thing to do. Take the avionics and the flightdeck systems for example...which isn't as simple as building the airframe out of metal! The last I know, they were still trying to emulate something by their own name that still looked like the MD-80s...and if I'm not mistaken, they haven't flown it till date.

2. The 787 is Boeing's Y2, and the 747-8 will remain Boeing's Y3 for quite a while. Its the Y1 that should be up next, but still at least 5-6 years away before heading for the drawing board considering the massive backlog of orders. Its the same case with the A320. In the meantime though, you could see Boeing/Airbus snapping in new engines on these birds that'd be based on the ones developed for the 787/A350XWB. These new engines could themselves keep the B737NG/A320 families on the production line as they are through over another decades time. And if you ask me, both Boeing and Airbus will do whatever they can to keep GE, RR and PW (though PW has fallen far behind lately) from offering their engines for the Chinese folks. The engine manufacturers in turn will weigh their opportunities and decide to be in exclusive support of Boeing and Airbus. Now, how soon do you think the Chinese can come up with a pair of engines to get their birds going? :)

3. Since you mentioned super-critical wings and composites, I think the days of the whole tube-and-wing design of airplanes are nearing the end. Blended wing for commercial airplanes is likely to be the next thing, as evident from Airbus' recent patenting of such a design in the US (and guess what, a tri-holer again!) and Boeing and NASA doing their BWB research deeply. Boeing already has hands-on experience on such a design - the B2 bomber, and last I heard they were quite getting along with the concept! So by the time the Chinese will actually make one of their very own planes fly, you could be used to seeing stealth-bomber-lookalikes in a world like the Jetsons! (That's my ultimate fantasy!!! :D)

4. As for the Civil Aviation Authorities and commercial flight operations, the next couple of decades will see the processes streamlined and simplified across the world, and not just in the US and EU, though they'll be the driving nations. Check this out in detail when you have some time in hand:

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/reauthorization/

I had been lucky enough to be involved in the OEP during its early days (back in 2003-2004) and I for one know that these evolutions will be eventually spread across the world for implementation. They will become the standards to follow in order to achieve compatibility for operations, and if any nation chooses not to get onboard, they'll be virtually left out of the world right on the face of the earth!

Its your kick again mate! :)

TIslam

May 22nd, 2008, 01:59 AM

3. Since you mentioned super-critical wings and composites, I think the days of the whole tube-and-wing design of airplanes are nearing the end. Blended wing for commercial airplanes is likely to be the next thing, as evident from Airbus' recent patenting of such a design in the US (and guess what, a tri-holer again!) and Boeing and NASA doing their BWB research deeply. Boeing already has hands-on experience on such a design - the B2 bomber, and last I heard they were quite getting along with the concept! So by the time the Chinese will actually make one of their very own planes fly, you could be used to seeing stealth-bomber-lookalikes in a world like the Jetsons! (That's my ultimate fantasy!!! :D)

Any pictures anywhere?

skystar320

May 22nd, 2008, 02:50 AM

Tell that to ATA, who went broke though! They had a terrible time keeping their Tristars flying, due to extremely difficult spares availability and mx issues for the type, so much so they bought 4x ex-Northwest DC-10s which were much easier to fly.

The spares 'availability' from the deserts don't help much! The L-1011 is technologically a superior aircraft to the DC-10, but sadly it went out of service long before the Diesel 10s, therefore making availability of serviceable spares and mx scarce as time passed by. And the 'only high operating cost in the fuel burn' will represent the single-biggest cost to any airline's operations, and should be taken equally seriously!

The ATA - Airlines collapse just wasn’t attributed to the L1011-500 aircraft although it didn’t help.

The L1011-500 aircraft were mainly used on US military transport which is tune is a very tricky contract. Instead of the normal ACMI as you pay per BH, these military contracts were written in such a way you were paid for each flight [therefore no room to increase prices as the fuel went up] so you were flying the aircraft making a loss

The DC-10 purchase from all accounts went pear shaped down the loo, although they got the aircraft eventually though it cost them a couple more million than originally planned and one of the contract’s they were going to operate went out the window when they couldn’t deliver the aircraft on time [no fault on their own] this is what I heard

Also, there scheduled ops were having a negative impact – declining yields were most of the problem.

Also your comment of “The spares 'availability' from the deserts doesn’t help much!” – yes actually they do help – ATA from all accounts brought shed loads of L1011 spare parts from Delta, though I agree with your posts of that the L1011 is a superior aircraft though is limited in its fuel burn

Side note, why didn’t ATA send the aircraft overseas for maintenance……………………… [damn unions]

skystar320

May 22nd, 2008, 02:53 AM

Now, why and how I have got access to those is a different question all together which, I believe we should not be discussing here.

Agreed, no more comment on that now..... though FYI just becareful on who you tell the company I know had this problem, they did a business plan and found it had gone into someone else hands. Legal proceedings occured.

skystar320

May 22nd, 2008, 02:56 AM

I still can't figure out which idiot bought the tristars [despite the hints]. Can somebody decipher the coded message?

Okay there are from heaven and wear all white........ [not god / jesus] some people say when something happens like an accident happens & they walk away free they say

"I believe ****** were looking after me"

skystar320

May 22nd, 2008, 03:53 AM

Edit - Too early

skystar320

May 22nd, 2008, 03:54 AM

Edit - Too early

iasif

May 22nd, 2008, 04:13 AM

Any pictures anywhere?

The design Airbus filed for US patenting is here:
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT7240877

A nightmare from an aesthetic point of view if you ask me, but I'm sure we'll all get used to it over time!

TIslam

May 22nd, 2008, 04:44 AM

The design Airbus filed for US patenting is here:
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT7240877

A nightmare from an aesthetic point of view if you ask me, but I'm sure we'll all get used to it over time!

Thanks. I expected it look like the B2 bomber per your earlier description. To me, it appears more like D10/L1011 except for the vertical stabilizer area. I wonder what Boeing is cooking up. :)

iasif

May 22nd, 2008, 05:17 AM

Thanks. I expected it look like the B2 bomber per your earlier description. To me, it appears more like D10/L1011 except for the vertical stabilizer area. I wonder what Boeing is cooking up. :)

The blended-wing concept (like the B-2) is what Boeing is working with for a while now.

This is what is official from Boeing:
http://www.boeing.com/phantom/news/2006/q2/060504b_nr.html

And here's more about the Blended-Wing Body concept:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blended_wing_body

And here's a neat document on BWB that's worth a read:
http://www.aoe.vt.edu/research/groups/bwb/papers/TheBWBAircraft.pdf

From what it looks like, the BWB may be an aircraft sans the vertical stabilizer just like the B-2, and therefore extremely dependent on the computer systems to fly. Since the entire plane would provide lifting surface, flares during landing could be looooooong. At the end of the day, the original essence of flying jets, and the fun thereof, would be almost gone! For nuts like Mr. Tex Johnston, the BWB is the worst nightmare coming true! :)

AeroGeeK

May 22nd, 2008, 06:47 PM

dopekhor

May 22nd, 2008, 07:39 PM

Though I don't like Scarebus, I'm waiting for their A350XWB. It might give 777 a good fight. It is supposed to be 20% more fuel-efficient than 777.
Talking of Chinese flying machines I'm afraid they will be lightyears behind USA & Europe & years behind Brazil, Canada even Russia.
i read somewhere i cant exactly remember that mitsubishi is developing aircrafts i'd wait for it to come cuz they sure can give boeing and airbus a run for their money

QGR

May 22nd, 2008, 08:24 PM

1. Reverse engineering aircraft isn't an easy thing to do. Take the avionics and the flightdeck systems for example...which isn't as simple as building the airframe out of metal! The last I know, they were still trying to emulate something by their own name that still looked like the MD-80s...and if I'm not mistaken, they haven't flown it till date.

2. The 787 is Boeing's Y2, and the 747-8 will remain Boeing's Y3 for quite a while. Its the Y1 that should be up next, but still at least 5-6 years away before heading for the drawing board considering the massive backlog of orders. Its the same case with the A320. In the meantime though, you could see Boeing/Airbus snapping in new engines on these birds that'd be based on the ones developed for the 787/A350XWB. These new engines could themselves keep the B737NG/A320 families on the production line as they are through over another decades time. And if you ask me, both Boeing and Airbus will do whatever they can to keep GE, RR and PW (though PW has fallen far behind lately) from offering their engines for the Chinese folks. The engine manufacturers in turn will weigh their opportunities and decide to be in exclusive support of Boeing and Airbus. Now, how soon do you think the Chinese can come up with a pair of engines to get their birds going? :)

3. Since you mentioned super-critical wings and composites, I think the days of the whole tube-and-wing design of airplanes are nearing the end. Blended wing for commercial airplanes is likely to be the next thing, as evident from Airbus' recent patenting of such a design in the US (and guess what, a tri-holer again!) and Boeing and NASA doing their BWB research deeply. Boeing already has hands-on experience on such a design - the B2 bomber, and last I heard they were quite getting along with the concept! So by the time the Chinese will actually make one of their very own planes fly, you could be used to seeing stealth-bomber-lookalikes in a world like the Jetsons! (That's my ultimate fantasy!!! :D)

4. As for the Civil Aviation Authorities and commercial flight operations, the next couple of decades will see the processes streamlined and simplified across the world, and not just in the US and EU, though they'll be the driving nations. Check this out in detail when you have some time in hand:

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/reauthorization/

I had been lucky enough to be involved in the OEP during its early days (back in 2003-2004) and I for one know that these evolutions will be eventually spread across the world for implementation. They will become the standards to follow in order to achieve compatibility for operations, and if any nation chooses not to get onboard, they'll be virtually left out of the world right on the face of the earth!

Its your kick again mate! :)

Humm...let's see... This is getting really interesting...

First of all, let me admit once again that I mostly agree on the points you have made. But having said that can't resist putting up some more food for thoughts...

1. I have no illusion what so ever regarding difficulty of reverse engineering an aircraft or for that matter aviation technology as whole. However, China has both nuclear and space technology at their disposal. Now, how far behind they are from western technology is obviously an issue to consider. But what I understand from my limited knowledge is these technologies are far more sensitive for US (or any other country for that matter...) than aviation technology.

2. One simple question...how Bombardier is planning to restart C-series with PW engines (as you have correctly mentioned that PW has recently fallen far behind GE and RR). I don't think China, at this stage, are even aspiring to have their own engines... but I don't see how or why Boeing and Airbus will create any direct or indirect pressure on any engine manufacturer as these Chinese or Canadians are only competing at below 150-seater market. With LCC getting popular every day and regional travel have increased significantly (due to increase in regional trade and with the recent trend, this will only go up further) in both Europe and Asia, demand for below 150-seater are likely to go up significantly.

3. I will let this point pass, simply because this is getting a bit too technical for my comfort. Just one query, what will happen to C-series in 2013? Though Bombardier is saying that they are going to come up with Geared Turbofan engine from PW and Composite wing design, are they going match that with Boeing Y1 or Airbus for that matter?

4. I agree in full. My only point is/was no matter what process is set, country like China and India will give maximum protection to their own industry, as was the case for WTO. Many other developing nation will follow the same suit (unfortunately, I am not too confident about our own loving country or rather the Government...:()

See the whole point I am trying to make is, Asia or rather India-China will become a dominating economic force in coming decades... and for that they are likely to reduce the political gap between them. When I think about China's manufacturing capability together with India's ability to promote, I, like many other from different field, believe that are they are going to be a formidable force in areas they want to penetrate on. With both this country being large enough in terms of area and terrain not being too friendly for road/rail transport, domestic travel along with increasing regional air travel is likely to grow much faster. Off course, they are less likely to join hands on this particular ‘Jumbo’ project, but if it yields result… it is very much on the card. Oil price again will be a factor, but I firmly beilive (like many other in my field) it will increase along with the purchasing power or large middle class section in Asia (simply because even if it reaches price of diamond, I am not sure how many of us are likely to ride on a bicycle....:lol:).

Back to you Chief... :D

AeroGeeK

May 22nd, 2008, 08:50 PM

i read somewhere i cant exactly remember that mitsubishi is developing aircrafts i'd wait for it to come cuz they sure can give boeing and airbus a run for their money

This project of Mitsubishi is called Mitsubishi Regional Jet [MRJ]. This regional jet will be a 70-90 seater aircraft. Mitsubishi is far from giving Boeing & Airbus a run for their money because B & A don't build such planes. So far only ANA has announced it's intention to buy 15 MRJ's with options for 10 more. I doubt MRJ can give a headache to CRJ & ERJ who are currently dominating the regional market.

QGR

May 22nd, 2008, 09:07 PM

And here's a neat document on BWB that's worth a read:
http://www.aoe.vt.edu/research/groups/bwb/papers/TheBWBAircraft.pdf

A helpful article indeed. Couple of thing just pops up in my mind…

- Though the specifications are not given, BWB-450 will require some modification of existing airport/runway facility (may sound silly, but I am just wondering, with expanded wing area, how the boarding bridges are going to look like!!!).

- Middle sections of passenger cabins will not have any window. With 0.9 Mach, travel time for long/ultra-long distance routes are not going to reduce much. Even with all the personalize in-flight entertainment, I am finding this difficult to imagine myself sitting in cattle-class for 10-12 hours in such a claustrophobic cabin :ohno:

How long do you think we need to wait before experiencing this 'nightmare' ourselves?

QGR

May 22nd, 2008, 09:10 PM

This project of Mitsubishi is called Mitsubishi Regional Jet [MRJ]. This regional jet will be a 70-90 seater aircraft. Mitsubishi is far from giving Boeing & Airbus a run for their money because B & A don't build such planes. So far only ANA has announced it's intention to buy 15 MRJ's with options for 10 more. I doubt MRJ can give a headache to CRJ & ERJ who are currently dominating the regional market.

We can as well open another front for the future of Japanese Jets...:)

shatilislam

May 22nd, 2008, 11:03 PM

shatilislam

May 22nd, 2008, 11:10 PM

shatilislam

May 22nd, 2008, 11:16 PM

WELL I got the name, Easy Fly Express Ltd., a new cargo Airline........I know one of the 5 founders........

shatilislam

May 22nd, 2008, 11:39 PM

http://8.5.0.95/photo/Untitled-(Bismillah-Airlines/British-Aerospace-BAe-748/1212984&tbl=photo_info&photo_nr=1&prev_id=&next_id=NEXTID

Well this is the HS-748 that Bismillah airlines took delivery last year. The new "Easy Fly Express Ltd." company is also following Bismillah's way in terms of Aircraft type and cargo routes!!!!!!!!! their pilots are also ''stolen" from Bismillah.

To distinguish this Bismillah HS-748 from that of Easy Fly's, this one's registration is S2-ADW.

iasif

May 22nd, 2008, 11:54 PM

Humm...let's see... This is getting really interesting...

First of all, let me admit once again that I mostly agree on the points you have made. But having said that can't resist putting up some more food for thoughts...

Back to you Chief... :D

Hmmmph! I'm thinking about raising an invoice to you now...!! :D

1. From what I know China's nuke and space techs are pretty good, but since these areas has no "commercial competition", staying updated-to-the-second isn't necessary, whereas the commercial aviation industry requires continuous evolution towards more efficiency. As I said earlier, China can perhaps end up matching current western technologies in making airplanes at a time when both Boeing and Airbus may have a whole new standard available (say in about a decades time from now) which may well negate any attractiveness of the Chinese bird. But if they can match the western technology available at the time when the Chinese plane will have its EIS, it may have an appeal to the global airlines.

As the air traffic control and navigational technologies get more and more advanced to optimize airspace usage, planes that will be built in the future will make extensive use of flight control software & systems - something that the Chinese will have to struggle with to get at par with. I was involved in the development of 3 software that are in use in today's Boeings - Integrated Approach Navigation (IAN), Vertical Situation Display (VSD) and Navigation Performance Scales (NPS), and all 3 of them are actually components designed keeping FAA's OEP (refer to the FAA link given earlier) in mind. Aircraft navigation will make greater use of GPS technologies in the future and redefine current air routes. More airplanes will be capable of and more airlines will make use of precision technologies such as the RNP. All these are what the Chinese will have to deal well with, and have their planes capable of handling.

On another note, here's an excerpt of what Boeing had to say recently regarding the 737RS (Aviation Week; 19th May, 2008):

"Boeing Goes Back to Drawing Board for 737RS Follow-on"

Boeing is abandoning its long-running effort to devise a successor to the 737, driven back to the drawing board by the lack of existing technology that can deliver the huge leap in performance airlines want for a next-generation single-aisle aircraft.

The manufacturer openly admits the change of strategy, saying, “We know customers are demanding really high targets for this aircraft, and we know that with the state of technology, we’re not going to get there anytime soon.” As a result, Boeing adds, “We’re focusing on technology efforts and reducing the aircraft design effort while the technology matures.”

Boeing’s 737RS study emerged from the product development group’s P-1 project of the late 1990s, and was later absorbed as a subset of the Yellowstone project.

Boeing has not publicly stated the 737RS targets, but they are believed to be cost reductions in the 20-25% range. A company official clarifies, however, that “you can’t just do a shrink of the 787; it’s not as easy as that because of the different missions, higher cycles and shorter range. You can’t shrink the 787 because of the systems. You need volume to handle the systems on the 787. With this study, we really need breakthroughs.”

