Best Air, Mid Asia, THT, Voyager fall short of compliance standards

Civil Aviation Authority of Bangladesh (CAAB) has suspended operations of four local airlines after International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) raised significant safety concerns over issuance of air operator certificates by the local regulator, insiders said.

The four carriers are Best Air, Mid Asia, THT and Voyager.

The CAAB has also asked seven other airlines to improve their safety compliance standards as part of its corrective measures to eliminate the drawback as the name of Bangladesh is expected to be posted on ICAO website along with 10 other countries.

“We've done well in many areas. But at one point, the safety concern has come. We hope to get shot of the drawback within two-three months as we are taking corrective actions,” said Wing Commander M Kamrul Islam, director for Flight Safety and Regulations of CAAB.

The ICAO, following its oversight safety audit of Bangladesh in May, identified safety vulnerability observing that the local civil aviation regulator, CAAB, has issued licences to air operators without ensuring full compliance with national regulations and international standards.

Officials however hoped CAAB would come out of the safety concern list within a couple of months as it has taken corrective measures such as suspension of operation of carriers including passenger service provider Best Air and cargo service operators Mid Asia, THT and Voyager, insiders said.

Seven other operators -- passenger service providers Biman, GMG, United and Aviana, and cargo operators Bismillah, Zoom Air and Easy Fly -- have been asked for improving their compliance.

Of the seven carriers, compliance standard of Biman is much better followed by United Airways, officials said.

In its audit, the ICAO found flaws in certification process established by the CAAB saying that the latter does not address issues such as review and approval of an air operator's flight safety document system, coordination between operations, airworthiness, and review and approval of an air operator's operations manual.

The ICAO also observed weaknesses in review and approval of training programmes for flight crew, cabin crew and operations personnel and air operators' ground handling arrangements.

The global aviation organisation suggested that CAAB should conduct an evaluation of all air operators immediately.

It also recommended developing and implementing a comprehensive certification process ensuring all compliance issues, and a system for maintaining records of all certifications related to applicants and holders of AOCs.

Offering an action plan template, the global aviation agency early last month also asked the CAAB to inform it about the corrective actions with warning that it (ICAO) would post safety concerns on its website if any issue remains unresolved.

Officials said the CAAB, following the ICAO recommendations, conducted assessment on compliance performance of local carriers and found various deficiencies in the local airlines.

“Based on this we have initiated major actions such as suspension of licences of some airlines and at the same time asked some to improve their compliance performances,” said Kamrul, also national coordinator for ICAO matters.

“We hope to resolve all concerns as soon as possible.”

http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=95189

Best Air, Mid Asia, THT, Voyager fall short of compliance standards...

http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=95189

A misdirected report. The 4 operators have been grounded following the ICAO audit on CAAB in May which has resulted in Bangladesh being one of the 11 states with 'Significant Safety Concern.' This whole point has gone missing in this report. Rather than questioning CAAB's competency (I mean lack thereof) directly, the report focuses on the 4 operators being non-compliant.

Best Air, Mid Asia, THT, Voyager fall short of compliance standards

Never heard of these carriers except the first one. Who owns these carriers & what's their fleet & route network?

one slight question, are they making a new terminal, i mean a completely diff one, or are they just expanding it?

Never heard of these carriers except the first one. Who owns these carriers & what's their fleet & route network?

Mid-Asia: none.
THT Air Services: B747-100 (MSN/LN 19650/24); YOM 1970; S2-AFA. Last seen at DAC probably in 2007.
Voyager: F-27-500RF

as for the pics, the exterior of the airport is not soo impressive, they need to renovate the exterior look i think! As for the interior, the departure is not bad but the arrival area sucks big time, tht needs renovating too! Am I right Imran bhaia?

Best Air, Mid Asia, THT, Voyager fall short of compliance standards

Civil Aviation Authority of Bangladesh (CAAB) has suspended operations of four local airlines after International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) raised significant safety concerns over issuance of air operator certificates by the local regulator, insiders said.
.......

Very funny! Oh boy, watch out! CAAB is coming after you and doing its job!

Best Air managed to ground itself, and ceased operations long before this so-called CAAB action, and the others? Aviation companies that are either "has been" or on paper only. It is like passing a death sentence on a person who has already expired. What a joke!

iasif, if a private airline has been granted access to fly international destinations are these rights revoked if not used?

Very funny! Oh boy, watch out! CAAB is coming after you and doing its job!

Best Air managed to ground itself, and ceased operations long before this so-called CAAB action, and the others? Aviation companies that are either "has been" or on paper only. It is like passing a death sentence on a person who has already expired. What a joke!

There couldn't possibly be a better way to express the fact!

iasif, if a private airline has been granted access to fly international destinations are these rights revoked if not used?

That's how it should be. No airline should have the right to indefinitely hold onto frequencies it's not intending to use. Besides, once frequencies are made effective, if the operators assigned to use them continues not to perform, it results in revenue loss for the airport authority of the destination.

Biman Bangladesh Airlines Limited is set to procure three new generation aircrafts for its fleet by October next to operate flights on more routes, including resuming its New York operations.

The national flag carrier, now turned into a public limited company, has invited `Request for Proposal (RFP)’ for taking lease of three 777-200ER/777- 200 aircraft before October this year.

The three aircraft will be brought for 48 months -- ACMI (Aircraft, Crew, Maintenance and Insurance) lease for 12 months with or without option for conversion to AMI (Aircraft, Maintenance and Insurance) after six months, and then to Dry Lease for another 36 months.

According to the RFP, the delivery of the aircraft will take place at a mutually agreed location while re- delivery after the lease period will take place at Dhaka at the lessor’s cost.