The transformation of the 737RS project into a more sweeping technology study effort is sparking industry speculation that this will inevitably push any prospective development of a 737 successor toward 2017-19.

Boeing declines to be more specific on the impact of the decision or the potential for further slippage. It simply says, “We expect the rate of this technology development to be available in the latter part of next decade, and we’ve said this will be no earlier than 2015.”

2. Boeing and GE have an exclusive agreement for the GE90s, particularly the 110K-115K rated ones which prevented Airbus from getting it when they began the first designs of what is now the A350XWB (previously touted as A370 at some point). So long the Chinese don't try to compete directly with what Airbus and Boeing would have to offer, they won't probably face any problem. But if they do get head-on, both A and B may have more of such exclusivity with the engine manufacturers that will prevent the Chinese from getting their hands on the thrust-bracket they'd require.

As for the success of the LCC's, I think they'll all face very difficult times as the cost of fuel keeps going up. Fuel currently represents roughly between 50%-70% of the total operating costs of a typical legacy/network carrier, whereas it is between 70%-90% in case of typical LCC's. Now, as fuel prices keep getting higher, the network carriers may be able to use some cushioning by keeping the other costs low and keep their fares as least affected as possible. The LCC's on the other hand would have no choice but to push up fares as fuel gets dearer. This effectively would minimize the gap between the cost of flying on an LCC and a full-service operator on any given route, and the perceived value to the average traveller will be more in favour of the full-service operators.

3. The C Series will have a lot to prove if it has to succeed commercially. The GENX is the best that there is today as far as engines are concerned, but it'll take a while before the advantages can be truly scaled down to the lower thrust bracket.

4. As far as air traffic control and navigation is concerned, the coming decades will see streamlining of processes through adoption of common standards which eventually every country will be forced to adopt (unless they want to just operate domestically forever!).

There's no doubt that India and China will be formidable forces considering their economies, but it'll just take them a while on the "learning curve" to be able to build competitive aircraft manufacturing industries of their own. Both India and Chine have been building parts for A & B and will continue to do so in the future in even greter extents, which should improve their manufacturing qualities and develop the infrastructure further. There will surely be a day that we would be flying in an airplane with a tag that'd read "Made in China"!

Its 4 in the morning now, and my grey cells are fast switching themselves off...but I still am contemplating the idea of raising that invoice to you...*yawn*...but seriously...!

iasif

May 23rd, 2008, 12:13 AM

A helpful article indeed. Couple of thing just pops up in my mind…

- Though the specifications are not given, BWB-450 will require some modification of existing airport/runway facility (may sound silly, but I am just wondering, with expanded wing area, how the boarding bridges are going to look like!!!).

- Middle sections of passenger cabins will not have any window. With 0.9 Mach, travel time for long/ultra-long distance routes are not going to reduce much. Even with all the personalize in-flight entertainment, I am finding this difficult to imagine myself sitting in cattle-class for 10-12 hours in such a claustrophobic cabin :ohno:

How long do you think we need to wait before experiencing this 'nightmare' ourselves?

In fact the lack of window is one of the major problem for BWB to be used as a passenger aircraft. Is there any suggestion regarding this?

- The BWB would definitely require infrastructural developments not just at the airports but even with air traffic control. As for gate compatibility, Boeing initially had an idea of "folding wings" for the B777 which was discarded for good reasons, but could be something that they might give it a try again with the BWB and manage to keep it within the 80m box. Even if they don't and airport gate capabilities have to get revised, it'll still make the investment worth it.

- Not just the middle section, there will be no windows for any pax on the BWB, but probably individual screens that will show the video feed from cams installed on the outside of the plane which may probably 'simulate' what you could be seeing if there was a window to look out of! Sickening idea nevertheless!!

The pax hold of the BWB will be more like a theatre, with probably 60-abreast rows and such! The most difficult problem is the fact that with such a wide pax hold, people wil be seated a long way away from the centre axis, meaning that during banks, they could be facing sever nauseatic experience. A B777-200, while banking at 45 degrees, has its 2 wings dipped and raised by 70 feet each way. This isn't any problem on the tube-and-wing design as the pax are very close to the centre axis, but on the BWB such banks would cause people throwing up all over the place. The apparent solution is to have lower bank degrees, of say just 5, which would in turn mean that the plane will end up using a lot of space to manoever which would then compromise airspace utilization. Like I said, its a challenge but I reckon will be eventually dealt well with somehow.

skystar320

May 23rd, 2008, 01:14 AM

[.]

TIslam

May 23rd, 2008, 03:57 AM

^^
BWB, present limitations notwithstanding, will be probably become a reality as it offers significant savings in operating costs, primarily fuel.

It is heartening to know that the original concept came from a McDonnell Douglas engineer and Boeing is now going to capitalize on it!

A four AM analysis does deserve a hefty invoice, Imran. :)

iasif

May 23rd, 2008, 06:07 AM

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled%20(Bismillah%20Airlines)/British%20Aerospace%20BAe-748%20Srs2A/347/1341386/L/&width=1024&height=695&sok=&photo_nr=1&prev_id=&next_id=NEXTID

This aircraft is recently been purchased by 5 bangladeshi entrepreneurs, who are going to use it for a new cargo airlines. It is not purchased by Bismillah as mentioned in the airliners.net. I have forgot the name of the new airlines......i shall collect it soon. The aircraft is already in ZIA and going to have 4 return cargo flights per week in Dhaka-Delhi route.

The registration is S2-AAX

WELL I got the name, Easy Fly Express Ltd., a new cargo Airline........I know one of the 5 founders........

http://8.5.0.95/photo/Untitled-(Bismillah-Airlines/British-Aerospace-BAe-748/1212984&tbl=photo_info&photo_nr=1&prev_id=&next_id=NEXTID

Well this is the HS-748 that Bismillah airlines took delivery last year. The new "Easy Fly Express Ltd." company is also following Bismillah's way in terms of Aircraft type and cargo routes!!!!!!!!! their pilots are also ''stolen" from Bismillah.

To distinguish this Bismillah HS-748 from that of Easy Fly's, this one's registration is S2-ADW.

Just another sheep following the herd. Best Air, Bismillah and Zoom Airways also got the HS-748s and never managed to provide quality services, which is understandable because of the airplane's dependability, or lack thereof to be precise. Its only cheap to get, but awful to operate and is a poor platform for cargo. The fuselage is almost perfectly circular and narrow, leaving very little usable room for boxed cargo inside (as a lot of space on the two sides and the top is left unfilled).

I saw one of these HS-748s yesterday at ZIA, parked at the cargo ramp next to the damaged Saudi Arabian 747-300 (and there were 5x Classic 747s at ZIA at the same time yesterday, very high by ZIA's standards!). Looked clean, despite not being a very promising airplane!

AeroGeeK

May 23rd, 2008, 10:57 AM

1. How do these junk planes fly from UK to Bangladesh? The pilots must be very good bush-pilots!

2. I'm ready to open a new front over MRJ!

3. The Saudi 743 is still at Zia? How long do they take to repair a plane?

4. 5x 747 classics? 1x 742 BG, 1x 743 Z5, 1x 743 SV [undamaged], 1x 743 SV [damaged] & who's the last one?

bromora

May 23rd, 2008, 11:52 AM

Following on from the ICH warning, looks like GMG is beginning to feel the crunch.

Biman stops catering services to GMG Airlines (http://nation.ittefaq.com/issues/2008/05/23/news0448.htm)

As GMG Airlines is planning to go for nearly one billion US dollar purchase of six wide-body Boeing aircraft, Biman Bangladesh Airlines Limited stopped catering services to the airlines on Wednesday for default in payment of Tk 4.3 million.

Biman also owes around Tk 6.3 million from GMG Airlines for cargo handling.

Sources in Biman said GMG Airlines also defaulted in payment to International Air Transport Association (IATA) Clearing House. For this reason, Biman has not received US$ 259,747.88 for ground handling charges provided to GMG Airlines.

On cargo handling account, GMG Airlines gave a bank guarantee of Tk 1 million whereas the dues stand at Tk 6.3 million, while its bank guarantee is Tk 4 million against supply of food items from Biman Flight Catering Service (BFCC).

A Biman high official said the cheques they received from the GMG Airlines on account of food services were dishonoured by the respective bank. The amount of such dishonoured cheques is Tk 3.2 million.

For ground handling of GMG Airlines flights, Biman is waiting to get US$ 259,747.88 from the IATA Clearing House.

As per the IATA rules, all ground handling payments would be provided through the IATA Clearing House.

Recently, IATA Clearing House informed all its members in writing that GMG Airlines, Air Botswana and Mahan Air have defaulted to pay their dues.

The Biman high official said this letter is a warning to all IATA members. "IATA by this letter to all its members gave the signal to be more cautious before making any deal with the three airliners."

But a GMG Airlines official denied the allegation that they had defaulted in payment to the IATA Clearing House. Asked about the IATA letter to its members, he said GMG Airlines always pay its bills in time to the IATA Clearing House.

GMG Airlines spokesman ATM Nazrul Islam, however, admitted they had defaulted in paying the cargo handling charges, BFCC payments and dishonoured bank cheques.

"We had requested Biman to give us some more time to pay the arrears to BFCC, but they didn't accept our request," he told UNB.

QGR

May 23rd, 2008, 02:19 PM

Hmmmph! I'm thinking about raising an invoice to you now...!! :D

There will surely be a day that we would be flying in an airplane with a tag that'd read "Made in China"!

Its 4 in the morning now, and my grey cells are fast switching themselves off...but I still am contemplating the idea of raising that invoice to you...*yawn*...but seriously...!

Three cheers for the grey cells for producing such invoice at 4 ‘0 clock in the morning!!! I am happy to admit that the invoice is a bit too strong for me to keep this front alive for the time being. I am equally happy at your submission to the fact that we will be able to fly on a ‘made in China’ airplane without being reincarnated….

On a different bur relevant note one small query… there are about 11,000 B737/A320/MD80-90 family series aircraft flying for commercial services with significant number of these are approaching toward their graveyard fast. Can Boeing and Airbus keep up pace of supply considering growth of demand for such aircraft in the next 3-5 years time? If the answer is negative, what will happen to the gap?

QGR

May 23rd, 2008, 02:42 PM

2. I'm ready to open a new front over MRJ!
__________________
I love Man U!

Go ahead dude…looking forward to Man U like performance from you! However, I will let honor of defending Japanese fame to someone else this time :D.

Cheers....

TIslam

May 23rd, 2008, 04:26 PM

I am equally happy at your submission to the fact that we will be able to fly on a ‘made in China’ airplane without being reincarnated….

I doubt it. Unless you're in China or flying a Chinese domestic operator, provided they can get their MD copy off the ground. :)

TIslam

May 23rd, 2008, 08:30 PM

Wouldn't that become a show stopper for GMG?

amar11372

May 23rd, 2008, 09:13 PM

Dhaka expects more overseas air travellers

FE Report

Mahbub Jamil, Special Assistant to the Chief Adviser for the Ministry of Civil Aviation and Tourism, said the recent boom experienced by the country's hospitality industry bears a positive notion for the country's growing aviation sector.

He was addressing as the chief guest of the 'Agents' Award Night' and second anniversary of the Etihad Airways operation in Bangladesh at a city hotel Thursday.

"Now, with a total of four players in the market of 5-star hotels in the country jostling for their share and a few more on the card, Bangladesh can expect more overseas air travellers in the coming years," Mahbub said.

"At the same time, local passengers of all class and profession will continue to fly to destinations in different regions of the world, which means airlines operating in Bangladesh will see greater number of passengers in years to come," he said.

It also shows that Bangladesh is a growing economy and a highly potential market, Mahbub asserted.

Khondoker Ashraful Kabir, Country Manager of Etihad Airways in Bangladesh informed that globally the Middle Eastern carrier saw an increase of 67 per cent in its number of passengers in 2007 while adding 13 more aircraft in its fleet, which now flies to 45 destinations all over the globe.

Ian Lovelock, Regional General Manager of Sales Operation of Etihad Airways in his speech said the carrier is looking to strengthen its aircraft fleet as well as banking on innovative approach to maintain the high standard of customer service.

Secretary to the Ministry of Civil Aviation and Tourism Syed Mohammad Zobaer, Executive Vice President of Etihad Airways-Crystal Cargo Desmond Stephen Vertannes and Managing Director of GSA-Cargo Ltd.-GSSA Etihad Crystal Cargo Helaluddin Akbar also spoke on the occasion.

Later, awards were handed over to the passenger sales and cargo sales agents of the Etihad Airways in Bangladesh on the basis of their performance.

Khalfan Battan Ali Al-Mansouri, Ambassador of the UAE in Bangladesh was also present at the event.

Etihad Airways, the national carrier of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) started its operation in November 2003.

FE (http://www.thefinancialexpress-bd.info/search_index.php?page=detail_news&news_id=34538)

shatilislam

May 24th, 2008, 01:39 AM

http://nation.ittefaq.com/issues/2008/05/24/news0535.htm

Seems they have shut down their domestic operation for those 4 days a week when they will operate flight to Bangkok. Otherwise how they will manage dac-bkk, dac-cgp and dac-zyl with only one aircraft?

akbar1

May 24th, 2008, 05:20 AM

does anyone know of any further development of the private airlines mainly United and RBA?

sas

May 24th, 2008, 08:15 AM

They really have one plane? You got to be kidding me...

AeroGeeK

May 24th, 2008, 09:01 AM

They really have one plane? You got to be kidding me...

Operating one classic is painful enough. They were supposed to get another one a few months ago. Who knows where that one is now?

iasif

May 24th, 2008, 09:30 AM

3. The Saudi 743 is still at Zia? How long do they take to repair a plane?

4. 5x 747 classics? 1x 742 BG, 1x 743 Z5, 1x 743 SV [undamaged], 1x 743 SV [damaged] & who's the last one?

The damages Saudi (actuakky Air Atlanta Icelandic) B747-300 will take a while to get back into the skies. The engine fire caused damage to the wing fairing, fixing which is a time consuming job!

You were spot on with the 4 guesses for the Classic 747s at ZIA. The 5th was the silver one...Cathay Cargo! :)

On a different bur relevant note one small query… there are about 11,000 B737/A320/MD80-90 family series aircraft flying for commercial services with significant number of these are approaching toward their graveyard fast. Can Boeing and Airbus keep up pace of supply considering growth of demand for such aircraft in the next 3-5 years time? If the answer is negative, what will happen to the gap?

As more mid/long-haul point-to-point services will be initiated, loads will be taken off on spoke-to-hub routes, thereby reducing substantial demand for the range/capacity offered by B737/A320/MD-80 series airplanes. Regional jets (CRJ/ERJ/MRJ/SSJ blah blah) will also together comprise a substantial fleet size worldwide that was for the 737s/A320s/MD-80s in the past.

So, which address should I be sending my invoice to, Sir? :)

iasif

May 24th, 2008, 09:48 AM

does anyone know of any further development of the private airlines mainly United and RBA?

I just had my first flight on RBA yesterday to Sylhet. The flight (4A 401) from DAC was perfect, and I complimented them for that, but perhaps a bit too early as they cancelled their ZYL-DAC flight today out of nowhere (the flight in which I was supposed to return on). I just received a call at 9am that their ZYL-DAC flight for the day (4A 402) scheduled to depart ZYL at 1210 was cancelled, and they had no alternatives to offer but simple apologies! As pissed as I was, I hung up the phone and called up Biman to find out their schedule and indeed they had a flight that was scheduled to depart ZYL at 1135. I rushed my arse out of the hotel to the Biman office, got my tickets, and rushed out to the airport to check-in at 1110. The flight departed on time and arrived at 1210 at DAC.

Once I had my tickets bought from BG at ZYL, I called the RBA guy to ask about my refund, to which he said I should collect it either from their airport office at ZIA or their office in Gulshan. Upon arrival at DAC, I went to their airport office to be told that they didn't have enough cash around there to refund for the 4 tickets, and that I'd have to head for Gulshan to get my money back, which is what I'm yet to do.

I've been informed that a meeting was held among the MD/CEO's of the private airlines about a week back where they had decided to raise their fares (as announced already) and had rationalized domestic routes and frequencies among themselves. The routes/frequency rationalization came effective from today, as a result of which United and RBA cancelled their flights to/from Sylhet today, while Z5 is operating a flight later in the day. While the mutual agreement among the private carriers is acceptable, what is not is how they simply cancelled their flights for which passengers had confirmed booking, without having any provision of alternatives to offer to them.

If the private carriers are taking the customers for granted, and are daring to take arbitrary decisions without being least concerned about the passengers' convenience, they'll soon find themselves "slapped out of business".

shatilislam

May 24th, 2008, 09:55 AM

They really have one plane? You got to be kidding me...

In fact they are commencing the international service with one 737-200, which they are using for the domestic service also. They are telling for last few months that another 737-200 will join the fleet, but that has not come into reality so far. Couple of months ago they have also declared that they were planning to buy 6 new generation aircrafts from AIRBUS. I haven't heard of any progress on that also.