It said that the proposal should come from the Principal/Owner. However, if represented by an agent, a letter of authorization from the Principal/Owner will have to be submitted along with the offer/proposal. If the lessor is not owner of the aircraft, owner’s authorization/mandate is required to be submitted along with the Proposal/Offer. As per the RFP, “D’ Check or Heavy maintenance check must not fall due during the lease period, while “C” Check as per Lessor’s applicable maintenance program shall have to be carried out prior to commencement of lease.

Before commencement of Dry Lease operations each aircraft to be delivered fresh out of ‘C’ check at the beginning of Dry Lease period.

The Base of the aircraft will be at Dhaka in Bangladesh. The aircraft will be operated to mid-haul and long-haul routes. The destinations of the aircrafts will be Jeddah, Dammam, Dubai, Riyadh, New York and Brussels.

With the leased aircraft, Biman Bangladesh Airlines wants to resume its New York flight that remains suspended for a long time.

Biman may also operate the leased aircraft to Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Hong Kong, Abu Dhabi, Doha, Muscat, Kuwait, Rome, London, Tripoli and any points within Biman's network.
Talking to UNB over telephone, a Biman official said they want to make themselves familiar with the new generation aircraft as the national flag carrier earlier signed an agreement with US aircraft giant Boeing to deliver eight new generation aircraft. “Apart from getting experience with new generation aircraft, Biman opted to start new routes as well as its suspended old routes to grab more business,” the official said. Biman during the caretaker government signed definitive deals with Boeing Company to procure eight aircraft -- four 777-300 ER and four 787-8.

Of the eight Boeings, the first consignment of four planes (777-300ER) will be arriving here in 2013 while the second consignment (787-8) in 2019.

The first Boeing 777-300ER aircraft will cost US$ 182.17 million while the other three at US$ 182.51 million, US$ 183.20 million and US$ 184.01 million.

The first Boeing 787 aircraft will cost US$ 132.83 million, while the other three at US$ 133.08 million, US$ 133.53 million and US$ 133.81 million.

The four Boeings (777-300ER), scheduled to fly in 2013, will have 463 seats, including 39 business-class berths and 424 economy class. The second phase Boeings (787), expected to arrive in 2019, will have 394 seats with 26 business-class and 268 economy ones. The 737-800 will have 175 seats.

---UNB, Dhaka

http://www.bangladeshinfo.com/business/headline_top.php?nid=1

* About the routes, when they get the aircrafts, shoudn't they resume their suspended European routes such as Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Athens, Manchester etc?? After receiving the new Boeing aircrafts, if BG performs well, I think they should also consider new routes such as Toronto, Madrid, Beijing, Moscow, and Johannesburg.

* In wiki, the unit cost of a B777 is at least around $230 million and for B787, is it at least $160 million or around tht price but here, I see we are getting it at a cheaper price lol. how come?

Also, imran bhaia, do u knw if these (ordered) aircrafts will have personal entertainment or not?

^^ also, it says that B787 will have 394 seats but in wiki, it says the maximum number of seats in B787 is only 290!

guys i am looking to Bangladesh mid september usually i travel by biman but since i found a good deal with emirates in their business class and gives me the chance to get on the A380. the stop overs at DXB is over 8 hours. i hear theres a hotel inside the airport that you check into and if there is does anyone no the cost of the hotel? also are there usually tickets available for DAC-ZYL with GMG on the day of arrival or should i book it in advance?

My itinerary as follows

16 Sept EK008 Boeing 773
LHR-0840
DXB-1830
17 Sept EK582 Boeing 773ER (8Hrs 30mins to Kill)
DXB-0200
DAC-0940
DAC-ZYL any suggestions?
ZYL-DAC any suggestions?
EK583 Boeing 773ER
DAC-1015
DXB-1305
EK001 Airbus A380 (18hrs to Kill)
DXB-0745
LHR-1215

also i do have a few relatives in Dubai will i need a transit visa? i hold a british passport. as far as i am aware if your a british citizen and you visit dubai for less then 30 days you do not need a visa does that still apply for transit visa?

guys i am looking to Bangladesh mid september usually i travel by biman but since i found a good deal with emirates in their business class and gives me the chance to get on the A380. the stop overs at DXB is over 8 hours. i hear theres a hotel inside the airport that you check into and if there is does anyone no the cost of the hotel? also are there usually tickets available for DAC-ZYL with GMG on the day of arrival or should i book it in advance?

My itinerary as follows

16 Sept EK008 Boeing 773
LHR-0840
DXB-1830
17 Sept EK582 Boeing 773ER (8Hrs 30mins to Kill)
DXB-0200
DAC-0940
DAC-ZYL any suggestions?
ZYL-DAC any suggestions?
EK583 Boeing 773ER
DAC-1015
DXB-1305
EK001 Airbus A380 (18hrs to Kill)
DXB-0745
LHR-1215

also i do have a few relatives in Dubai will i need a transit visa? i hold a british passport. as far as i am aware if your a british citizen and you visit dubai for less then 30 days you do not need a visa does that still apply for transit visa?

Did you mean free hotel accommodation at the airport? I doubt it will be at the airport, even if EK would like to entice you to travel in J class by offering a free hotel, it will be outside the airport. At least that is how it used to be. But J class passengers can avail themselves EK's lounge for free, where there are shower facilities and never ending buffet.

UK and US passport holders do not need a visa to enter UAE, for up to 90 days.

* About the routes, when they get the aircrafts, shoudn't they resume their suspended European routes such as Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Athens, Manchester etc?? After receiving the new Boeing aircrafts, if BG performs well, I think they should also consider new routes such as Toronto, Madrid, Beijing, Moscow, and Johannesburg.

* In wiki, the unit cost of a B777 is at least around $230 million and for B787, is it at least $160 million or around tht price but here, I see we are getting it at a cheaper price lol. how come?

Also, imran bhaia, do u knw if these (ordered) aircrafts will have personal entertainment or not?

1. The new 777s and 787s (excluding the options) will be used up almost entirely to (i) replace the existing capacity of the DC-10s and A310s, and (ii) add capacity in the growth markets of the existing network. Among the points you mentioned, Manchester, perhaps Amsterdam, Toronto and Beijing may be worthwhile to look at. However, Air Service Agreements will be an issue of concern. Biman haslong been wanting to go into Toronto, only to be let down by the Canadian authorities who wouldn't give Bangladesh the rights until such time they feel their carriers are interested in Bangladesh to operate into.

2. No aircraft is sold at the publicized list prices. But Boeing does have every reason to be upset over Biman's disclosure of actual prices which they were obligated by contract not to let out!

^^ also, it says that B787 will have 394 seats but in wiki, it says the maximum number of seats in B787 is only 290!

You weren't reading closely enough! If you added up his cabin config of 268Y+26J you would get 294, and excuse his 394 as a typo! :)

FYI though, the Wiki number of 290 isn't correct either. The 787-8 can actually accommodate up to 375 pax in a single cattle-class config.

^^ thanx alot for the info :)

Did you mean free hotel accommodation at the airport? I doubt it will be at the airport, even if EK would like to entice you to travel in J class by offering a free hotel, it will be outside the airport. At least that is how it used to be. But J class passengers can avail themselves EK's lounge for free, where there are shower facilities and never ending buffet.

UK and US passport holders do not need a visa to enter UAE, for up to 90 days.

just found out there is a hotel inside the Terminal Called Dubai International Hotel (DHI). I wouldnt want to spend 18 hours inside the airport. DHI rates per night is quite affordable.

just found out there is a hotel inside the Terminal Called Dubai International Hotel (DHI). I wouldnt want to spend 18 hours inside the airport. DHI rates per night is quite affordable.

Unless your going to be spending all 18 hours inside the airport, you may want to compare the rates of the DIA Business lounge open to al, l that rents beds (with shower) per (certain) block hours.

^^ how much is it lol?? I would'nt like a transit more than 10-12 hrs haha (i.e. without a hotel/lounge) :P

Unless your going to be spending all 18 hours inside the airport, you may want to compare the rates of the DIA Business lounge open to al, l that rents beds (with shower) per (certain) block hours.


I think your right DIA will charge 1095AED (£170) i wouldnt want to spend £170 for just 18 hours. i guess i will have too see what on offer once i get there.

1...... Biman haslong been wanting to go into Toronto, only to be let down by the Canadian authorities who wouldn't give Bangladesh the rights until such time they feel their carriers are interested in Bangladesh to operate into.

Being illogical and unreasonable isn't the sole province of GoB. Canadian carriers barely get past Europe and Japan. Air Canada began to fly to India just the other day. So, if no Canadian carriers show any interest in Dhaka, BG doesn't get a shot at YYZ, for the next fifty years? :ohno:

So, if no Canadian carriers show any interest in Dhaka, BG doesn't get a shot at YYZ, for the next fifty years? :ohno:

No...not unless the Canadian authorities have a change of mind. Bangladesh had last approached them about 4/5 years back...and that's what they had to say then...that unless their carriers show interest in Bangladesh, they're not keen to talk about an ASA.

It's ridiculous, and borders sadism of sorts. By denying Bangladesh the rights and not operating themselves either, they're depriving Biman/BD operators while the whole Bangladesh-Canada market is taken away by EK/EY. They gain nothing from their presence in the Star Alliance either since pax bound for Canada are least likely to take TG or SQ who operates into DAC.

add capacity in the growth markets of the existing network. Among the points you mentioned, Manchester, perhaps Amsterdam, Toronto and Beijing may be worthwhile to look at. However, Air Service Agreements will be an issue of concern. Biman haslong been wanting to go into Toronto, only to be let down by the Canadian authorities who wouldn't give Bangladesh the rights until such time they feel their carriers are interested in Bangladesh to operate into.

I think BG should also think about their closed routes like DAC - Seoul - Narita.

I think BG should also think about their closed routes like DAC - Seoul - Narita.

Yes, but the problem is the appropriate aircraft for these routes will be the 737s, but if they have just 2 of them in the fleet, they'll have them all completely occupied to do SIN, BKK, CCU, KTM and other thin regional routes.

No...not unless the Canadian authorities have a change of mind. Bangladesh had last approached them about 4/5 years back...and that's what they had to say then...that unless their carriers show interest in Bangladesh, they're not keen to talk about an ASA.

It's ridiculous, and borders sadism of sorts. By denying Bangladesh the rights and not operating themselves either, they're depriving Biman/BD operators while the whole Bangladesh-Canada market is taken away by EK/EY. They gain nothing from their presence in the Star Alliance either since pax bound for Canada are least likely to take TG or SQ who operates into DAC.

Okay, listen up you all Canadians (and residents) up there: It is time to write/lobby your MPs and other appropriate government officials to sign an ASA with Bangladesh and permit BG to fly to YYZ.

Mid-Asia: none.
THT Air Services: B747-100 (MSN/LN 19650/24); YOM 1970; S2-AFA. Last seen at DAC probably in 2007.
Voyager: F-27-500RF

How can an airline be an airline without having any aircraft? Or do they have paper aircrafts?

How can an airline be an airline without having any aircraft? Or do they have paper aircrafts?

Beats me!!! How about Air Riksha

How can an airline be an airline without having any aircraft? Or do they have paper aircrafts?

They got disqualified on the grounds of not having the appropriate manuals (operating manual, safety manual, emergency manual, etc.). That's more than enough to get busted...aircraft or no aircraft!

http://www.eprothomalo.com/contents/2009/2009_07_05/content_zoom/2009_07_05_5_12_b.jpg

why just for a day??