The discussion in this forum abt 2 L-1011 seen in ZIA.....are those brought by Best Air? i COULD not understand clearly from the discussion.....can anybody explain?

shatilislam

May 24th, 2008, 10:06 AM

I've been informed that a meeting was held among the MD/CEO's of the private airlines about a week back where they had decided to raise their fares (as announced already) and had rationalized domestic routes and frequencies among themselves. The routes/frequency rationalization came effective from today, as a result of which United and RBA cancelled their flights to/from Sylhet today, while Z5 is operating a flight later in the day. While the mutual agreement among the private carriers is acceptable, what is not is how they simply cancelled their flights for which passengers had confirmed booking, without having any provision of alternatives to offer to them.

Dear Imran,

what type of rationalization they are trying to implement among themselves? Do you think it would be effective for them to reduce their losses in domestic sector?

AeroGeeK

May 24th, 2008, 01:17 PM

The discussion in this forum abt 2 L-1011 seen in ZIA.....are those brought by Best Air? i COULD not understand clearly from the discussion.....can anybody explain?

A member of this forum was giving numerous hints to identify the buyer of L-1011's. But all the hints went over my head. I am waiting for someone to decipher those secret messages.

iasif

May 24th, 2008, 02:13 PM

The discussion in this forum abt 2 L-1011 seen in ZIA.....are those brought by Best Air? i COULD not understand clearly from the discussion.....can anybody explain?

The L-1011 I had seen at ZIA left that very same day, so that couldn't be one of the 2 that has been talked about here. And like you, and probably many others, I also don't know which operator the 2x L-1011 could be belonging to despite the generous hints offered by skystar320.

AeroGeeK

May 24th, 2008, 02:19 PM

You were spot on with the 4 guesses for the Classic 747s at ZIA. The 5th was the silver one...Cathay Cargo!

I was almost sure that the last classic was CX because AF operates B747-400BCF/ERF to DAC.:)

iasif

May 24th, 2008, 02:22 PM

Dear Imran,

what type of rationalization they are trying to implement among themselves? Do you think it would be effective for them to reduce their losses in domestic sector?

They have allocated frequencies among themselves under the agreement. For example in the DAC-CGP-DAC route, Best Air would be operating 1x flight daily, United 2x, RBA 1x, and GMG 2x...to ZYL GMG would operate 3x MD-82 flights/week on the days BA flies to DAC to carry the interline pax...RBA probably will fly 3x/week to ZYL...and such aimilar arrangements. While this move will probably take off the excess capacity in each route on a daily basis, it would also mean that the average daily utilization of these planes will go down.

Like I had said earlier, the total capacity available for the domestic market is much greater than the total prevailing demand (by seat count), and whichever way they arrange it among themselves, I still can't see how they will be making money at the end of the day.

iasif

May 24th, 2008, 02:28 PM

Wouldn't that become a show stopper for GMG?

Last I heard GMG was trying to get boxed meals from hotels/restaurants to manage the situation and keep the flights going, but I'm not sure how well that'd work.

It also owes a huge sum of money payable to CAAB and BPC, and its a matter of time before they get at Z5 in a strict manner, unless of course Z5 manages to pay up!

From that newspaper report, I couldn't understand how the GMG spokesperson denied having defaulted payment with the ICH! I have a copy of the very email with me, from which I had extracted the part posted in the original thread.

iasif

May 24th, 2008, 02:31 PM

I was almost sure that the last classic was CX because AF operates B747-400BCF/ERF to DAC.:)

AF doesn't have any scheduled operations to DAC. They were here the last time to bring back the much-talked-about bunch of artifacts that were sent to France.

TIslam

May 24th, 2008, 03:22 PM

AF doesn't have any scheduled operations to DAC. They were here the last time to bring back the much-talked-about bunch of artifacts that were sent to France.

Wait a minute. I read while back that AF started a scheduled freight service to DAC?

TIslam

May 24th, 2008, 03:53 PM

^^
I just checked AF-KLM Cargo website. It shows a CDG-DAC scheduled service every Thursday.

shatilislam

May 24th, 2008, 07:22 PM

AF doesn't have any scheduled operations to DAC. They were here the last time to bring back the much-talked-about bunch of artifacts that were sent to France.

But the Air France site says it has a weekly cargo flight to Dhaka via Delhi. In fact I heard that they operate a weekly cargo flight. It seems that they have a local agent also in Dhaka. But I am not sure whether they are continuing that operation after the artifact episode.

amar11372

May 24th, 2008, 08:25 PM

GMG seeks Tk50cr loan to meet working capital needs
Sohel Parvez

http://www.thedailystar.net/photo/2008/05/25/2008-05-25__b04.jpg
An aircraft of GMG Airlines waits on the runway at Zia International Airport. The private carrier has signed a memorandum of understanding with a financial institution to receive Tk 50 crore loan to meet its working capital requirement.

GMG Airlines, the country's biggest private carrier, has signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with a financial institution to receive as much as Tk 50 crore to meet its working capital requirement.

“We are seeking the working capital to bridge the gap between the inflow and outflow of cash. We are hopeful to get the loan by the end of June this year,” Abdus Sattar, chairman of GMG Airlines, said yesterday.

The GMG signed the MoU on May 22 with IIDFC (Industrial and Infrastructure Development Finance Company Limited) to get the money, he said.

Under the MoU, the IIDFC is expected to arrange the working capital for the airline through syndication with other banks and financial institutions, according to a senior official of the IIDFC.

"Since our business is expanding we need more working capital to fuel our growth," Sattar said.

Sattar also said the carrier is seeking working capital after it started operations on Dhaka-Dubai route in early February this year with its Boeing 747-300.

The GMG chairman said the carrier has yet to find the route profitable due mainly to poor number of passengers on the return flights from Dubai to Dhaka. "We are going in full capacity but receiving poor number of passengers in the return flights,” he said.

The carrier, operating daily flights on the Dhaka-Dubai-Dhaka route, has received some 169 passengers on an average on its return flights to Dhaka. Sattar said.

'Unless we receive some 300-350 passengers in a return flight, it is difficult for us to reach a break-even level on the route,” he said.

The private carrier, according to its chairman, has to spend between Tk 1.5 crore-Tk 2 crore on meeting its daily expenses.

Meeting of regular expenses has also become quite difficult for the airline due mainly to delay in the encashment of the proceeds from the ticket selling under a system called 'Billing and Settlement Plan (BSP).

The BSP is a system designed to facilitate the settlement operations for airlines and agents under IATA (International Air Transport Association).

“We have to wait some 30-45 days for encashment of the money from sold tickets,” he said.

The 10-year old carrier, with seven aircraft in its fleet, is flying to various international destinations such as Kolkata, Delhi, Katmandu, Bangkok and Kuala Lumpur and Dubai now.

The airline, which wanted to make a turnover of Tk 1350 crore in 2008, records the average monthly turnover at Tk 50-60 crore now. Its average monthly turnover was about Tk 25 crore in 2007.

sohel@thedailystar.net

iasif

May 24th, 2008, 08:54 PM

TIslam

May 25th, 2008, 01:40 AM

GMG seeks Tk50cr loan to meet working capital needs

'Unless we receive some 300-350 passengers in a return flight, it is difficult for us to reach a break-even level on the route,” he said.

No s--t Sherlock! Our resident expert Imran, had already forecast that! Did GMG do its homework i.e. market research? Dreaming about something and turning it into reality is often mutually exclusive. Time to trade-in that 747 for a 737 and rationalize capacity.

amar11372

May 25th, 2008, 03:41 AM

No s--t Sherlock! Our resident expert Imran, had already forecast that! Did GMG do its homework i.e. market research? Dreaming about something and turning it into reality is often mutually exclusive. Time to trade-in that 747 for a 737 and rationalize capacity.

I kinda feel sorry for GMG, they had all the hopes that the Dubai-Dhaka route would turn their company into a profitable one. They should have not put all their eggs in one basket. :ohno:

iasif

May 25th, 2008, 05:45 AM

I kinda feel sorry for GMG, they had all the hopes that the Dubai-Dhaka route would turn their company into a profitable one. They should have not put all their eggs in one basket. :ohno:

Almost the whole growth plan of GMG had lately been based on the hopes of Biman's demise, which although looked imminent at a point of time, didn't quite happen!

GMG started its DXB flight from 1st February, and enjoyed load factors to their comfort till the end of March. Biman received its B747 on 12th March and put it into service from the 17th, which added capacity to its DAC-DXB-DAC route (by means of freeing up schedules off the DC-10s/A310s). That led to GMG losing load factors simply because of 2 reasons: (i) the Bangladeshi labour force still perceives Biman as the true 'deshi' airline, and therefore primarily attempts to buy a ticket from it when they're travelling; and (ii) Biman's sales infrastructure is still much stronger than GMG's in the sense that a lot of tickets bought by these labourers are sold directly off the airline's own counter offices, and not necessarily through GDS. Added to that is the fact that Biman now offers a far lower fare on the route than GMG, which has clearly handed out to GMG the wrong end of the stick!

iasif

May 25th, 2008, 06:20 AM

Time to trade-in that 747 for a 737 and rationalize capacity.

I'm afraid GMG will be stuck with that 747 for a while. Air Atlanta Icelandic doesn't have any other type of aircraft in pax configuration available for leasing at the moment. When they took the 747-300 (543 pax config in 2-class) for something around USD 5,900/block hour compared to what Biman paid for it during Hajj (close to USD 10,000/block hour), they thought they had a great bargain, which it actually was until Biman found its 747-200 from Kabo (542 pax config in all economy) for around USD 5,300/block hour.

Sure the Kabo 747-200 is older than the B747-300, but even to the average traveller (let alone the labourers) the age of the 2 aircraft will have no significant dictinction. And then there's the fact that Air Atlanta Icelandic has been having trouble maintaining their P&W 747s well enough (something I had been saying for a while), which is made evident by the fact that their 747-300 with GMG had more technical issues in the past months than the older 747-200 from Kabo leased to Biman.

In terms of per-seat/mile cost, the Kabo 747-200 is also a tad bit more economical than the 747-300 because Biman is paying over USD 600 less per block hour for the 542 seater than what GMG is paying for its 543 seater. The cargo payload, max fuel capacity and MTOW for the 747-200 and -300 are identical, which means that all other things being equal, Biman is having to pay over USD 600 less at the cost of having one fewer seat.

AeroGeeK

May 25th, 2008, 09:52 AM

TIslam

May 25th, 2008, 03:37 PM

I'm afraid GMG will be stuck with that 747 for a while. Air Atlanta Icelandic doesn't have any other type of aircraft in pax configuration available for leasing at the moment. When they took the 747-300 (543 pax config in 2-class) for something around USD 5,900/block hour compared to what Biman paid for it during Hajj (close to USD 10,000/block hour), they thought they had a great bargain, which it actually was until Biman found its 747-200 from Kabo (542 pax config in all economy) for around USD 5,300/block hour.

Sure the Kabo 747-200 is older than the B747-300, but even to the average traveller (let alone the labourers) the age of the 2 aircraft will have no significant dictinction. And then there's the fact that Air Atlanta Icelandic has been having trouble maintaining their P&W 747s well enough (something I had been saying for a while), which is made evident by the fact that their 747-300 with GMG had more technical issues in the past months than the older 747-200 from Kabo leased to Biman.

In terms of per-seat/mile cost, the Kabo 747-200 is also a tad bit more economical than the 747-300 because Biman is paying over USD 600 less per block hour for the 542 seater than what GMG is paying for its 543 seater. The cargo payload, max fuel capacity and MTOW for the 747-200 and -300 are identical, which means that all other things being equal, Biman is having to pay over USD 600 less at the cost of having one fewer seat.

Did GMG sign any long term contract for which they would be beholden to Air Atlanta Icelandic? If the load factor isn't there, wouldn't it be prudent to use smaller equipment that would minimize the losses if not eliminate, altogether?

Having gained a little insight from all your (Imran) articles and the information that you've shared here, I feel that GMG has no business running an airline (business) as they appear to be operating from the seat of their pants. Great for a bush pilot, not so for a business with profit motive. You cannot swim with the sharks unless you're a shark yourself. If the rest of the new comers are just as bad as GMG, well then, all I can say is good luck and goodbye. Seems like to me that Biman is the only airline that is going to survive, in the long run. So, if Mr. Sattar wishes to own an airline so badly, perhaps he could become a majority shareholder of Biman when the government finally puts it through privatization, but he should leave the operations in the hands professionals.

AeroGeeK

May 25th, 2008, 04:14 PM

B743 was a bad choice. I think a B757-200/300 or another B738 would have been perfect considering that they only get 160-170 pax on DXB-DAC flight. With smaller equipment they would have been unable to carry 543 pax on DAC-DXB flight but still the overall situation could be better. They should have thought that BG can also lease a B747 just like they did.

iasif

May 25th, 2008, 07:07 PM

01. On board RBA flight 4A 401 on 23rd May, 2008 (Dash-8-100; S2-AEL) with just 10 pax on the flight. The cabin was neat and clean indeed!
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04424.jpg

02. Descending to Sylhet after about 15 mins of cruising.
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04428.jpg

03. Landing gear on its way down, as we get set on the approach.
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04434.jpg

04. Gear locked as we pass over that bridge down there.
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04441.jpg

05. At the ramp of Sylhet airport; my son taking a look back at the bird! :)
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04447.jpg

06. A full load of pax on their way up into the vintage RJ (24th May, 2008; Flight BG 604; S2-ADY).
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04470.jpg

07. Leaving the new terminal under construction behind. The current state of the airport and the work in progress was disappointing in my opinion!
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04473.jpg

08. That's the view of the entire terminal from inside the F-28. Pardon the blurred image, the windows on this bird have almost become opaque over all these years!
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04476.jpg

09. Rotate!
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04479.jpg

10. Off Runway 29, blasting past the brickfields.
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04481.jpg

11. FL140 and crusing through the cotton-clouds!
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04497.jpg

12. Cabin-shot from row 6. That overhead bin doesn't do its job well anymore, and I guess you can't blame it!
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04500.jpg

13. Flaring on on Rwy14 at ZIA...
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04505.jpg

14. Touchdown and everything in action to decelerate the plane: brakes, airbrakes, spoilers!
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04509.jpg

15. This was fun! As soon as we touched down, the cockpit door swung open with the thud of the aircraft onto the ground, and the entire cabin burst into a laughter!
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04512.jpg

16. That 747 has been sitting out there more than what its operator would like!
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04520.jpg

17. Its a very poor quality pic, owing to the state of the windows of the F-28 but can anyone identify that aircraft in blue? Its like an HS-748 but with 4 props and a longer fuselage! Could it be one of the 2 aircraft shatilislam was speaking about the other day belonging to 'Easy Fly'?
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04527.jpg

18. We're out of our plane, and it seems like the cockpit crew is letting some air in for themselves!
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04529.jpg

19. The Thai A330 landed behind us and is seen vacating the runway as the BAF C-130 is seen ready for another day long training.
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04530.jpg

20. Didn't think this shot would turn out to be as good as it did when I took the photo. The mean-n-ugly 747-200 Biman is using on its high-density flights to the Middle-East.
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04533.jpg

21. The Thai A330 again (HS-TEH) seen taxiing to its gate. She could use a bath, don't you think?
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04536.jpg

TIslam

May 25th, 2008, 07:24 PM

Just as we were getting hungry for some new pictures! Thanks Imran, nice job. Too bad for those F28 windows.

As ZIA has expanded considerably, structurally, and got busier, don't you think they need a control tower on a high column? The present one appears rather inadequate.

iasif

May 25th, 2008, 08:06 PM

GMG's B743 is having technical problems often. Then why is Biman's B742 not having problems? It's older & is supposed to be more prone to problems. B743's upper-deck is stretched than the B742's. Then why does it have only 1 seat more than the B742? Does the B742 have different seating configuration than the standard 3-4-3?

Age isn't the single-most important factor for any aircraft's airworthiness, its the maintenance standards that are maintained. Air Atlanta Icelandic has generally been known to maintain decent mx standards, with the exception of the P&W-powered 747s which they have acquired only recently (from Corsair, Travelcitydirect, etc.). I don't know where Kabo gets its mx done from, but they have a handful of these 747-200s which hasn't so far reported nearly as many problems as AAI's P&W B747s! And GMG isn't the only sufferer...ask SV!

As for the configs, as far as I know both 747s are configured in a 2-class layout but the layout on the Kabo 747 is much "tighter". A fellow airliners.net member took a lot of time to render this seating layout of the Kabo 747:
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/Biman-747.jpg

Did GMG sign any long term contract for which they would be beholden to Air Atlanta Icelandic? If the load factor isn't there, wouldn't it be prudent to use smaller equipment that would minimize the losses if not eliminate, altogether?

Yeah, they definitely had to guarantee a minimum number of block hours to use every month over the whole lease period. Although I don't know exactly how many hours, I'm quite certain it isn't any less than 200 hours/month over the initial lease period of 1 year, which may seem quite difficult for Z5 now that they're down to operating only 3x flights/week to DXB. Even if they don't make actual use of the minimum guaranteed block hours, they'll have to pay for them to AAI at about USD 5,900/hour x 2400 = USD 14.16 million (assuming minimum block hour guarantee of just 200 hrs/month).