Yes, but the problem is the appropriate aircraft for these routes will be the 737s, but if they have just 2 of them in the fleet, they'll have them all completely occupied to do SIN, BKK, CCU, KTM and other thin regional routes.

With increasing competition, especially from local private airlines, BG should never operate routes like CCU or KTM (even BKK). And with 737-800, it will be sheer madness I presume. By the way, are they planning to bring one its 738 without winglets?

Mid-Asia: none.
THT Air Services: B747-100 (MSN/LN 19650/24); YOM 1970; S2-AFA. Last seen at DAC probably in 2007.
Voyager: F-27-500RF

The data I have says, Voyager Air is the leading shrimp fry carrier (correct me if it is not)... how can they managed such a feat with with that stone-age bird?

With increasing competition, especially from local private airlines, BG should never operate routes like CCU or KTM (even BKK). And with 737-800, it will be sheer madness I presume. By the way, are they planning to bring one its 738 without winglets?

May not be a bad idea if the yield is not that good. BTW, QGR, please check your pm. Thanks.

With increasing competition, especially from local private airlines, BG should never operate routes like CCU or KTM (even BKK). And with 737-800, it will be sheer madness I presume. By the way, are they planning to bring one its 738 without winglets?

BG should probably consider pulling out of CCU, but KTM is actually a very good point for BG, not so much because of travellers between DAC and KTM, but for the connecting feed it gets from KUL and BKK. This volume is quite large, and also the reason why Z5 operates to KTM. TG operates to KTM, but their fares are much higher than what BG can sell at and MH doesn't operate to KTM at all.

As for the 738s Biman is getting, all of what they'll get from Boeing will be with the winglets. If my memory serves me right, Boeing has made the winglets a default component for the 738s and 739s.

The data I have says, Voyager Air is the leading shrimp fry carrier (correct me if it is not)... how can they managed such a feat with with that stone-age bird?

1. Unlike you and I, shrimp fries can't protest about the condition of the aircraft they're put on! :)

2. There are many 'less-than-sane' pilots who'd fly anything, as many times as required, for money.

3. There are banks (;)) and generous bankers (;)) passionately willing to fund for the purchase of disposable aircraft! :)

4. There's CAAB to pave the way to operate!

1. Unlike you and I, shrimp fries can't protest about the condition of the aircraft they're put on! :)

Valid point indeed...

3. There are banks (;)) and generous bankers (;)) passionately willing to fund for the purchase of disposable aircraft! :)

Well, you need a bit of insanity to make life more interesting... sane stuffs are typically boring, you know... :D

.....If my memory serves me right, Boeing has made the winglets a default component for the 738s and 739s.

May be a standard component, but if BG wants to operate if 738 in short routes like CCU or KTM or even CGP/ZYL, they better get one without winglets like 9W. Personally (and of course a biased opinion...), I think 738 is wrong equipment for such routes, and BG can explore i) 737 classics like -300 or ii) regional jets (CRJ, ERJ, SRJ etc.). By the way, did I mention that I am not at all a big fan of tarboprops...:)

http://www.eprothomalo.com/contents/2009/2009_07_05/content_zoom/2009_07_05_5_12_b.jpg

why just for a day??

test flight, i guess why not make some money if you can.

May be a standard component, but if BG wants to operate if 738 in short routes like CCU or KTM or even CGP/ZYL, they better get one without winglets like 9W. Personally (and of course a biased opinion...), I think 738 is wrong equipment for such routes, and BG can explore i) 737 classics like -300 or ii) regional jets (CRJ, ERJ, SRJ etc.). By the way, did I mention that I am not at all a big fan of tarboprops...:)

The classics probably wouldn't be cost effective, and the RJs do not have the passenger capacity as well as pax to cargo capacity ratio, for those routes since they are feeder routes for other destinations, except perhaps CCU.

The RJs typically have inadequate cargo space. One time, we were returning home from EWR. The flight was so full that they couldn't board all the checked luggage. Some of our pieces arrived on later flights and were delivered to us the next day. Of course, things are a bit different today since you have to pay for checking in your baggage. On the other hand, I cannot imagine the chaos during the boarding process on these RJs nowadays, with everybody trying to fit their over sized carry ons in the overhead bins or under the seat. I read somewhere recently, that the US carriers are actively considering to begin charging for carry on luggage. So, effectively we'll be using flying commuter buses!

The classics probably wouldn't be cost effective, and the RJs do not have the passenger capacity as well as pax to cargo capacity ratio, for those routes since they are feeder routes for other destinations, except perhaps CCU.

The RJs typically have inadequate cargo space. One time, we were returning home from EWR. The flight was so full that they couldn't board all the checked luggage. Some of our pieces arrived on later flights and were delivered to us the next day. Of course, things are a bit different today since you have to pay for checking in your baggage. On the other hand, I cannot imagine the chaos during the boarding process on these RJs nowadays, with everybody trying to fit their over sized carry ons in the overhead bins or under the seat. I read somewhere recently, that the US carriers are actively considering to begin charging for carry on luggage. So, effectively we'll be using flying commuter buses!

The classics will be super cost effective compared to the exiting F28s any day of the week... :)

Cargo pay-load is a problem for regional jets and this has been discussed in forum several times as well. However, as I mentioned before, personally, I am not really excited about the prospect of air freight to/from BD in near future with the type of trade we have... and I am not really sure BG needs cargo capacity for domestic and regional routes like KTM/RGN/CCU etc. If there is, they should, or rather, must go for 737 classics... as for pax capacity, I don't see any reason for BG to go for 100+ seater for its domestic or regional routes, even for onward connectivity...