B743 was a bad choice. I think a B757-200/300 or another B738 would have been perfect considering that they only get 160-170 pax on DXB-DAC flight. With smaller equipment they would have been unable to carry 543 pax on DAC-DXB flight but still the overall situation could be better. They should have thought that BG can also lease a B747 just like they did.

Average pax load on the return DXB-DAC leg has been way under even 100! The B737-800 or the B757 may have been a far better choice, but Air Atlanta Icelandic doesn't have any to offer and Z5 thought it'd be smart to pick up the B747 just after its lease to Biman had expired after Hajj.

In my opinion, Z5 made two mistakes on equipment choice. The first was the MD-82, which despite being a very fine aircraft with the right capacity, is an extremely inefficient aircraft as far as fuel consumption is concerned. With rising fuel prices, these were meant to become very difficult to operate for Z5 as they don't have quite an expansive operations network yet. The B747, of course, is as big a problem for Z5 as the plane itself! Both the MD-82 and the B747-300 has led to accruing overdue fuel bills with BPC, and that could be the next thing on the line that could be cut off to Z5!

iasif

May 25th, 2008, 08:16 PM

As ZIA has expanded considerably, structurally, and got busier, don't you think they need a control tower on a high column? The present one appears rather inadequate.

What do you do with a high tower and no useful equipment? If you have the right tools in hand, you can actually operate the ATC from beneath the ground! ;)

ZIA's ATC needs a Primary Surveillance Radar (PSR), a Monopulse Secondary Surveillance Radar (MSSR), and a modular ATC system (Enroute, Terminal, Approach, Surface). Once these are in place, the need for a new tower can be evaluated, which I think may not be necessary as the current tower still allows for just enough visual range across the airport area.

amar11372

May 25th, 2008, 08:54 PM

Competition hardens on prestigious Dhaka-Bangkok route
Best Air goes beyond border
Star Business Report

Competition has intensified on the Dhaka-Bangkok route as another local private airline Best Air commenced its international operation yesterday by launching its first international flight on the route.

“It's a great feeling. We are now taking the Bangladesh's flag beyond the border. We will attract passengers through our excellent services such as on-time departure,” said M Haider Uzzaman, chairman of Best Air, prior to the launching of its global operation.

Civil Aviation and Tourism Secretary Syed Mohammad Zobaer inaugurated the flight at the Zia International Airport (ZIA).

Best Air , majority stakes of which is controlled by Kuwait based Aqeeq Aviation Holding, is the third local airline to fly on the international route. The airline has been operating on the domestic routes with its single Boeing 737-200 for five months.

The airline however said that it would strengthen its fleet by adding two more Boeing-737-200 aircraft in June this year before it starts flying to new international destinations such as Kolkata, Chennai and Kuala Lumpur in July.

Analysts however said the new entrant would face tough competition on the Dhaka-Bangkok route, as the number of passengers on point-to-point basis has not increased, rather remained stable in the last couple of months.

The airline will have to compete with the four existing carriers namely Thai Airways, Biman Bangladesh Airlines, GMG Airlines and DRUK Air with Thai Airways receiving the bulk of the passengers.

“The market will be very much competitive,” said aviation industry analyst Imran Asif.

The Best Air, however, hoped to make its room through the excellence of its services such as 'on-time departure.'

According to the Best Air, it would operate four flights a week on the Dhaka-Bangkok-Dhaka route. The carrier will charge $ 324 per passenger as fare, $114 lower than that of the market leader Thai Airways, he said.

Industry operators said Bangladeshi health service seekers and businessmen are the main passengers on the Dhaka to Bangkok route and rate of passenger growth on point-to-point basis on the route has remained almost unchanged in the last couple of years. At present about 300 passengers travel on the route every day on average.

Abdus Sattar, chairman of GMG Airlines, said the number of passengers on point-to-point basis has not increased and entry of the new carrier might cost other carriers their existing market shares.

“The Thai Airways is getting more passengers because it offers onward flight connections,” he said, adding, “Efforts are needed to expand the market.”

Haider however, said the Best Air would be able to attract passengers as it is planning to go for some 30 interline agreements with other carriers that fly from Bangkok and beyond.

http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=38203

amar11372

May 25th, 2008, 09:00 PM

Air Arabia first budget airline to fly to Dhaka

FE Report

Air Arabia announced Sunday it would launch its flights to Dhaka on June 8, making it the first budget airlines to fly to the Bangladeshi capital, the carrier said.

The first and largest low-cost carrier in the Middle East and North Africa said it would operate 162-seater Airbus A-320 aircraft four times a week between Dhaka and Air Arabia's hub in Sharjah.

Dhaka marks Air Arabia's second destination in Bangladesh, the other being Chittagong, which was introduced June last year. It would be the carrier's 17th flights to South Asia and 40th in the world.

http://www.thefinancialexpress-bd.info/search_index.php?page=detail_news&news_id=34704

AeroGeeK

May 25th, 2008, 09:09 PM

At the ramp of Sylhet airport; my son taking a look back at the bird!

Don't look back son! It's nothing compared to a B77W!

A full load of pax on their way up into the vintage RJ (24th May, 2008; Flight BG 604; S2-ADY).

Only 10 people went to ZYL & a full load of pax came back! Why is that?

which may seem quite difficult for Z5 now that they're down to operating only 3x flights/week to DXB.

So the poor B743 remains idle for 4 days a week & fly for a total of around 30 hours during the remaining 3 days?:nuts:

iasif

May 25th, 2008, 09:19 PM

Only 10 people went to ZYL & a full load of pax came back! Why is that?

So the poor B743 remains idle for 4 days a week & fly for a total of around 30 hours during the remaining 3 days?:nuts:

I think more than 70 of the 80-odd pax on the BG flight back to DAC were connecting for the BG flight to LHR.

And yes, GMG's 747 is currently heavily under utilized...if they've guaranteed 200 block hours/month, they're at least 70 hours short every month!

clearsky

May 25th, 2008, 10:28 PM

^^ GMG is citing poor load factor on DXB-DAC route. They are saying that DAC-DXB route is fetching expected load but not the return flight. That's why are not able to break even. They are currently trying to secure 50 crorer loan from private banks to tackle their losses.

GMG is hardly achieving 50% of their forecasted growth of 1300+ crore business in '08.

shatilislam

May 26th, 2008, 12:14 AM

[QUOTE=iasif;21074999] Gear locked as we pass over that bridge down there.
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04441.jpg[/UNQUOTE]

If there were 10 pax in a 37 seater, the load factor is little more than 25%. Now if it is the regular scnario, I feel worried about the fate of this new airline.

[QUOTE=iasif;21074999] 05. At the ramp of Sylhet airport; my son taking a look back at the bird! :)
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04447.jpg[/UNQUOTE]

The livery is beautiful.

[QUOTE=iasif;21074999] 06. A full load of pax on their way up into the vintage RJ (24th May, 2008; Flight BG 604; S2-ADY).
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04470.jpg[/UNQUOTE]

I feel happy that the F-28 is actually operating flight. Few days ago all of them were grounded due to maintenance.

[QUOTE=iasif;21074999] 17. Its a very poor quality pic, owing to the state of the windows of the F-28 but can anyone identify that aircraft in blue? Its like an HS-748 but with 4 props and a longer fuselage! Could it be one of the 2 aircraft shatilislam was speaking about the other day belonging to 'Easy Fly'?
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04527.jpg[/UNQUOTE]

No I don't think this is the HS-748 of EASY FLY. In fact they brought 1 HS-748, not 2.

[QUOTE=iasif;21074999] 18. We're out of our plane, and it seems like the cockpit crew is letting some air in for themselves!
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04529.jpg[/UNQUOTE]

They may need some breath after running this vintage.

[QUOTE=iasif;21074999] 19. The Thai A330 landed behind us and is seen vacating the runway as the BAF C-130 is seen ready for another day long training.
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04530.jpg[/UNQUOTE]

I love this C-130. Such a beautiful aircraft.

[QUOTE=iasif;21074999] 20. Didn't think this shot would turn out to be as good as it did when I took the photo. The mean-n-ugly 747-200 Biman is using on its high-density flights to the Middle-East.
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/DSC04533.jpg[/UNQUOTE]

Ugly but effective, comparing to the 743 of GMG.

Finally, thanx Imran a lot for this beautiful set of photo.

clearsky

May 26th, 2008, 12:34 AM

^^ Looks like that 743 has NWA livery. May be it used to belong to NWA some years ago.

Moin

May 26th, 2008, 01:01 AM

Dubai: Sharjah-based budget carrier Air Arabia will begin service to Dhaka, Bangladesh, from June 8, the airline said in a statement.

........Air Arabia will fly to Dhaka on Mondays, Wed-nesdays, Fridays and Sundays, departing Sharjah at 12.35pm and arriving at Dhaka at 6.55pm.

Return flights will depart Dhaka at 7.40pm and arrive at 10.45pm. It is Air Arabia's 40th destination worldwide and the 17th destination in South Asia.

http://www.gulfnews.com/business/Aviation/10216017.html

iasif

May 26th, 2008, 05:30 AM

^^ Looks like that 743 has NWA livery. May be it used to belong to NWA some years ago.

This 747-200 (MSN 23547; LN 642) was delivered by Boeing to Northwest (N636US) in 1986 and flew for the airline till 2003 before getting stored at Mojave, CA. It was taken up by Kabo in 2007 and used on Hajj flights by an Iranian airline before Biman took it up in March 2008.

sas

May 26th, 2008, 06:03 AM

Looks like it's in Northwest colors!

manbil777

May 26th, 2008, 09:24 AM

but can anyone identify that aircraft in blue

Ah -- nothing but a garden variety Soviet Ilyushin IL-18, on which many a student left from Tejgaon to study in Moscow in the 70's. These days most of these turboprops have been turned into cargoliners. The example in Dhaka seen here may be a cargo aircraft as well.

Here (http://www.planepictures.net/show.php?id=727811) is a picture for comparison.

AeroGeeK

May 26th, 2008, 12:25 PM

How many pax are BG getting on that 742 in DXB-DAC flight? If they too are getting less than 100 then how is BG affording the jumbo?
Why isn't GMG using the 743 on DAC-KUL flight?

QGR

May 26th, 2008, 06:25 PM

Sorry for duplication.

QGR

May 26th, 2008, 06:31 PM

Ah -- nothing but a garden variety Soviet Ilyushin IL-18, on which many a student left from Tejgaon to study in Moscow in the 70's. These days most of these turboprops have been turned into cargoliners. The example in Dhaka seen here may be a cargo aircraft as well.

Here (http://www.planepictures.net/show.php?id=727811) is a picture for comparison.

An IL-18 then!!! Are they hiring Indiana Jones for finding these antic pieces?

Any trace of those L-1011s tristars? Apparently, the existing operators have no idea re these aircrafts. I saw some generous hints being given in this forum, but let me admit, like many other, I haven’t been able to make anything out of those.

QGR

May 26th, 2008, 07:56 PM

iasif

May 26th, 2008, 08:38 PM

How many pax are BG getting on that 742 in DXB-DAC flight? If they too are getting less than 100 then how is BG affording the jumbo?
Why isn't GMG using the 743 on DAC-KUL flight?

BG's recent inbound traffic load from DXB is equally dismal as that of Z5's, but BG extends the DXB flight to JED/RUH and sometimes even KHI and pick up pax from those points to improve the load factor and consequently the revenues from the flight. This probably keeps the DAC-DXB flight for BG just out of being in the red.

DAC-KUL is also a one-way traffic route which I think is currently served with adequate daily capacity.

iasif

May 26th, 2008, 08:46 PM

Once again BG is in media for wrong reason...

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080526/jsp/calcutta/story_9318963.jsp

In short, a British subject, arrived by a BG flight to NSCB International Airport in Kolkata, became seriously ill in the immigration hall and eventually fainted. Our highly efficient BG officials and officials of Airport Authority of India (AAI) engaged each other over the responsibility of the poor chap and after one hour (without any action), when immigration officers forced the AAI to call for an ambulance, both BG and AAI shown a real competitive spirit by denying to carry the stretcher even!!!!

The whole thing seems real ugly and uncivilized to me. Any thought anyone?

There are some things that you do by the book. And then there are some things that you do out of the sense of being responsible, which often may be something the book doesn't say. In this case, had the officials (of both BG and AAI) considered the man's life more important than what their god-damned books said, they would've collaborated to ensure that appropriate paramedic support given to the man at the soonest possible time.

Its through instances like these that we diminish our human qualities, and its such a shame!

I think the deputy commissioner of security control was absolutely right.

AeroGeeK

May 26th, 2008, 09:07 PM

I thought all of BG's LHR flights were routed through DXB.

TIslam

May 26th, 2008, 09:09 PM

There are some things that you do by the book. And then there are some things that you do out of the sense of being responsible, which often may be something the book doesn't say. In this case, had the officials (of both BG and AAI) considered the man's life more important than what their god-damned books said, they would've collaborated to ensure that appropriate paramedic support given to the man at the soonest possible time.

Its through instances like these that we diminish our human qualities, and its such a shame!

I think the deputy commissioner of security control was absolutely right.

Therein lies the difference between first world and third world countries. While countries like the US may be the devil according to many, human life is given the only importance in times of emergencies. If the same thing was to happen here, a paramedic team would have appeared in a flash, and the patient would have been transported to the nearest ER, the person's legal/immigration status, notwithstanding.

There is no such thing as "by the book", when a human life is in danger. This event ought to give a black eye to all (not just Biman). :bash:

TIslam

May 26th, 2008, 09:19 PM

BG's recent inbound traffic load from DXB is equally dismal as that of Z5's, but BG extends the DXB flight to JED/RUH and sometimes even KHI and pick up pax from those points to improve the load factor and consequently the revenues from the flight. This probably keeps the DAC-DXB flight for BG just out of being in the red.

DAC-KUL is also a one-way traffic route which I think is currently served with adequate daily capacity.

Why doesn't Z5 do the same thing? Aren't they supposed to begin service to other ME cities?

AeroGeeK

May 26th, 2008, 09:27 PM

GMG haven't got permission to fly to Saudi Arabia yet.

shatilislam

May 26th, 2008, 11:11 PM

I thought all of BG's LHR flights were routed through DXB.

Possibly he was coming from LHR to Calcutta through Dhaka. Many European passengers do so due to lower price of BG. I remember once I took the Orly-DAC BG flight couple of years ago. to my surprize, the whole DC-10 was full! Most of the passengers were in a group of french nuns and associates who were travelling to calcutta Mother Terreca place via dhaka. One of them was sitting beside me and informed me that they were taking BG as the lowest price option.

Regarding the incident, I only would like to say that the importance of human life is not understood by the people of our region. This is one of the few things we must learn from the westerners. The incident was pathetic, and the people on the ground should be accountable for it.

TIslam

May 26th, 2008, 11:28 PM

^^
Imagine, on the other hand, what a PR coup it would have been, if Biman staff rushed its passenger to a hospital.

If the people who run Biman (as a collective) aren't dim witted, I don't know who is (are).

iasif

May 27th, 2008, 05:16 AM

Why doesn't Z5 do the same thing? Aren't they supposed to begin service to other ME cities?

GMG haven't got permission to fly to Saudi Arabia yet.

GMG is/will probably be allowed to fly to other countries in the ME except KSA, in which case it will have to do 2-3 stops on the return flight from DXB in order to accumulate 150-200 odd pax. This will entail a crew scheduling difficulty which will have to be addressed through bringing in additional crew sets which will require something that's illusive to GMG now - $$$!

Besides, that 747 itself is proving to be far from being dependable. Reportedly, their flight to DXB went technical day before yesterday after arrival at DXB. They had over a hundred pax confirmed on the return flight and guess who was going to bring them back...BG (possibly on their way back from JED)!

TIslam

May 27th, 2008, 05:36 AM

GMG is/will probably be allowed to fly to other countries in the ME except KSA, in which case it will have to do 2-3 stops on the return flight from DXB in order to accumulate 150-200 odd pax. This will entail a crew scheduling difficulty which will have to be addressed through bringing in additional crew sets which will require something that's illusive to GMG now - $$$!

Besides, that 747 itself is proving to be far from being dependable. Reportedly, their flight to DXB went technical day before yesterday after arrival at DXB. They had over a hundred pax confirmed on the return flight and guess who was going to bring them back...BG (possibly on their way back from JED)!

I don't see that borrowed "working capital" (if it comes trhough) helping GMG much. I wonder whether the airline is on "life support", already.

iasif

May 27th, 2008, 06:19 AM

I don't see that borrowed "working capital" (if it comes trhough) helping GMG much. I wonder whether the airline is on "life support", already.

I'll be very, very surprised if they actually get the money from IIDFC. As a creditor, they might not be looking at an airline with enough potential to be able to repay the loan. More so because of the fact that lately the airline hasn't demonstrated much professionalism in its growth and expansion planning.

iasif

May 27th, 2008, 10:33 AM

Reportedly, their flight to DXB went technical day before yesterday after arrival at DXB. They had over a hundred pax confirmed on the return flight and guess who was going to bring them back...BG (possibly on their way back from JED)!

I was a bit wrong on that info! The GMG 747 didn't even leave Dhaka (in the past 3 days) and BG brought back GMG's 100+ pax from DXB on its way back from JED.