The classics will be super cost effective compared to the exiting F28s any day of the week... :)

Cargo pay-load is a problem for regional jets and this has been discussed in forum several times as well. However, as I mentioned before, personally, I am not really excited about the prospect of air freight to/from BD in near future with the type of trade we have... and I am not really sure BG needs cargo capacity for domestic and regional routes like KTM/RGN/CCU etc. If there is, they should, or rather, must go for 737 classics... as for pax capacity, I don't see any reason for BG to go for 100+ seater for its domestic or regional routes, even for onward connectivity...

RJ's not only lack any cargo capacity, it also wouldn't be able to take the volume of baggage that is considered 'standard' with passengers from this part of the world. For example, per BG's ground rules, the estimated average for each pax+baggage is 110 kgs, whereas typical industry standard is 95 kgs. RJ's would have a difficulty with even the 95 kgs ea, let alone anything more than that. In India, Air Sahara essentially used their CRJs in thin routes with business traffic (which is lean in BD) and yet faced problems related to baggage like TIslam mentioned.

As for 737 Classics, the -300/-400/-500s would have their appeal so long fuel prices remain stable (like it has been for months now). But if fuel prices creep up towards 150 bucks a barrel, the efficiency lost in fuel would well offset the higher acquisition cost of more fuel efficient birds, which would then become the reason for operators to opt for the newer ones.

The higher the fuel prices would be, the lower the lease rates will get for the older birds...but it can only get lower by so much until it goes below the level at which parking it (or scrapping it) would make the owner lose less money!

Coming back to Biman, they can actually make use of the 737 Classics on lease for their short-to-medium (2 to 4 years) term needs. Beyond that, the NG's are the dead-end option!

RJ's not only lack any cargo capacity, it also wouldn't be able to take the volume of baggage that is considered 'standard' with passengers from this part of the world.

Well, sorry to sound silly, but why can't they sacrifice some seats for additional room in cargo compartment? Or is it the MTOW is a problem? Even that should not be a problem (again from a very layman/common sense perspective) as BG will operate them for a very short route, comparing to the range they have and thus gain from the fuel load...

Beyond that, the NG's are the dead-end option!

Are they? Well pardon me, but I am failing to understand how BG is going to fill 160~189 seats for DAC-ZYL-DAC or DAC-CGP-RGN-CGP-DAC route! In fact, as I said, for domestic and regional routes, with increasing competition, BG will need to make a hell lot of rationalization...

As for the classics, well, I don't think 737NGs are like for like replacement for either A310 (for short to mid haul routes) or F28, but probably you can substitute A310 with those 160~189 seater, but BG also need to replace its F28 (unless they decide to scrap the domestic and regional completely), and fast....

Well, sorry to sound silly, but why can't they sacrifice some seats for additional room in cargo compartment? Or is it the MTOW is a problem? Even that should not be a problem (again from a very layman/common sense perspective) as BG will operate them for a very short route, comparing to the range they have and thus gain from the fuel load...

Fewer seats sold would theoretically allow more baggage by 'weight' per travelling pax, but the aircraft would still be 'volume limited' which is a major problem! Plus, seats unsold means lost revenues. It doesn't add up economically, one way or the other.

Are they? Well pardon me, but I am failing to understand how BG is going to fill 160~189 seats for DAC-ZYL-DAC or DAC-CGP-RGN-CGP-DAC route! In fact, as I said, for domestic and regional routes, with increasing competition, BG will need to make a hell lot of rationalization...

As for the classics, well, I don't think 737NGs are like for like replacement for either A310 or F28, but probably you can substitute A310 with those 160~189 seater, but BG also need to replace its F28 (unless they decide to scrap the domestic and regional completely), and fast....

If BG operates to busy markets directly out of CGP and ZYL (like CGP-DXB/JED/RUH and ZYL-LHR), it won't need the capacity of the 737s (Classic or NG's) to feed pax back and forth from DAC. For point-to-point domestic travellers between DAC and CGP/ZYL, turboprops would be the ideal solution (though yo aren't fond of them!).

737s should be used for the regional routes and to possibly offer more frequencies. For example, a specific route served by 1x A310 flight can be replaced with 2x 737 flights, thereby offering an additional frequency and also additional capacity to address the growth. Of course, the critical pre-conditions are (i) traffic growth on the route, and (ii) non slot-restricted destination airports.

As for 737 Classics, the -300/-400/-500s would have their appeal so long fuel prices remain stable (like it has been for months now). But if fuel prices creep up towards 150 bucks a barrel, the efficiency lost in fuel would well offset the higher acquisition cost of more fuel efficient birds, which would then become the reason for operators to opt for the newer ones.

Just to add...

The perspective from which you see the impact of fuel price is probably a bit different from which I view it... essentially because of our respective profession...:)

When the fuel price was going up at a super sonic speed, I keep on mentioning in the earlier parts of this thread that the price will only go up in proportion to a large section of world population's purchasing power (the hike was essentially a reflection of suddenly increased purchasing power of people in India and China... among other things...). It's a simple demand-supply theory. As both oil and air travel are largely essential in nature (except a minimum luxury element ...), the increase in price of fuel can be passed on to the consumer with minimum impact on demand for air travel. However, as there is a bit bigger luxury element in need for air travel, there will be some negative impact for a drastic or sustained hike in oil price...

As for BG's fleet planning, specially for replacing the F28s, fuel price should be one of the last thing that should come under discussion, considering the domestic air travelers' behavioral pattern.... This is my deduction though....

Fewer seats sold would theoretically allow more baggage by 'weight' per travelling pax, but the aircraft would still be 'volume limited' which is a major problem! Plus, seats unsold means lost revenues. It doesn't add up economically, one way or the other.

No, not unsold seats, I was actually talking about reducing the seats for making more cargo space in the main cabin... anyway, if this is such a grave problem, why aren't Bombardier/Embraer/Sukhoi trying to solve this?

....turboprops would be the ideal solution (though yo aren't fond of them!).