The latest is that BG has been requested by Z5 to carry some 2,760 outbound pax to DXB, scheduled to travel in the coming weeks, who has booked on Z5 already!

Z5 is reportedly looking to get rid of its 'Jumbo' problem asap.

AeroGeeK

May 27th, 2008, 11:42 AM

A jumbo mishap for Z5! Everything they wanted in the past few months have gone horribly wrong. No second jumbo, no 767's, no permission to fly to KSA, no good result from the existing jumbo, no nothing!

shatilislam

May 27th, 2008, 06:37 PM

I was a bit wrong on that info! The GMG 747 didn't even leave Dhaka (in the past 3 days) and BG brought back GMG's 100+ pax from DXB on its way back from JED.

The latest is that BG has been requested by Z5 to carry some 2,760 outbound pax to DXB, scheduled to travel in the coming weeks, who has booked on Z5 already!

Z5 is reportedly looking to get rid of its 'Jumbo' problem asap.

I really feel bad for GMG. They are in complete disarray I guess. :ohno:

QGR

May 27th, 2008, 07:43 PM

I really feel bad for GMG. They are in complete disarray I guess. :ohno:

Like you, many of us are feeling the same way, because we wanted to see them as worthwhile competitor of BG. But they have initiated their own fall. Firstly, their whole business model was apparently based on the assumption that BG will go down the drain pretty soon. This is a negative thinking and hardly any business has prospered through such process.

Secondly, they should have done their fleet planning by professionals having technical expertise as well as market experience in this part of the world.

Last but not the least, they should not let their service standard go down. No matter they are dealing with hi-tech aviation stuff, airline primarily belongs to service industry and mounting complain against an airline still very much at its infancy is no way a good sign.

This, however, is not a post-mortem report, as they are no where near to their end as yet. I sincerely hope that they will learn from other pioneers of some successful industries in this country, who had a pretty ordinary start with many negatives, but learn from their mistake quickly before the lesson became too heavy to digest…

vishal

May 27th, 2008, 08:41 PM

amar11372

May 27th, 2008, 08:58 PM

AeroGeeK

May 27th, 2008, 09:05 PM

AeroGeeK

May 27th, 2008, 09:43 PM

Kingfisher wants to fly to Dhaka. http://www.keralanext.com/news/?id=63760001

iasif

May 27th, 2008, 09:51 PM

I would just like to say Hats Off to you guys ...I am an NRI Indian and haven't seen this much professionalism and knowledge being displayed in any of "Our" forums ...Its a real delight to read through your postings ... I am not even an Aviation fan ..but the sheer language and information and seriousness displayed here ,gives me enough juice to keep me hooked...Special thanks to IASIF, SHATILISLAM, AEROGEEK and QGR.

Moderators may remove my posting owing to non-relevance factor :-).

The pleasure is all ours! :)

You're welcome on board with us, and be a part of the noise we make here! The best part about this whole forum-like thingy is that we all (most of us here) have "agreed to disagree" while maintaining one common dream - that of a strong and healthy aviation industry in Bangladesh.

Owing to the discussants' inputs and support from the likes of you, it is fast becoming "the place to be" for aviation-related information that directly/indirectly concerns Bangladesh!

Bottoms up! :cheers2:

iasif

May 27th, 2008, 09:55 PM

Kingfisher wants to fly to Dhaka. http://www.keralanext.com/news/?id=63760001

They've been pondering on that for a while now. Their idea is to have pax converged from these destinations to their hub at BLR, from where they'd be taking their onward flights to the Europe and North America...like DAC-BLR-SFO for example! :)

TIslam

May 27th, 2008, 10:06 PM

They've been pondering on that for a while now. Their idea is to have pax converged from these destinations to their hub at BLR, from where they'd be taking their onward flights to the Europe and North America...like DAC-BLR-SFO for example! :)

Not a bad idea. Kingfisher has already recieved many accolades for their premium services at economy prices. I'm sure they'll have some loyal fans if they can make the sector successful.

iasif

May 27th, 2008, 10:20 PM

Not a bad idea. Kingfisher has already recieved many accolades for their premium services at economy prices. I'm sure they'll have some loyal fans if they can make the sector successful.

With fuel prices where they are and where they're looking to get, "premium services" and "economy prices" would soon become increasingly difficult to be used in the same sentence! :)

vishal

May 27th, 2008, 11:20 PM

^^The pleasure is all ours! :)

You're welcome on board with us, and be a part of the noise we make here! The best part about this whole forum-like thingy is that we all (most of us here) have "agreed to disagree" while maintaining one common dream - that of a strong and healthy aviation industry in Bangladesh.

Owing to the discussants' inputs and support from the likes of you, it is fast becoming "the place to be" for aviation-related information that directly/indirectly concerns Bangladesh!

Bottoms up! :cheers2:

Absolutely.... I can see a lot of future in Banagaldesh's Aviation industry ..And specially with alert citizens like you ... Whole of Asian Tiger is rising and with a roar ...Bangladesh is one of our Pack..ain't it? :banana::)

Thanks a Lot...I will sit back and enjoy this wonderful cruise as a pax...:cheers:

Best of Luck Guys!!! :bow::bow::bow::cheers1:

vishal

May 27th, 2008, 11:24 PM

You are welcome! How did you find this thread?:)
Thanks a Lot!! Well I am just a passive forumer ...Just keep hunting for some food (for thought:bash:) ...This turned out to be the most interesting thread ... Another one at par is the Supertalls thread about Burj Dubai.

amar11372

May 28th, 2008, 01:05 AM

Well enjoy your stay vishal, feel free to ask question about Bangladeshi Aviation or just Aviation in general. :cheers:

TIslam

May 28th, 2008, 04:39 AM

Like you, many of us are feeling the same way, because we wanted to see them as worthwhile competitor of BG. But they have initiated their own fall. Firstly, their whole business model was apparently based on the assumption that BG will go down the drain pretty soon. This is a negative thinking and hardly any business has prospered through such process.

Secondly, they should have done their fleet planning by professionals having technical expertise as well as market experience in this part of the world.

Last but not the least, they should not let their service standard go down. No matter they are dealing with hi-tech aviation stuff, airline primarily belongs to service industry and mounting complain against an airline still very much at its infancy is no way a good sign.

This, however, is not a post-mortem report, as they are no where near to their end as yet. I sincerely hope that they will learn from other pioneers of some successful industries in this country, who had a pretty ordinary start with many negatives, but learn from their mistake quickly before the lesson became too heavy to digest…

Chapter 11 isn't an option since there's no such nothing in Bangladesh (as far as I know) so, I really do not see what options are at GMG's disposal, i.e. specifically the steps that the airline can take to address the manifold problems it has created for itself.

This could however, provide a wake up call to the other new comers.

iasif

May 28th, 2008, 05:24 AM

Chapter 11 isn't an option since there's no such nothing in Bangladesh (as far as I know) so, I really do not see what options are at GMG's disposal, i.e. specifically the steps that the airline can take to address the manifold problems it has created for itself.

This could however, provide a wake up call to the other new comers.

I'm an optimist, and I believe there's almost always a solution to every problem. GMG too can perhaps come over the troubles they're having now (as discussed here), only if they can fight one problem on their own - their ego! Its when you let your ego overwhelm your very being, and then let it run into a conflict with that of your fellow mates in business that you really end up in a very difficult situation in hand.

GMG can get over the problems if they act smart, which may come at the cost of having to shed some arrogance. For example, rather than prolonging the difficulties by choosing to hang on to it, they could've tried to get rid of the 747 to Biman itself when it had issued the tender for the second onea month back! It'd probably have required for GMG to get into an understanding with AAI about this but it could surely be done. So long the offer went to Biman comforming to the tender requirements, Biman wouldn't have had any particular reservation to take it from GMG, rather they'd probably have viewed it as a 'win' for themselves to be able to take up GMG's 747! GMG is paying about USD 5,900/block hour on that plane, and Biman would've found it competitive against the other offers they received (the only valid ones are from Orient Thai/SS Motors and AusBan). By doing that, GMG would probably have been hurt in its ego, but it could relieve them from the burden of having it when they can't fly it for fuel, food et al which is even more scandalous!

If you ask me, I think its still worth a try despite the fact that the tender is closed now. BG can get around it and take it up from Z5 if it wants, given that they are pursued well for doing so!

TIslam

May 28th, 2008, 05:59 AM

I'm an optimist, and I believe there's almost always a solution to every problem. GMG too can perhaps come over the troubles they're having now (as discussed here), only if they can fight one problem on their own - their ego! Its when you let your ego overwhelm your very being, and then let it run into a conflict with that of your fellow mates in business that you really end up in a very difficult situation in hand.

GMG can get over the problems if they act smart, which may come at the cost of having to shed some arrogance. For example, rather than prolonging the difficulties by choosing to hang on to it, they could've tried to get rid of the 747 to Biman itself when it had issued the tender for the second onea month back! It'd probably have required for GMG to get into an understanding with AAI about this but it could surely be done. So long the offer went to Biman comforming to the tender requirements, Biman wouldn't have had any particular reservation to take it from GMG, rather they'd probably have viewed it as a 'win' for themselves to be able to take up GMG's 747! GMG is paying about USD 5,900/block hour on that plane, and Biman would've found it competitive against the other offers they received (the only valid ones are from Orient Thai/SS Motors and AusBan). By doing that, GMG would probably have been hurt in its ego, but it could relieve them from the burden of having it when they can't fly it for fuel, food et al which is even more scandalous!

If you ask me, I think its still worth a try despite the fact that the tender is closed now. BG can get around it and take it up from Z5 if it wants, given that they are pursued well for doing so!

For GMG's sake, I hope they or some of their "connected" folks frequent this forum and such up the good advise that is being dispensed here, gratis. Since, you're an optimist Imran, I hope to travel by your airline, in a few years. :)

vishal

May 28th, 2008, 07:41 AM

Well enjoy your stay vishal, feel free to ask question about Bangladeshi Aviation or just Aviation in general. :cheers:

I am honored .... I have indeed become an Aviation fan..thanks to SSC and more so to this forum ..As of now I am learning ..hopefully someday soon I will start contributing like you guys ....I will commend few more names like Yourself and TIslam too .... you guys are just rockin ...:dance:

AeroGeeK

May 28th, 2008, 09:32 AM

I wonder how many people will travel to BLR from DAC to connect to other flights. You can travel to Europe by BA, BG & other middle-eastern carriers through their hubs. You can go to New York by BA & EK. You can take SQ's superb service to SFO/LAX etc. So what's the point in flying BLR-DAC?

QGR

May 28th, 2008, 07:34 PM

If you ask me, I think its still worth a try despite the fact that the tender is closed now. BG can get around it and take it up from Z5 if it wants, given that they are pursued well for doing so!

Despite all my sympathy toward Z5, I hope BG will not consider that as an option. The aircraft is giving a lot of trouble to Z5 and BG is hardly in a position, as far as its fleet is concerned, to take an aircraft which will be grounded frequently or unsafe to operate.

Just wondering, why don't BG consider outright purchase of couple of 747-200Bs (or even -300 for that matter, if available) with crew and maintenance outsourced for 6 months or so? In ACMI, BG almost has to pay the price of the aircraft in 9 to 12 months time. I know it will be difficult for BG to arrange USD 15 to 20 million at a time, but it’s not impossible if they can think beyond their box. Any guess what will be the payback period of a 747-200/300 if it can be operated with satisfactory load factor?

akbar1

May 28th, 2008, 08:38 PM

AeroGeeK

May 28th, 2008, 08:54 PM

QGR

May 28th, 2008, 09:52 PM

I honestly haven't heard of any of those awards before. How important & prestigeous are they?

That was rather harsh dude....though I must admit that I haven't hard of those either :D

Never mind the importance and prestige....:cheers:

akbar1

May 29th, 2008, 12:39 AM

OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE AWARD

http://images2.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp53395%3Evq%3D3363%3E936%3E888%3EWSNRCG%3D323837%3B2%3B3%3C33vq0mrj

amar11372

May 29th, 2008, 03:51 AM

Biman needs to follow MH's ‘turn-around’ policy for survival

S M Jahangir

back from Malaysia

Just a couple of years ago, the Malaysia Airlines - MH - was suffering from substantial operating losses like Biman Bangladesh Airlines (BBA) has been incurring. The MH sustained operating losses to the tune of RM 1.3 billion in 2005.

Because of such huge losses, the authorities of the Malaysia Airlines found themselves in a difficult situation to run their operations.

But the management undertook a 'turn-around' policy in 2006 after the leadership of the Malaysian government said 'no' to its bailout proposal.

And it was the turning point for the Malaysia Airlines.

Under its turnaround policy, the MH took up a series of measurers including rationalisation of its manpower, aggressive marketing drives and improvement of its service quality. The management had also started familiarising its airlines code 'MH' as Malaysian Hospitality.

The loss-making MH management cut 300 jobs in 2006 under its manpower rationing plan, a senior executive told a big gathering of foreign delegates while giving a presentation on the airline at a hotel in Putrajaya on May 23 last.

Some 390 foreign journalists, tour operators and travel agents took part in the function, which was arranged on the eve of celebrating the country's annual event 'Colours of Malaysia'.

Such manpower rationalisation plan coupled with its improved management helped the airlines reverse its negative balance sheet.

Within a very short time the airline became a profitable entity. After offsetting its losses, the Malaysia Airlines was able to surpass the operating target by about 16 times to RM 851 million in 2007 as against the target of RM 50 million, the executive informed the foreign delegates.

MH's business continues to grow as the airline has already enhanced both its fleet and markets.

The Airlines has set a target of raising its operating profit at RM 1.5 billion to 3.0 billion annually by the year 1212.

Currently, the MH, having a total of 19,423 staff, is operating flights to around 100 destinations around the globe.

Meanwhile, the Bangladesh government has recently taken some steps to help get rid of its huge financial losses that the national flag carrier has been sustaining over the years due to multifarious reasons including managerial deficiency, but no positive progress has yet been visible in this regard.

The state-run national flag carrier has officially started its journey as a public limited company (PLC) with the interim government enacting a new law -- Bangladesh Biman Corporation (Amendment) Ordinance, 2007.

The government converted the Biman into a PLC, taking its huge operating losses into consideration.

Official figures revealed that the Biman incurred a loss of around Tk 12 billion in fiscal year 2006-07 alone.

http://www.thefinancialexpress-bd.info/search_index.php?page=detail_news&news_id=35066

iasif

May 29th, 2008, 04:33 PM

OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE AWARD

Hi guys, just thought you all might be interested to know that:

Captain Tasbirul Ahmed Choudhury, Founder Chairman and Managing Director, United Airways Bangladesh Limited, achieved “Desher Kagoj Business Award 2007” on 4th April 2008 and “Begum Rokeya Shining Personality Award 2007” on 1st May 2008 for outstanding performance in Airline sector in Bangladesh in the year of 2007.

:rofl:

While I maintain some reservations regarding the "contribution" issue, I actually like one thing about United, despite not having flown with them yet.

The thing I've noticed and like in particular is their landing approaches at ZIA. When they're coming in from the south (Chittaging, Jessore) they often do visual approach on Rwy32 for landing at ZIA which saves them about 6-8 mins of flying time and more impotantly the fuel burn thereof (than if they had chosen to do instrument landings on Rwy14). Even when they land on Rwy14 when coming from the south (due to prevailing wind conditions) they often do visuals and therefore save time and fuel. Visual landing is something most pilots tend to avoid these days (when instrument options are available), even during perfect weather and visibility conditions, and some of these pilots at United are fun to watch and admire!

amar11372

May 29th, 2008, 08:55 PM

Purchasing 2 Aircraft
Biman strikes deal with Boeing in 2 weeks
Rashidul Hasan

Biman Bangladesh Airlines Ltd is likely to strike a deal with US plane-maker Boeing to procure two Boeing 737-800s within the next two weeks.

Biman is likely to sign another deal with Orient Thai in three-four days to lease a Boeing 747 Jumbo Jet in order to minimise the disruptions in its flight schedules.

Sources at the civil aviation ministry said the deal with Boeing will also include an option to buy two more similar planes.

The two 737-800s, scheduled to arrive in 2015, will be used on regional routes.

A high-level Boeing delegation is to arrive in Dhaka today to discuss the pros and corns of the deal with Biman while officials of Orient Thai arrive in Dhaka Sunday to discuss their deal with Biman, a top Biman official told The Daily Star last night.

"We hope to sign the deal with Boeing within the next 15 days for procuring two 737-800s," Mahbub Jamil, special assistant to the chief adviser for civil aviation and tourism ministry, told The Daily Star last night.

Biman on April 23 signed a deal with the US plane-maker to procure four 777-300ER and four 787-8 Dreamliner planes at a cost of $1.26 billion (Tk 8,728 crore).

The deal included an option for purchasing four more planes, two 777-300ERs and two 787-8s. Boeing is yet to put 787-8s into service.

On that day, Biman also signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Boeing for buying two 737-800s.

On the deal with Orient Thai, a top Biman official told The Daily Star that they are at the final stages of the agreement. "We are hopeful about signing the agreement within three-four days," the official said requesting anonymity.

Under the prospective Aircraft, Crew, Maintenance and Insurance (ACMI) lease agreement, Orient Thai will provide all staffs and crew for the Jumbo Jet while Biman will provide fuel.