Unfortunately true. So, some more rusty Dash 8s in BG color may be, ideal for bumpy rides and landing in paddy fields.... By the way, why not some exotic choice, An-140 for example... How do you think they will do for BG or some NG type operator?

No, not unsold seats, I was actually talking about reducing the seats for making more cargo space in the main cabin... anyway, if this is such a grave problem, why aren't Bombardier/Embraer/Sukhoi trying to solve this?
We do not know there they are addressing the problem. If they are, good for them, if not perhaps higher density Asian countries aren't their target market. But as I mentioned earlier, baggage becomes a problem for all US carriers operating RJs whenever the flights are overbooked and full. They routinely dispatch the checked baggage in later flights using larger equipment. Here is does not matter much owing multiple frequencies in most sectors (e.g. 8/10 flights a day b/w DTW-EWR for DL/NW), other than annoying/inconveniencing passenger, which they shrug off as cost of doing business.

Unfortunately true. So, some more rusty Dash 8s in BG color may be, ideal for bumpy rides and landing in paddy fields.... By the way, why not some exotic choice, An-140 for example... How do you think they will do for BG or some NG type operator?
Your personal preference notwithstanding, turboprops are indeed ideal for BG's as well as the private carriers domestic sectors, as Imran suggests. My preference would be ATRs over the DASHs. I would rather put up with bumpy rides and paddy field landings as opposed to taking the bus or train, keeping in mind that paddy field landing strips are rather affordable to full service airports (in many places that's all they have, e.g. the Australian outbacks, vast Russian territories, the Philippines).

As both oil and air travel are largely essential in nature (except a minimum luxury element ...), the increase in price of fuel can be passed on to the consumer with minimum impact on demand for air travel. However, as there is a bit bigger luxury element in need for air travel, there will be some negative impact for a drastic or sustained hike in oil price...

Still over my (mediocre) head. Last year, when oil prices neared US$ 150/barrel, IATA assessed that the impact on the airline industry for the year could be US$ 60 billion in losses...certainly more than 'some negative impact' from my point of view. Last year, the air travel demand sustained while airlines were struggling to maintain competitive fares, and as a result some 25 airlines went bust in a span of just 6 months. This year, owing to the recession, the demand has dropped to force airlines shelve their fleet growth plans and park many of their planes here and there.

I also always believed that there was way more than just economic forces that determined oil prices from time to time. When the prices dropped by more than two-third from last year's peak, it didn't happen out of a drastic fall in demand or a drastic increase in supply. As a matter of fact, production have been cut in recent months to help push the price up. I believed that it was a bubble blown too large last year, and was only a matter of time till it popped...which it did!

As for BG's fleet planning, specially for replacing the F28s, fuel price should be one of the last thing that should come under discussion, considering the domestic air travelers' behavioral pattern.... This is my deduction though....

Every minute of operating the F-28 is a nuisance on BG's part. The difference of per hour DOC between the F-28 and ATR 72/Dash-8-300 itself would more than suffice wet-leasing (the most expensive of lease options) of ATR 72s/Dash-8s. And if you factor in the maintenance costs related to the F-28s, I think about a year's costs per frame would be equal to (if not more) what it'd cost to buy used ATR 72s/Dash-8s.

Still over my (mediocre) head. Last year, when oil prices neared US$ 150/barrel, IATA assessed that the impact on the airline industry for the year could be US$ 60 billion in losses...certainly more than 'some negative impact' from my point of view. Last year, the air travel demand sustained while airlines were struggling to maintain competitive fares, and as a result some 25 airlines went bust in a span of just 6 months. This year, owing to the recession, the demand has dropped to force airlines shelve their fleet growth plans and park many of their planes here and there.

Yet, comparing to the size of the overall industry and intensity of the hike, that impact was not out of shape... besides, IATA like any other apex trade body will always portray a deadly picture to safeguard the industry for which it is arguing, I doubt that USD 60 billion is an exaggeration... off course I may well be all wrong.

Off course there are other factors behind the movement of oil price... there are significant amount of manipulation in oil trading, like any other trading of instruments (mere paper trading through spot/options/forwards), and because of oil's importance as commodity and limited stock, extent and profitability of such manipulation is great... but still, economic forces will have the final say, especially in a bit longer term.

I am not, by any means, suggesting fuel efficiency is unimportant for BG's (or for that matter any other operator's) fleet planning. However, as you yourself is saying, when comparing to F28 or DC10s, this whole task becomes immaterial...even more for BD domestic route, as the commercial viability is big time question in terms of alternate mode of transport etc.

I would rather put up with bumpy rides and paddy field landings as opposed to taking the bus or train, keeping in mind that paddy field landing strips are rather affordable to full service airports (in many places that's all they have, e.g. the Australian outbacks, vast Russian territories, the Philippines).

:?: :eek: :gunz:

No, not unsold seats, I was actually talking about reducing the seats for making more cargo space in the main cabin... anyway, if this is such a grave problem, why aren't Bombardier/Embraer/Sukhoi trying to solve this?

There's no solution to this problem. All RJ's are designed to thrive on lighter-than-typical passengers (unlike you and me again :)), and that's what they work best with. To answer your question, if you remove seats to allow for more volume for revenue cargo, the additional cost of maintenance of a 'combi' version of such a small jet would itself negate the efficiency appeal of the aircraft.

If you meant more volume for baggage, which would require a less-complex bulk space than cargo space, then again you'd lose the efficiency factor for having to carry fewer passengers with the thrust-class of an RJ. To explain this more elaborately - RJ's are meant to carry equal or more passengers than typical turboprops faster between points and often over greater distances, hence the requirement of the jet engines which delivers the required thrust but at a significantly higher fuel burn delta than turboprops. This relatively higher fuel burn is paid for by the additional number of pax and the greater speed allowing for higher frequencies. If an RJ is forced to carry fewer passengers than what it is designed to, it'd lose its essential economic appeal.