Earlier, a four-member technical team went to Bangkok to inspect the plane of the Thai aviation firm that won the bid for leasing the plane to Biman.

The Board of Directors of Biman on April 20 in a marathon meeting decided to lease an aircraft from Orient Thai.

On March 9, Biman leased a Boeing 747-200 from a Nigeria-based airline to minimise disruptions in flight schedules.

Biman has been facing serious troubles in maintaining flight schedules due to acute shortage of aircraft for quite some time.

Biman currently owns three types of aircraft--four McDonnell Douglas DC10-30s, four Fokker F28s, and three Airbus A310-300s. Production of DC10-30s and F28s ended in the 80's due to their lack of viability in service.

Of the 11 planes of Biman fleet, only four or five are now operational while the rest are grounded.

http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=38870

iasif

May 29th, 2008, 11:28 PM

Biman needs to follow MH's ‘turn-around’ policy for survival

http://www.thefinancialexpress-bd.info/search_index.php?page=detail_news&news_id=35066

BG has cut more jobs (more than 6x times) than MH already, and the problems that were at MH and ones prevailing with BG aren't quite the same. MH largely suffered from management problems and shortfalls, whereas BG had/has an all-around shortfall that it'll have to make up in order to be truly profitable.

dopekhor

May 29th, 2008, 11:34 PM

what ever happened to the custom officers that got caught red handed doing their dhandabaazi?

i heard that they were let go, is that true?

vishal

May 30th, 2008, 12:26 AM

BG has cut more jobs (more than 6x times) than MH already, and the problems that were at MH and ones prevailing with BG aren't quite the same. MH largely suffered from management problems and shortfalls, whereas BG had/has an all-around shortfall that it'll have to make up in order to be truly profitable.

It sometimes makes me wonder that when the Sun is shining in BD's aviation market why isn't anyone making hay .... I think this is a good time when a small regional player can come up to speed and deliver global results ....similar situation was there in India 4-5 years back and you can see the position of Jet/Kingfisher now... For that sake even our national carrier seems to be on the right path ...
We need sincere and serious players in BD now ... I think this would be the right time to start ...isn't it?

dopekhor

May 30th, 2008, 12:35 AM

vishal

May 30th, 2008, 01:32 AM

you know how desis are... always taking the safe side. ;)

Yeah:ohno: But the point is we need to come out of this mentality ... Biman seems to have all the tools and support to make a turnaround ... In fact they can offer cheaper alternatives to flyers from India too ... I remember back in 2000 ppl from India used to fly Biman ....
What would it take for local airlines to run their entire fleet out of ERJ's /CRJ's ..Go upto Thailand/Bangkok/Singapore and provide outward connectivity through codesharing?

TIslam

May 30th, 2008, 01:43 AM

It sometimes makes me wonder that when the Sun is shining in BD's aviation market why isn't anyone making hay .... I think this is a good time when a small regional player can come up to speed and deliver global results ....similar situation was there in India 4-5 years back and you can see the position of Jet/Kingfisher now... For that sake even our national carrier seems to be on the right path ...
We need sincere and serious players in BD now ... I think this would be the right time to start ...isn't it?

I don't think there's any lack of sincere and serious players. The problem is that in today's world economy and market, airline business is highly competitive with thin profit margin which is cyclic. That being the case, only the smartest and fittest are going to survive. That too cannot be assured unless they are managed by people with proven track record in the field. It took Jet Airways over ten years to come of age and make its presence felt in the global market. Like its peers of fit airlines (Emirates, Singapore, et.al), Jet Airways today, is managed by career aviation/airline specialists. Such is not the seen in Bangladesh.

Biman, I feel, is on its way to recovery and should be fully mended in a few years, provided it does not fall victim to the politicians and micro management by the government, once again. I would place a 50/50 bet on the private airlines.

Finally, one has to keep in mind that the ecosystem for airlines in Bangladesh isn't the same as India's. India can sustain at least two or three decent sized private airlines purely in the domestic market, owing to its size (geographical dimension) and economy. In Bangladesh, not a single private carrier can operate profitably without extending to the regional/international sectors, in the long term.

vishal

May 30th, 2008, 02:25 AM

I don't think there's any lack of sincere and serious players. The problem is that in today's world economy and market, airline business is highly competitive with thin profit margin which is cyclic. That being the case, only the smartest and fittest are going to survive. That too cannot be assured unless they are managed .....

Absolutely... The market dynamics and proportions are definitely different in Bangladesh, however, it does have enough flow for sustaining at least a couple of "Good" Airlines. Biman surely has promising future (the socio-political factors notwithstanding) ...

Afterall Bangladesh has far more potential than Singapore ....well, atleast in terms of availability of a significant domestic market. A startup airline will always have the priviledge of flying local before spannig out ....Though it takes a lot of courage/knowledge and "endurance" in our Desi environment to flourish competitively....but is not impossible.

TIslam

May 30th, 2008, 03:03 AM

Absolutely... The market dynamics and proportions are definitely different in Bangladesh, however, it does have enough flow for sustaining at least a couple of "Good" Airlines. Biman surely has promising future (the socio-political factors notwithstanding) ...

Afterall Bangladesh has far more potential than Singapore ....well, atleast in terms of availability of a significant domestic market. A startup airline will always have the priviledge of flying local before spannig out ....Though it takes a lot of courage/knowledge and "endurance" in our Desi environment to flourish competitively....but is not impossible.

Yes, nothing is impossible. What discourages me is the lack of professionalism among the private airlines in Bangladesh. Although, I recognize the need for time and patience. Let's hope for the best. :cheers:

iasif

May 30th, 2008, 05:58 AM

It sometimes makes me wonder that when the Sun is shining in BD's aviation market why isn't anyone making hay .... I think this is a good time when a small regional player can come up to speed and deliver global results ....similar situation was there in India 4-5 years back and you can see the position of Jet/Kingfisher now... For that sake even our national carrier seems to be on the right path ...
We need sincere and serious players in BD now ... I think this would be the right time to start ...isn't it?

The private carriers of Bangladesh so far planned their growth assuming that it'd happen at the cost of BG losing its way. Z5's recent growth plans were almost entirely based on the assumption that BG would be 'non-existent' in the near future. United in their statements have also said that they were looking at the markets in the Middle-East and supposedly lucrative regional routes, again looking at taking a bite off Biman's market as EK, EY, QR or TG, SQ wouldn't really be hurt thanks to their huge networks. Best Air just began operations on the DAC-BKK route and they're sure to find themselves struggling as well...mark my words!

The point I'm trying to make is that rather trying to have a bite off BG's pie only and fight among themselves, the carriers should rather look at exploring new markets where BG doesn't and will not operate anytime soon. They could also try and be 'regional feeders' to the large network carriers. By taking this approach, they wouldn't be banking their prosperity on anyone's demise, and possibly be able to ensure a 'space' of their own where they can operate way more comfortably than they are doing now!

akbar1

May 30th, 2008, 07:24 AM

The private carriers of Bangladesh so far planned their growth assuming that it'd happen at the cost of BG losing its way. Z5's recent growth plans were almost entirely based on the assumption that BG would be 'non-existent' in the near future. United in their statements have also said that they were looking at the markets in the Middle-East and supposedly lucrative regional routes, again looking at taking a bite off Biman's market as EK, EY, QR or TG, SQ wouldn't really be hurt thanks to their huge networks. Best Air just began operations on the DAC-BKK route and they're sure to find themselves struggling as well...mark my words!

The point I'm trying to make is that rather trying to have a bite off BG's pie only and fight among themselves, the carriers should rather look at exploring new markets where BG doesn't and will not operate anytime soon. They could also try and be 'regional feeders' to the large network carriers. By taking this approach, they wouldn't be banking their prosperity on anyone's demise, and possibly be able to ensure a 'space' of their own where they can operate way more comfortably than they are doing now!

Sylhet to London direct flight is a major route waiting to be explored. BG will never to it in the near future or eles they would have done it by now.

Some private airliners want it, mainly United and RBA, but again, CAAB is taking far too long for this. We all are fully aware of the large 300,000 plus Bangladeshi community based in the UK, majority of them hail from the Sylhet region. A recent survey conducted by a local Bangla television channel in the UK "Channel S" found that almost all want's to fly from Sylhet when they are returning to the UK. It's more convinent for them.

I am very disipointed in the progress of the new terminal in Sylhet Airport and still no sign of refueling station for the long houl aircrafts.

CAAB and the goverment needs to get a move on. Countrys infurstructure development is vital for the economy to grow. Sylhet has good links with London, due to it's residents also having duel citizenship in the UK. This will open the region up for other things such as tourisam, business ect.

Does anyone have any further info to add on the stataus of Sylhet Airport and whether international flight from there?

iasif

May 30th, 2008, 08:23 AM

Sylhet to London direct flight is a major route waiting to be explored. BG will never to it in the near future or eles they would have done it by now.

Wrong assumption.

Until the runway at ZYL was extended, a large widebody airplane with the range to do ZYL-LHR non-stop (e.g. B777) couldn't operate into and out of ZYL without load penalties (which would be uneconomical).

Now that the runway has been extended, BA can start using the 777s as soon as refuelling and handling facilities become available at ZYL and BG can begin doing that too with their A310s or once they get the 777s on lease as planned. The ASA between Bangladesh and UK, however, would need to be amended to include ZYL as one of the allowed points of origin and arrival for BG and BA.

vishal

May 30th, 2008, 08:45 AM

Wrong assumption.

Until the runway at ZYL was extended, a large widebody airplane with the range to do ZYL-LHR non-stop (e.g. B777) couldn't operate into and out of ZYL without load penalties (which would be uneconomical).

Now that the runway has been extended, BA can start using the 777s as soon as refuelling and handling facilities become available at ZYL and BG can begin doing that too with their A310s or once they get the 777s on lease as planned. The ASA between Bangladesh and UK, however, would need to be amended to include ZYL as one of the allowed points of origin and arrival for BG and BA.

Based on the assumption that only Short to Medium range crafts can be serviced from Sylhet, would it not make sense for them to carry out a regional feeder service (as you have mentioned) to Hyd/BLR in India and then do codeshare with other carriers that are pointed towrads LHR/FRA etc..? Though someone has mentioned earlier thay who would want to take BLR/HYD route instead of thru DXB? It would make perfect business sense.

dopekhor

May 30th, 2008, 08:47 AM

iasif

May 30th, 2008, 08:57 AM

Based on the assumption that only Short to Medium range crafts can be serviced from Sylhet, would it not make sense for them to carry out a regional feeder service (as you have mentioned) to Hyd/BLR in India and then do codeshare with other carriers that are pointed towrads LHR/FRA etc..? Though someone has mentioned earlier thay who would want to take BLR/HYD route instead of to DXB?

that would be real nice if it happens soon i mean real soon

The traffic between ZYL-LHR well warrants scheduled non-stop flights, which the pax would prefer as well. Now that the runway has been extended, the next on the cards to get done are to make fuelling and better aircraft handling facilities available at the airport, and the completion of the new terminal to handle the passengers.

Once the infrastructure is there up and ready, the ASA can be amended easily to include ZYL as origin/arrival points for airlines of Bangladesh and UK to allow direct non-stop flights between ZYL-LHR/STN/LGW/MAN.

amar11372

May 30th, 2008, 10:25 AM

The traffic between ZYL-LHR well warrants scheduled non-stop flights, which the pax would prefer as well. Now that the runway has been extended, the next on the cards to get done are to make fuelling and better aircraft handling facilities available at the airport, and the completion of the new terminal to handle the passengers.

Once the infrastructure is there up and ready, the ASA can be amended easily to include ZYL as origin/arrival points for airlines of Bangladesh and UK to allow direct non-stop flights between ZYL-LHR/STN/LGW/MAN.

Is the Govt that blind too see that if they handed out the operation of Airport to a private company, all the necessary infrastructure would get build at no cost to the govt? :ohno:

dopekhor

May 30th, 2008, 10:33 AM

iasif

May 30th, 2008, 12:25 PM

Is the Govt that blind too see that if they handed out the operation of Airport to a private company, all the necessary infrastructure would get build at no cost to the govt? :ohno:

if it goes to private hands none of the people working at the airports will be able to earn extra cash, hence when the ctg airport was handed to thai airways these bastards got to the streets and started protesting that if its given to private hands smuggling with grow with tripple digits

and with the help of the then bitch ass opposition they got their way

The new airports at Hyderabad and Bangalore have been built under public-private partnerships and that model can well work for our airports as well. Last I heard the GoB had asked ADB's assistance to assess the matter and prescribe models under which the airport at Chittagong may be operated/managed by international private organizations with the experience to do such a job. I'll have to find out how far they've gone with that.

As for the management of CGP airport by Thai, trust me when I say that the agreement terms under which it was pushed to go through was absolutely against the interest of Bangladesh. The Biman/CAAB officials protested it for the wrong reason (to protect their own selfish interests) but at the end if it all, it was actually a good thing that it didn't go to Thai!

TIslam

May 30th, 2008, 01:56 PM

^^
The time is more than ripe to lease out the international airports in Bangladesh, to the private sector. Both BOM and DEL has gone that way.

dopekhor

May 30th, 2008, 02:02 PM

The new airports at Hyderabad and Bangalore have been built under public-private partnerships and that model can well work for our airports as well. Last I heard the GoB had asked ADB's assistance to assess the matter and prescribe models under which the airport at Chittagong may be operated/managed by international private organizations with the experience to do such a job. I'll have to find out how far they've gone with that.

As for the management of CGP airport by Thai, trust me when I say that the agreement terms under which it was pushed to go through was absolutely against the interest of Bangladesh. The Biman/CAAB officials protested it for the wrong reason (to protect their own selfish interests) but at the end if it all, it was actually a good thing that it didn't go to Thai!
yeah but at least this government can try to hand over to the private sector in a proper manner that way the custom bastards and caab will learn a lesson

dopekhor

May 30th, 2008, 02:02 PM

^^
The time is more than ripe to lease out the international airports in Bangladesh, to the private sector. Both BOM and DEL has gone that way.
the people working in the airports, biman and caab will never let you do it, because it will bring and end to their extra income

TIslam

May 30th, 2008, 02:39 PM

the people working in the airports, biman and caab will never let you do it, because it will bring and end to their extra income

Of course they wouldn't. That is why one would expect for such a thing happen before the curtain falls on the CTG. They have done it with Chittagong port.

dopekhor

May 30th, 2008, 02:42 PM

Of course they wouldn't. That is why one would expect for such a thing happen before the curtain falls on the CTG. They have done it with Chittagong port.
well not exactly, there is still a lot of work that needs to be done, but at the end of the day my hats are off for them at least the started the process

Tmac

May 30th, 2008, 05:20 PM

is Chittagong airport under private management?

Tmac

May 30th, 2008, 05:22 PM

Air Arabia to introduce service to Dhaka

• Air Arabia’s 40th destination globally, second destination in Bangladesh
• Largest South Asian destination network of any Middle East-based carrier
• Dhaka service to begin on June 8, 2008
• Flights to operate four times per week initially

Air Arabia, the first and largest low-cost carrier (LCC) in the Middle East and North Africa, announced today that it will launch service to Dhaka, Bangladesh, beginning June 8, 2008. Flights will initially operate four times per week between Dkaha and Air Arabia’s hub in Sharjah.

Dhaka marks Air Arabia’s second destination in Bangladesh, the other being Chittagong, which was introduced in June of last year. Air Arabia will fly to Dhaka four times per week on Mondays, Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays, departing Sharjah at 12:35PM and arriving at Dhaka at 18:55PM. Return flights will depart Dhaka at 19:40PM and arrive in Sharjah at 22:45PM. It is Air Arabia’s 40th destination worldwide and the 17th destination in South Asia.

“With the opening of our newest destination in Dhaka, we will have developed the most comprehensive destination network in South Asia of any Middle East-based carrier,” said AK Nizar, Head of Commercial Department, Air Arabia. “Our flights to both Dhaka and Chittagong represent a commitment to the Bangladeshi market, and recognition of its immense growth potential. With flights to these two cities, the two largest in Bangladesh, we serve the majority of Bangladeshis who wish to have the highest level of service for a competitively priced fare when they fly to the Middle East.”

Dhaka is the political and cultural centre of Bangladesh. It is also the largest city in Bangladesh with a population of 11 million. With the addition of Dhaka, Air Arabia now serves the most populous city in almost every country in South Asia, with flights to Colombo, Mumbai, Karachi and Kathmandu from the LCC’s main hub in Sharjah.

http://www.albawaba.com/en/countries/UAE/228225

Tmac

May 30th, 2008, 05:23 PM

how is ZIA handling all this international traffic with only 6 aerobridges?

iasif

May 30th, 2008, 05:33 PM

how is ZIA handling all this international traffic with only 6 aerobridges?