Unfortunately true. So, some more rusty Dash 8s in BG color may be, ideal for bumpy rides and landing in paddy fields.... By the way, why not some exotic choice, An-140 for example... How do you think they will do for BG or some NG type operator?

I request you to recall your own earlier statement: "you need a bit of insanity to make life more interesting... sane stuffs are typically boring, you know...". Bumpy rides and landing in paddy fields should be 'interesting' and not nearly as boring as landing on well-paved runways, no? :naughty:

As for AN-140 or such aircraft, the biggest problem is that due to their limited worldwide sales, pooling of spares would be difficult once the manufacturer would cease producing them (unlike western-built aircraft). Another concern is the Net Present Value calculation over the aircraft's typical life-span, for the same reason of limited acceptability in the global market, which does not get offset by the relatively cheaper price tags alone.

:?: :eek: :gunz:

Not sure what you're confused over worried about and I'm no cowboy. I have had many turboprop rides that have been smooth as silk. I used to routine fly between CLE and SDF while back and back in the days the only game in town was a CO puddle jumper (an Embraer turboprop) . Unless the weather was bad, the ride used to be smooth.:)

by miumiulina

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2574/3690939208_d0b1a39e34_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2464/3690133697_bbb0f676fb_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2603/3690940274_dd5e3cd1ea_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2488/3690134609_d8897f0e6e_b.jpg

Which airport are these snaps from? Would've said ZYL but what's that BG F28 doing there?

My itinerary as follows

16 Sept EK008 Boeing 773
LHR-0840
DXB-1830
17 Sept EK582 Boeing 773ER (8Hrs 30mins to Kill)
DXB-0200
DAC-0940
DAC-ZYL any suggestions?
ZYL-DAC any suggestions?
EK583 Boeing 773ER
DAC-1015
DXB-1305
EK001 Airbus A380 (18hrs to Kill)
DXB-0745
LHR-1215

A friend of mine took his family to BD last week with the EK582 connection from DXB. They pre-booked tickets onto GMG but had to wait around 5 hours to board the DAC-ZYL flight plus their lugguage was not with them on the flight and had to wait another 3/4 days to get them all back!

If you're travelling on your own, you might be better off taking a Greenline coach from DAC to ZYL (they drop you off anywhere on the route) although there is a 30/40 min taxi journey to the coach station from DAC. If you do want to take GMG et al. would be best to book before you start your journey.

For your return trip, an early coach (if one is available) or "private hire" from ZYL to DAC would be your best bet I think.

Bumpy rides and landing in paddy fields should be 'interesting' and not nearly as boring as landing on well-paved runways, no?

Not sure what you're confused over worried about and I'm no cowboy. ...

I am confused over the reason why someone would pay handsomely to risk his own life, worried over the fact that rising popularity of bumpy rides and paddy field landings may encourage local operators to include that in their Standard Operating Procedure, and want to get hold of guns to shoot down people who are are promoting such idea...:D

Which airport are these snaps from? Would've said ZYL but what's that BG F28 doing there?

The fist two pictures do look like good old Zia to me, but I'm a bit confused too... BTW, what's wrong with ZYL and F28? BG does operates flight to ZYL and that has to be with F28...

The fist two pictures do look like good old Zia to me, but I'm a bit confused too... BTW, what's wrong with ZYL and F28? BG does operates flight to ZYL and that has to be with F28...

These days, BG doesn't get to fly the F-28s to ZYL as often as they'd like to. The other day, an A310 flight came from LHR to DAC which had 70-odd pax bound for ZYL. When they were told to disembark the A310 and board the F-28 parked next, almost all of them simply refused to comply with the instructions and get off the A310 and insisted that they'd have to be transported to ZYL with the A310! The standoff reached a ridiculous height as these pax refused to move from their seats, and pax bound for another flight on that aircraft were held up at the boarding terminal.

At one point the arriving A310 crews, who had reached their continuous duty limit with the arrival at DAC, were requested to perform the DAC-ZYL-DAC legs. After some deliberations, the crews eventually performed the flight jeopardizing the safety of the flight. It was an unfortunate event, one among many, where the pax failed to realize the importance of their own safety.

Back to the photos, the third and the fourth pics are taken at CGP from what I can tell.

I am confused over the reason why someone would pay handsomely to risk his own life, worried over the fact that rising popularity of bumpy rides and paddy field landings may encourage local operators to include that in their Standard Operating Procedure, and want to get hold of guns to shoot down people who are are promoting such idea...:D
:lol:
Is that the banker in you that brings out the conservative cautiousness in you? I wonder what you'd have to say or your attitude would be, if you lived in a country where flying is the fastest and convenient mode of communication and transportation, with bumpy rides and paddy field landings being par for the course?

Do you consider anything short of a jet, unsafe? If yes, and had you lived here as a banker, you would probably have single-handedly killed off general aviation in your community by denying loans for purchase of single engined private planes! :D

These days, BG doesn't get to fly the F-28s to ZYL as often as they'd like to. The other day, an A310 flight came from LHR to DAC which had 70-odd pax bound for ZYL. When they were told to disembark the A310 and board the F-28 parked next, almost all of them simply refused to comply with the instructions and get off the A310 and insisted that they'd have to be transported to ZYL with the A310! The standoff reached a ridiculous height as these pax refused to move from their seats, and pax bound for another flight on that aircraft were held up at the boarding terminal.

At one point the arriving A310 crews, who had reached their continuous duty limit with the arrival at DAC, were requested to perform the DAC-ZYL-DAC legs. After some deliberations, the crews eventually performed the flight jeopardizing the safety of the flight. It was an unfortunate event, one among many, where the pax failed to realize the importance of their own safety.