And they thought David Copperfield pulled off a great one by vanishing out the train bogie in thin air! Child's game compared to what we have here day in and day out!! :D

TIslam

May 30th, 2008, 07:32 PM

And they thought David Copperfield pulled off a great one by vanishing out the train bogie in thin air! Child's game compared to what we have here day in and day out!! :D

Sorry, I may be dense but, could you please explain? :)

Are you saying ZIA is like LHR these days where there's more aircraft than boarding bridges, during peak hours? Could it be that the aero bridges are inefficiently utilized perhaps due to lack of time/slot management?

dopekhor

May 30th, 2008, 07:48 PM

is Chittagong airport under private management?
nope, was supposed to be thou..

iasif

May 30th, 2008, 08:16 PM

Sorry, I may be dense but, could you please explain? :)

Are you saying ZIA is like LHR these days where there's more aircraft than boarding bridges, during peak hours? Could it be that the aero bridges are inefficiently utilized perhaps due to lack of time/slot management?

The aerobridges are just one of the many components that ensure efficient handling of the aircraft & passengers which directly affects the on-time performance of the airlines. Considering that the ATC is terribly weak to simultaneous inbound traffic efficiently, the quality of ground services is in a shabby state, and the logistics service is utterly disappointing, you ought to believe that its quite 'magical' that ZIA somehow gets to manage these flights everyday!

Its a riotous scene during the peak morning hours...imagine an EK 777 holding in the middle of the taxiway blocking any pushback from the domestic terminal as it waits while a QR A330 is halfway through its pushback from a gate waiting for a GF 767 to get out if its way as the 767's pilots are trying to figure out the signalman's confusing marshalling instructions towards another gate! I mean, you just have to see it to believe it! Even after all this indiscipline in place, the airlines still manages to make their way in and out of ZIA everyday, which is by all means - magical! :)

TIslam

May 30th, 2008, 09:32 PM

The aerobridges are just one of the many components that ensure efficient handling of the aircraft & passengers which directly affects the on-time performance of the airlines. Considering that the ATC is terribly weak to simultaneous inbound traffic efficiently, the quality of ground services is in a shabby state, and the logistics service is utterly disappointing, you ought to believe that its quite 'magical' that ZIA somehow gets to manage these flights everyday!

Its a riotous scene during the peak morning hours...imagine an EK 777 holding in the middle of the taxiway blocking any pushback from the domestic terminal as it waits while a QR A330 is halfway through its pushback from a gate waiting for a GF 767 to get out if its way as the 767's pilots are trying to figure out the signalman's confusing marshalling instructions towards another gate! I mean, you just have to see it to believe it! Even after all this indiscipline in place, the airlines still manages to make their way in and out of ZIA everyday, which is by all means - magical! :)

:nuts:
Why is everything so chaotic at ZIA? Total lack of trained personnel in every sphere of airport operations?

dopekhor

May 30th, 2008, 11:01 PM

:nuts:
Why is everything so chaotic at ZIA? Total lack of trained personnel in every sphere of airport operations?
nope ZIA has a lot of olosh manush, ai r ki..

akbar1

May 31st, 2008, 05:01 AM

whi is constracting the new terminal at Sylhet? Local builders!!!!!!!!

AeroGeeK

May 31st, 2008, 08:51 AM

CAAB told Padma Oil a long time ago to setup a refueling facility at ZYL. I don't why they are taking so long. But the final question is, will BD-UK update the current ASA to let BA land in ZYL?

amar11372

May 31st, 2008, 09:06 AM

dopekhor

May 31st, 2008, 09:13 AM

dopekhor

May 31st, 2008, 09:14 AM

Yeah thats what I am wondering too... Will the UK amend the ASA with the new routes?
if biman can guarantee that their aircrafts are safe enough

TIslam

May 31st, 2008, 05:11 PM

because biman still owes padma oil at least a billion dollars US

CAAB isn't Biman, even though they pretend they own Biman. Moreover, I read in the news recently that the government cleared all arrear fuel bills of Biman. Perhaps Padma Oil doesn't take orders from CAAB? The directive probably needs to come from folks higher in the food chain. Civil Aviation ministry or PetroBangla?

TIslam

May 31st, 2008, 05:16 PM

if biman can guarantee that their aircrafts are safe enough

???

I doubt that would be an issue in re-negotiated ASA between UK and Bangladesh, to allow direct flights between LHR-SYL. IF BA feels that they have more to gain, then it will happen.

AeroGeeK

May 31st, 2008, 06:38 PM

???

I doubt that would be an issue in re-negotiated ASA between UK and Bangladesh, to allow direct flights between LHR-SYL. IF BA feels that they have more to gain, then it will happen.

BA isn't UK's civil aviation authority just like Biman isn't CAAB. As a major player in UK's civil aviation, Virgin's reported interest in Bangladesh is also a vital factor. And I think it'd be wise for VS to operate LHR-ZYL-LHR rather than taking BA head-to-head on LHR-DAC-LHR. So if BA/VS lobbies to their Govt. the ASA should be easy to update.

AeroGeeK

May 31st, 2008, 06:46 PM

iasif

May 31st, 2008, 07:07 PM

CAAB told Padma Oil a long time ago to setup a refueling facility at ZYL. I don't why they are taking so long. But the final question is, will BD-UK update the current ASA to let BA land in ZYL?

Yeah thats what I am wondering too... Will the UK amend the ASA with the new routes?

The issue of fuelling services at ZYL and the terminal under construction are like the egg and the chicken. CAAB has to say that fuelling services can be put up with the establishment of reservoirs and bowsers even now. BPC has to say that it'd rather install hydrants once the terminal construction has progressed far enough, and that an interim arrangement would be a wasteful investment.

While this dispute can be settled, what is still a persistent problem even under the current government is the deliberate sluggish bureaucracy which will take aeons before approving the financial proposal that will be required anyways.

As for the ASA, I for one know that BA would be glad to amend the ASA to include ZYL as an origin/arrival point because they've long been wanting to do LHR-ZYL non-stop. The first obstacle was the shorter runway which recently got extended. The only obstacle remaining now is the airport infrastructure. UK would gladly amend the ASA to allow both BA and BG to fly directly between LHR-ZYL. As it is, ZYL is the biggest bet BG can use to retain its slots at Heathrow!

TIslam

May 31st, 2008, 07:09 PM

BA isn't UK's civil aviation authority just like Biman isn't CAAB. As a major player in UK's civil aviation, Virgin's reported interest in Bangladesh is also a vital factor. And I think it'd be wise for VS to operate LHR-ZYL-LHR rather than taking BA head-to-head on LHR-DAC-LHR. So if BA/VS lobbies to their Govt. the ASA should be easy to update.

I forgot about the other major British operator, VS. By "BA", I meant the stake holders.

TIslam

May 31st, 2008, 07:11 PM

iasif

May 31st, 2008, 07:25 PM

Air India Express plans to fly to BKK via DAC. I wonder how much dense this sector will get. There are already 5 operators flying this route. And I am sure Z5 & Best will suffer the most.
http://article.wn.com/view/2008/05/24/Air_India_Express_to_Fly_to_Dammam/?template=cheetah-article%2Fdisplayarticle.txt

Why have they put AI's pic in AIE's report?:lol:

This will hurt BG as well as well as other operators on the route, except only TG. BG offers one of the most convenient flight connection between DEL and BKK through DAC. It actually offered the best price for the route, which may have changed only recently, if at all. Since AI Express operates on a low-cost model, it can perhaps match Biman's pricing which AI, 9W, TG can't.

I personally think the Indian carriers will soon begin to operate BOM/DEL-DAC-KUL as well.

Silv3r

May 31st, 2008, 08:10 PM

I am back.. sorry i took a long break in between.

Anyways....so whats sup with this allowing low cost carriers to operate ZIA? :ohno: i mean now whatever % of passenger local and national carriers will decline.

Is best air operating with one aircraft? does anyone know how many times a week they operate BKK?

TIslam

May 31st, 2008, 08:17 PM

Moin

May 31st, 2008, 09:09 PM

Airlines across the globe will stop issuing paper tickets this Monday.

Paper tickets are already a thing of the past for many airline passengers, but as of 1 June the International Air Traffic Association (IATA) says its members will no longer issue them.

What about BG and other local airlines??

TIslam

May 31st, 2008, 10:01 PM

This will hurt BG as well as well as other operators on the route, except only TG. BG offers one of the most convenient flight connection between DEL and BKK through DAC. It actually offered the best price for the route, which may have changed only recently, if at all. Since AI Express operates on a low-cost model, it can perhaps match Biman's pricing which AI, 9W, TG can't.

I personally think the Indian carriers will soon begin to operate BOM/DEL-DAC-KUL as well.

But then protectionism is not answer, either. If I can borrow the phrase popular in academia, "publish or perish", only the best shall survive. If Bangladeshi entrepreneurs want to be in the airline business, they have to learn the trade and do whatever it takes to be successful. That is the bottom line.

vishal

June 1st, 2008, 03:02 AM

But then protectionism is not answer, either. If I can borrow the phrase popular in academia, "publish or perish", only the best shall survive. If Bangladeshi entrepreneurs want to be in the airline business, they have to learn the trade and do whatever it takes to be successful. That is the bottom line.

Exactly...If local players are not going to reap the growing market, an "outsider" will pray for the share ....and that means outflow of profit ... people don't always go for "deshi" factor when they are looking for good and reliable service.
Air India was in the very same situation as BG before, however recent competition and a better management made it run on the correct approach path ....Air India Express runs on LCC model and can provide competitive price for better service (With the inudction of new instruments and staff).
I still think Biman is best suited and can turnaround towards betterment, provided ppl who have serious knowledge about the dynamics of aviation business run the show.

From my perception, couple of you guys have strong knowledge and the right connections in the industry... You guys need to go ahead and take over control (I know this is easier said than done...)...

amar11372

June 1st, 2008, 03:42 AM

From my perception, couple of you guys have strong knowledge and the right connections in the industry... You guys need to go ahead and take over control (I know this is easier said than done...)...

Imran Asif should lead, we will follow. :lol:

TIslam

June 1st, 2008, 03:52 AM

Imran Asif should lead, we will follow. :lol:

He's been rather quiet lately. I wonder what he's up to .....

TIslam

June 1st, 2008, 03:56 AM

......

From my perception, couple of you guys have strong knowledge and the right connections in the industry... You guys need to go ahead and take over control (I know this is easier said than done...)...

I'm cheering for Imran Asif. :cheer:

iasif

June 1st, 2008, 04:20 AM

Why won't it affect TG?

Because TG is a network carrier. Many of their outbound pax from DAC are going beyond BKK and that segment will be left untouched. BG could provide a competition if it had the plans and the planes to do it...!

He's been rather quiet lately. I wonder what he's up to .....

Me? I'm up to nothing, really! You believe me, don't? you? ;)

I'm cheering for Imran Asif. :cheer:

Aye....you look rather 'cute' in that outfit! :D

TIslam

June 1st, 2008, 05:10 AM

Because TG is a network carrier. Many of their outbound pax from DAC are going beyond BKK and that segment will be left untouched. BG could provide a competition if it had the plans and the planes to do it...!

Well then, the solution appears to be, at least to me, that the Bangladeshi carriers should seriously contemplate the concept of hub operations. Wouldn't they draw a steady number of passengers, if they had direct service from CGP and SYL to international/regional destinations?

Hey, you cannot go wrong with a smiley cheerleader! :)

iasif

June 1st, 2008, 05:30 AM

Well then, the solution appears to be, at least to me, that the Bangladeshi carriers should seriously contemplate the concept of hub operations. Wouldn't they draw a steady number of passengers, if they had direct service from CGP and SYL to international/regional destinations?

Hey, you cannot go wrong with a smiley cheerleader! :)

There are a lot of markets where BG doesn't and will not operate in the near future, and intl carriers can't directly do out of Bangladesh. These are the ones that our private carriers should explore and build themselves upon rather than only trying to get a bite off Biamn's market. Competing head-on with a state-owned airline isn't such a great idea, for it can be 'authorized' to operate at a loss to (i) retain its market, and more importantly (ii) to serve labourers/pilgrims as sensitive national interests.

TIslam

June 1st, 2008, 06:13 AM

There are a lot of markets where BG doesn't and will not operate in the near future, and intl carriers can't directly do out of Bangladesh. These are the ones that our private carriers should explore and build themselves upon rather than only trying to get a bite off Biamn's market. Competing head-on with a state-owned airline isn't such a great idea, for it can be 'authorized' to operate at a loss to (i) retain its market, and more importantly (ii) to serve labourers/pilgrims as sensitive national interests.

Makes perfect sense. One doesn't have to be in the airline business to realize and understand this, my questions is, why can't those bozos (BestAir, GMG, et.al.)? :uh:

iasif

June 1st, 2008, 09:16 AM

Makes perfect sense. One doesn't have to be in the airline business to realize and understand this, my questions is, why can't those bozos (BestAir, GMG, et.al.)? :uh:

You answered yourself! :)

dopekhor

June 1st, 2008, 07:25 PM

Makes perfect sense. One doesn't have to be in the airline business to realize and understand this, my questions is, why can't those bozos (BestAir, GMG, et.al.)? :uh:
because best air is made up of ex biman officials who wanted to give biman a competition by opening their own company

i say the governtment should allow fdi in this sector say 65% max with and that after 3-4 years of profit the foreign partner should drop 10% to the local stock exchange

TIslam

June 1st, 2008, 08:22 PM

because best air is made up of ex biman officials who wanted to give biman a competition by opening their own company

i say the governtment should allow fdi in this sector say 65% max with and that after 3-4 years of profit the foreign partner should drop 10% to the local stock exchange

So you're saying currently FDI isn't permitted in the aviation sector?

TIslam

June 1st, 2008, 08:34 PM

You answered yourself! :)

Imran, could we get you fired up once again to put pen to paper (more like fingers to the keyboard) and publish some articles in this regard? I know it would be free advice but I'm sure just like the rest of us, you would be sorry to witness the demise of private sector airline business in Bangladesh. You should provide specifics in how to operate, which markets (sectors) to concentrate, etc. Thanks. :cheers1:

dopekhor

June 1st, 2008, 08:48 PM

So you're saying currently FDI isn't permitted in the aviation sector?
as far as i know yes

Moin

June 1st, 2008, 08:52 PM

Biman Bangladesh Airlines Ltd yesterday leased a Boeing 747-300 aircraft from a Thai airline for one year in a bid to minimise disruption in its flight schedules.

"The 512-seater aircraft from Orient Thai Airlines will arrive at Zia International Airport (ZIA) by June 17," a Biman high official told The Daily Star.

An agreement to this effect was signed yesterday between Biman Bangladesh Airlines and Orient Thai at Biman's head office in Dhaka, Biman sources said.

Muhammad Tahir Husain, Biman's acting managing director, and Cho Tsnag, executive director of Orient Thai, signed the deal on behalf of their sides.

The national flag carrier has been facing serious troubles in maintaining flight schedules due to acute shortage of aircraft for quite some time now. With the leased one, the number of Biman's aircraft will rise to 10.

The leased aircraft will be used to operate Biman's flights to Gulf and Middle East countries.

Under Aircraft-Crew-Maintenance-Insurance (ACMI) lease process, the Orient Thai, which started operations in 2000, will provide staff and crew of the wide-body aircraft while Biman will supply fuel.

On expiry of the lease, the deal might be extended following negotiations between the two sides, sources said.

"As per the lease conditions, Biman will have to pay $5,395 to Orient Thai for per block hour (every flying hour from take-off to landing)," a Biman official said.

"We have finished almost all formalities to bring the leased aircraft to ZIA," the Biman official said.

Biman currently owns three types of aircraft -- four DC10-30s, two F28s, and two A310-300s.

Of those, only four or five can fly every day, while the rest are suffering from technical glitches.

Biman on March 9 leased a 542-seater Boeing 747-200 from a Nigeria-based airline, Kabo Air.

http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=39271

vishal

June 1st, 2008, 09:09 PM

I'm cheering for Imran Asif. :cheer:

Go for it Imran ....:nocrook:
I am sure you guys have way more knowledge than anyone out there at the helm.

TIslam

June 2nd, 2008, 12:15 AM

Biman Bangladesh Airlines Ltd yesterday leased a Boeing 747-300 aircraft from a Thai airline for one year in a bid to minimise disruption in its flight schedules.

Muhammad Tahir Husain, Biman's acting managing director, and Cho Tsnag, executive director of Orient Thai, signed the deal on behalf of their sides.
.............

Acting MD? What happened to the MD? Did he get the axe or transferred? If he's been transferred, when will the block heads in the government realize that you cannot afford to treat airline personnel like your run of the mill civil servants and that continuity is a big factor in the success and failure of an airline?

iasif

June 2nd, 2008, 06:27 AM

So you're saying currently FDI isn't permitted in the aviation sector?

as far as i know yes

Currently, FDI of up to 49% is allowed for Bangladeshi airlines. I however think this should be raised to 75% (if not more) for 2 reasons:

1. Banks/leasing companies in Bangladesh don't view the aviation industry as one promising enough, and are therefore reluctant to consider funding airlines. Examples like Air Parabat, Aero Bengal didn't help and we're soon to have some more going down.

2. Even if local finance can be arranged, it is going to cost between 12%-17% depending on the bank and entrepreneurs concerned, which is quite high. This high cost, plus the expenditures in foreign currencies and revenue in local currencies altogether would pose a very difficult situation for any airline. If higher degree of FDI is allowed, funding may be availed at a lower cost which may be a critical factor towards helping the airline to be more competitive against the foreign operators.

Acting MD? What happened to the MD? Did he get the axe or transferred? If he's been transferred, when will the block heads in the government realize that you cannot afford to treat airline personnel like your run of the mill civil servants and that continuity is a big factor in the success and failure of an airline?

The MD is off to Istanbul, Turkey to attend the IATA AGM which is being held from 1-3 June, 2008. He is scheduled to return on the 4th and resume at his office from 5th.

Tmac

June 2nd, 2008, 08:33 AM

Dhaka ZIA International Airport

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/Bangladesh/Bangladesh1/dhakaairport111.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/Bangladesh/Bangladesh1/dhakaairport112.jpg

AeroGeeK

June 2nd, 2008, 09:34 AM

Why are the gates numbered 1/1A, 2/2A, 3/3A and so on? What does A mean? Aerobridge?
Is that EK 777 a -200ER series?

AeroGeeK

June 2nd, 2008, 09:50 AM

amar11372

June 2nd, 2008, 10:59 AM

Dhaka ZIA International Airport

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/Bangladesh/Bangladesh1/dhakaairport111.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/Bangladesh/Bangladesh1/dhakaairport112.jpg

They seriously need to brighten up ZIA.

iasif

June 2nd, 2008, 12:04 PM

Is that EK 777 a -200ER series?

No. That's what Mr. Tim Clark says is the 'champion' of EK's fleet - the 777-300ER. In case you're wondering why they use their -300ERs on a 5-odd hour route, its because of 2 reasons: (i) capacity (ii) to avoid refuelling at DAC.

Kang Pacific Airlines takes off in three days time. They will be operating Fujairah-Manila-Fujairah 2x week flights initially. Fujairah-Dhaka-Manila will begin later. They've abandoned their initial plan to lease DC-10's & are wet-leasing A300-600R & B767's. How many people in Dhaka wants to go to Manila?:lol:

Well, well...you just might be missing out on the bigger picture here! If they can provide a good connection for flights out of MNL to Australia at a bargain price (through codesharing/interlining with PR), you might as well see a lot of people taking the flight from DAC!

Philippine Airlines (PR) has non-stop flights to both SYD and MEL (the cities with most Bangladeshis) out of MNL and this flight could just be a cheaper alternative than flying on SQ, TG, or MH out of DAC!

Having said that, I must add that as far as my memory serves, the ASA between UAE and Bangladesh allowed the UAE carriers to operate pax flights to any points beyond DAC, but 5th freedom rights ex-DAC was only allowed for (i) KHI, and (ii) KUL for pax; and (iii) any points in India except CCU, BOM, DEL, and (iv) Taipei for cargo flights. I'm not sure if it has been amended recently to include MNL as an allowed 5th freedom point out of DAC for UAE carriers operating pax flights, without which Nang Pacific won't be able to pick pax up from DAC.

dopekhor

June 2nd, 2008, 12:36 PM

Currently, FDI of up to 49% is allowed for Bangladeshi airlines. I however think this should be raised to 75% (if not more) for 2 reasons:

1. Banks/leasing companies in Bangladesh don't view the aviation industry as one promising enough, and are therefore reluctant to consider funding airlines. Examples like Air Parabat, Aero Bengal didn't help and we're soon to have some more going down.

2. Even if local finance can be arranged, it is going to cost between 12%-17% depending on the bank and entrepreneurs concerned, which is quite high. This high cost, plus the expenditures in foreign currencies and revenue in local currencies altogether would pose a very difficult situation for any airline. If higher degree of FDI is allowed, funding may be availed at a lower cost which may be a critical factor towards helping the airline to be more competitive against the foreign operators.

The MD is off to Istanbul, Turkey to attend the IATA AGM which is being held from 1-3 June, 2008. He is scheduled to return on the 4th and resume at his office from 5th.
i dont think any foreign company has showed interest in buying any stake in any bangladeshi airline

amar11372

June 2nd, 2008, 12:38 PM

i dont think any foreign company has showed interest in buying any stake in any bangladeshi airline

BestAir is partially own by a Kuwaiti company.

dopekhor

June 2nd, 2008, 01:51 PM

BestAir is partially own by a Kuwaiti company.
sure u aint mixing it up with air arabia

amar11372

June 2nd, 2008, 02:08 PM

sure u aint mixing it up with air arabia

"Best Air, a subsidiary of Best Aviation is a domestic private airline of Bangladesh. The company formed in 2007 as a joint venture between Best Aviation and a Kuwait-based company, Aqeeq Aviation Holding which controls a 70% share of the airline. It started operations in January of 2008 from Dhaka's Zia International Airport and currently flies to one domestic destination."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_Air

amar11372

June 2nd, 2008, 02:12 PM

Hey Imran, so why didn't the maximum 49% FDI apply to BestAir as a Kuwaiti company owns 70% of the company?

TIslam

June 2nd, 2008, 03:50 PM

Kang Pacific Airlines takes off in three days time. They will be operating Fujairah-Manila-Fujairah 2x week flights initially. Fujairah-Dhaka-Manila will begin later. They've abandoned their initial plan to lease DC-10's & are wet-leasing A300-600R & B767's. How many people in Dhaka wants to go to Manila?:lol:

You'd be surprised. Don't forget that there's a good number of people traveling between DAC and MNL because of ADB. I wasn't aware of this until I met my spouse whose father is with ADB. The problem however is, that ADB folks are SQ fans, for most part. They prefer multi-hops over non-stops owing to SQ's top notch business class service. So, Kang-Pacific has to be as good as SQ, in service. Then perhaps the non-stop factor will sell.

dopekhor

June 2nd, 2008, 07:04 PM

"Best Air, a subsidiary of Best Aviation is a domestic private airline of Bangladesh. The company formed in 2007 as a joint venture between Best Aviation and a Kuwait-based company, Aqeeq Aviation Holding which controls a 70% share of the airline. It started operations in January of 2008 from Dhaka's Zia International Airport and currently flies to one domestic destination."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_Air
oh okay my bad, i didnt know that

btw there is no mention of that in their website in their message from the chairman it looks like they are a part of the www.ipsslgroup.com which i have never heard off

btw did you notice at the bottom of their webiste

Under Constriction....
more>>
Email:info@bestair.com

these fcukers dont even own that domain lol

iasif

June 2nd, 2008, 07:12 PM

Hey Imran, so why didn't the maximum 49% FDI apply to BestAir as a Kuwaiti company owns 70% of the company?

Well, that's as good a mess-up as Biman disclosing the actual purchase price of the Boeings! Aqeeq technically owns 49% of the shares in Best Air. The other 21% shares are owned by Aqeeq 'nominated' local folks, and Best Air said in its press releases that Aqeeq owns 70% (!!), to which GoB/CAAB should've immediately pounced upon as that is a direct violation of the regulations currently in place!

iasif

June 2nd, 2008, 07:39 PM

So, Kang-Pacific has to be as good as SQ, in service.

:rofl:

TIslam

June 2nd, 2008, 08:35 PM

:rofl:

Yes Imran, it is hilarious but shouldn't all airlines strive to be SQ? :D

vishal

June 2nd, 2008, 08:55 PM

Yes Imran, it is hilarious but shouldn't all airlines strive to be SQ? :D

On the contrary, offlate I have experienced some decrement in the service provided by SQ too... I travel often between CCU-LAX and last 2 ones have not been as good as what we used to get couple of years back ... I think Malaysian / Qantas have improved a lot lately.

iasif

June 2nd, 2008, 11:08 PM

On the contrary, offlate I have experienced some decrement in the service provided by SQ too... I travel often between CCU-LAX and last 2 ones have not been as good as what we used to get couple of years back ... I think Malaysian / Qantas have improved a lot lately.

Well, I've had a couple odd flights on SQ as well in which the service wasn't great by SQ's own standards, but despite that when I average out all of my flights on each airline (ones I've flown at least 5 times), SQ still stands out way ahead of the rest! One of my not-so-great flights on SQ was also coincidentally to LAX, on the Executive Economy class of their A340-500s out of SIN. But then, I've had pure Y class hops from SIN-KUL where they were exceptional, and like I said, still the best on the average for me!

I haven't flown on MH in a while, but QF has always been one of the top 5 of my list and so is 9W, since 2001 when they hadn't even gone international! :)

vishal

June 3rd, 2008, 12:12 AM

Well, I've had a couple odd flights on SQ as well in which the service wasn't great by SQ's own standards, but despite that when I average out all of my flights on each airline (ones I've flown at least 5 times), SQ still stands out way ahead of the rest! One of my not-so-great flights on SQ was also coincidentally to LAX, on the Executive Economy class of their A340-500s out of SIN. But then, I've had pure Y class hops from SIN-KUL where they were exceptional, and like I said, still the best on the average for me!

I haven't flown on MH in a while, but QF has always been one of the top 5 of my list and so is 9W, since 2001 when they hadn't even gone international! :)

Agreed... SQ is still ahead of most when compared, but they have definitely compromised on several fronts (porbably its the cost factor) .. To me currently CX is also at par with them (Atleast in the Economy area). I have to still fly Y Class on SQ. In India Jet and Kingfisher definitely have set the standards absolutely high and now that 9W is starting on SFO-BOM route, things are surely going to heaten up here (Heard they have one of the best configurations and the famed Rooms ;)).

BTW, do you have any info about Kingfisher's plan to connect DAC yet? Do you know they serve their own Kingfisher brand beer :cheers: inflight .. How about that for a nice service :nuts:

TIslam

June 3rd, 2008, 01:14 AM

^^
Previously I wrote on this forum that I felt SQ economy class service to be on the decline. My experience on the last two LAX-SIN-MES-SIN-DAC-SIN-LAX, within the last two years, wasn't good. The cabin crew had an air of indifference about them. The same sort of attitude one takes for granted among the US carriers. I recognize however, their disposition mus vary from sector to sector and probably always positive in business class and beyond.

Both Conde Nest travel magazine and Skytrax have been rating CX very high in the last two years of so, just as KE.

TIslam

June 3rd, 2008, 01:17 AM

No. That's what Mr. Tim Clark says is the 'champion' of EK's fleet - the 777-300ER. In case you're wondering why they use their -300ERs on a 5-odd hour route, its because of 2 reasons: (i) capacity (ii) to avoid refuelling at DAC.

But the picture (#226) clearly shows the aircraft is being refueled!

NYnites99

June 3rd, 2008, 05:15 AM

Crisis-hit airlines to lose $2.3b this year
June 2, 2008

Air travel industry body IATA predicted Monday that airlines would lose 2.3 billion dollars this year, dramatically reversing an earlier forecast of profits nearly twice this figure.

The International Air Transport Association, which represents companies accounting for 94 percent of world air travel, blamed surging fuel costs for the reversal.

"The industry is in crisis, perhaps the biggest crisis we have ever faced," IATA secretary general Giovanni Bisignani said at the start of the organisation's general meeting here.

In April, the airline body had forecast profits of 4.5 billion dollars (2.9 billion euros) for the industry, but a sharp rise in oil prices since then amid slowing economic growth provoked the reappraisal.

Jet fuel is refined from crude oil, the price of which has soared above 135 dollars a barrel, and represents the biggest slice of operating expenses for airlines.

After making an estimated 40 billion dollars of losses after the attacks of September 11, 2001, the airline industry had recovered in recent years, posting healthy profits of 5.6 billion dollars last year.

Bisignani likened the industry to the Greek mythological figure Sisyphus, who was condemned to roll a boulder up a hill for eternity only to watch it roll back down when he reached the top.

"Our industry is like Sisyphus: after a long uphill journey a giant boulder of bad news is driving us back down," Bisignani said.

He warned that losses this year could total 6.1 billion dollars if the oil price stayed around 135 dollars a barrel. The figure of 2.1 billion dollars was based on oil averaging 106.5 dollars over the year.

The dire predictions came amid mounting evidence that some in the airline industry are already beginning to struggle.

Last Friday, British business-class airline Silverjet said it had suspended operations and entered administration, leaving it on the brink of collapse, after running into serious funding problems.

"Twenty-four airlines went bust in the last six months," Bisignani said, hinting that ticket prices were set to rise "to reflect cost structure."

The head of the German unit of Britain's easyJet airline said in an interview published Monday that high fuel prices would trigger a rash of bankruptcies in Europe.

"Several airlines in Europe will go out of business," John Kohlsaat told Berlin's daily Der Tagesspiegel. "Theoretically, 50 are endangered."

Kohlsaat said several carriers had been hit hard by rising fuel costs and were sliding into the red -- a development that in the end would leave only British Airways, Air France/KLM, Lufthansa, Ryanair, and easyJet.

Those best equipped to survive were the companies with a new fleet of planes, which consume less fuel than their older counterparts, and those with low operating costs.

"A new Airbus consumes 20 percent less fuel than an old Boeing 737," he said.

Speaking in Istanbul, the head of Malaysia Airlines said the company would freeze recruitment and was considering axing more routes as part of cost-cutting measures triggered by rising fuel prices.

"We are monitoring the overseas routes. If you reduce capacity, the routes' results actually improve," chief executive Idris Jala told Malaysia's official Bernama news agency.

"It is the worst time for the airline industry. We are, however, cautiously optimistic," he said.

In another sign that airlines are looking at new ways to cut their costs, 10-strong global airline alliance Oneworld said Monday that its members were considering buying fuel collectively.

Oneworld representative John McCulloh said a proposal for Oneworld, which includes British Airways, Cathay Pacific and Qantas, to buy fuel together to save on costs was to be considered at a meeting next week.

McCulloh conceded however that some members were reticient about the proposal.

THE DAILY STAR
http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=39482

amar11372

June 3rd, 2008, 06:41 AM

^^ Well the Govt fixed the price of Jet fuel in BD but refueling in other countries would definitely hurt the Airlines.

iasif

June 3rd, 2008, 07:02 AM

In India Jet and Kingfisher definitely have set the standards absolutely high and now that 9W is starting on SFO-BOM route, things are surely going to heaten up here (Heard they have one of the best configurations and the famed Rooms ;)).

BTW, do you have any info about Kingfisher's plan to connect DAC yet? Do you know they serve their own Kingfisher brand beer :cheers: inflight .. How about that for a nice service :nuts:

I've flown on Kingfisher only once so can't really judge them from that but 9W has been outstanding all through. Their 'rooms' as you mention is only second to SQ's F-class on their A380s, which is a mile high clubber's biggest dream! :D

So IT serves their own beer on-board? If they do that on their flights to DAC, they should expect a lot of supposedly tipsy people to deal with! I've seen a lot of these guys who'd get 'drunk' inflight if they were served a soft drink in a beer can...and now if IT serves real beer, oh my! :)

AeroGeeK

June 3rd, 2008, 07:13 AM

iasif

June 3rd, 2008, 01:58 PM

Biman's 743 has 30 seats less than their 742 yet it cost's nearly $100 more than the 742. So:
1. why did BG lease it?
2. why didn't Z5 lease it instead of AAI's 743 whch costs $500 more per hour?
3. does it have PW engines?

You can't match one plane's config/cost against another in a perfectly proportionate basis. Yes its got 30 fewer seats and costs a 100-odd dollars extra but its still within the range bracket for the type. Also, at the point of time Z5 took the one from AAI's, this one might not have been available for leasing.

Orient-Thai's only active 747-300 (HS-UTO; 23639/664) is an ex-Japan Airlines bird (JA8178) and is powered by P&W's, which may not be a problem by itself just because AAI's ones are having some troubles. I don't know if Orient-Thai has any other 747-300s but I do know they were looking for some more Classics.

This pic that I took back in March at ZIA may just be the bird in question:
http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/Pic31.jpg

TIslam

June 3rd, 2008, 02:33 PM

I've flown on Kingfisher only once so can't really judge them from that but 9W has been outstanding all through. Their 'rooms' as you mention is only second to SQ's F-class on their A380s, which is a mile high clubber's biggest dream! :D

Strictly forbidden! ;)

So IT serves their own beer on-board? If they do that on their flights to DAC, they should expect a lot of supposedly tipsy people to deal with! I've seen a lot of these guys who'd get 'drunk' inflight if they were served a soft drink in a beer can...and now if IT serves real beer, oh my! :)

Two stories (as witnessed by me) from two separate SIN-DAC SQ flights:

1)One time, a malay[sian] flight attendant could not keep up serving beer to a fellow sitting just ahead of me and it was time to serve the meal. As he was passing a meal tray to that beer loving passenger, the attendant stopped mid-air and asked the passenger, "you ordered halal meal, muslim meal"? The fellow answered yes. To which the attended asked, "you're a muslim?". The passenger replied yes. Then the attendant said, "no halal meal for you, unless you stop drinking alcohol now!". The passenger was rather young and probably felt intimidated and didn't get any alcohol for the duration of the flight. And one thought there was only the soup nazi?! (Seinfeld episode).

2)Another time, James, the Bangla pop/rock music star, was a fellow passenger. At the time, I didn't know who he was but my wife appraised me. He was drinking at Changi who knows from when, but he pretty much kept drinking until almost touch down at DAC. Later on, he was quite a nuisance and was making an ass of himself on the ground, and was being abusive towards his assistant (I gathered as much) who accompained him in the flight. The immigration folks were beginning to get annoyed by him.