Back to the photos, the third and the fourth pics are taken at CGP from what I can tell.

A310 for DAC-ZYL-DAC and you are crushing down my idea for 737 classics!!! Not bad at all... pretty soon BG will compete with BRTC if they keep on providing these kind passenger services.

Looking at the bright side though, if you forget about the safety factor and economics for a while, by keeping the passenger request BG once again reminded why many NRB still prefer BG over airlines like EK or SQ... you can only make such request to your own airlines. If I were in charge of marketing at BG, I would have definitely make a case out this highlighting the positive side of the story... and probably earn some good reputation which BG badly needs ...

And to the photos, what's that hanger in the third photo (right under the port wing of that 4H bird)... I remember seeing that every time I fly from CGP... In use for BAF I presume...

Do you consider anything short of a jet, unsafe?

I consider any type of flying machine unsafe, as long as I am above the ground....

Unfortunately, I have to be on board of many flying junks in my life in different part of the Globe, and still, I never liked it.

Now don't kick me out of this forum after this honest confession...:)

These days, BG doesn't get to fly the F-28s to ZYL as often as they'd like to. The other day, an A310 flight came from LHR to DAC which had 70-odd pax bound for ZYL. When they were told to disembark the A310 and board the F-28 parked next, almost all of them simply refused to comply with the instructions and get off the A310 and insisted that they'd have to be transported to ZYL with the A310! The standoff reached a ridiculous height as these pax refused to move from their seats, and pax bound for another flight on that aircraft were held up at the boarding terminal.

At one point the arriving A310 crews, who had reached their continuous duty limit with the arrival at DAC, were requested to perform the DAC-ZYL-DAC legs. After some deliberations, the crews eventually performed the flight jeopardizing the safety of the flight. It was an unfortunate event, one among many, where the pax failed to realize the importance of their own safety.

Back to the photos, the third and the fourth pics are taken at CGP from what I can tell.

Non-compliance with airline instructions should result in an arrest. I'm sure somewhere in the books there is a policy on this which is not being enforced as usual. OTOH Biman's hassling paasengers has to stop so they don't resort to extreme measures like this.

This sets a very bad precedent. Passenger mutiny cannot be tolerated which jeopardizes safety.

Here's a page (http://www.ge.com/autographs/?c_id=cnnA#/section0) on the GE CF-34 which powers many regional jets. The middle left arrow shows some engine parts.

The newest aircraft to use the CF-34 is the ARJ-21 from China. Some posts (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=35601738) and pictures (http://www.acac.com.cn/site_en/product01.asp). One can easily see the new Russian supercritical wing.

I wonder if the fuselage is any better in relation to ERJ/CRJ choices for carrying standard pellets/containers. Probably not...

These days, BG doesn't get to fly the F-28s to ZYL as often as they'd like to. The other day, an A310 flight came from LHR to DAC which had 70-odd pax bound for ZYL. When they were told to disembark the A310 and board the F-28 parked next, almost all of them simply refused to comply with the instructions and get off the A310 and insisted that they'd have to be transported to ZYL with the A310! The standoff reached a ridiculous height as these pax refused to move from their seats, and pax bound for another flight on that aircraft were held up at the boarding terminal.

At one point the arriving A310 crews, who had reached their continuous duty limit with the arrival at DAC, were requested to perform the DAC-ZYL-DAC legs. After some deliberations, the crews eventually performed the flight jeopardizing the safety of the flight. It was an unfortunate event, one among many, where the pax failed to realize the importance of their own safety.Looking at it from a customer perspective, they were sold a LHR-DAC-ZYL flight with no change of aircraft (and an added cost of usually around £50 for the "priviledge"). If they'd wanted a LHR-DXB-DAC + DAC-ZYL connection, they would've taken EK rather than BG.

There was no way of knowing there was a waiting aircraft for them (who'd believe a Biman minion nowadays?) and there was a 70%+ chance of their luggage not going with them if they transferred to the F28. Being non-versant in aircraft safety, they did not understand (and would not have believed Biman) that there were any safety issues. The fact they eventually made the flight without any problems confirmed their suspicions that BG was just trying to get out of flying them to ZYL as sold.

This is all from experience having flown BG since the 80s - although I wouldn't touch them with a bargepole now (along with a lot of other PAX who are migrating to EK, QR, etc).

These days, BG doesn't get to fly the F-28s to ZYL as often as they'd like to. The other day, an A310 flight came from LHR to DAC which had 70-odd pax bound for ZYL. When they were told to disembark the A310 and board the F-28 parked next, almost all of them simply refused to comply with the instructions and get off the A310 and insisted that they'd have to be transported to ZYL with the A310! The standoff reached a ridiculous height as these pax refused to move from their seats, and pax bound for another flight on that aircraft were held up at the boarding terminal.

At one point the arriving A310 crews, who had reached their continuous duty limit with the arrival at DAC, were requested to perform the DAC-ZYL-DAC legs. After some deliberations, the crews eventually performed the flight jeopardizing the safety of the flight. It was an unfortunate event, one among many, where the pax failed to realize the importance of their own safety.

Back to the photos, the third and the fourth pics are taken at CGP from what I can tell.

Hi mate, it's simple to simpathy with the aircrew ect ect...But is it not time for Biman to realise that they need to do LHR-ZYL-DAC. That will solve all the problems the UK bound px have with Biman.

Having worked in the UK Bengali Community, I have learnt that they only reason they did not get off the Airbus was because they wanted to have their laggages with them, and not have to wait 3-4 days for them. Most of the passengers were going to outskirt villages in Sylhet, so it was not possible for them to travel to the airport everyday to see if their belongings have arrived. You must understand, most families go on vacation for a short period of time, mainly during school holidays.

Unless Biman stop's this hipocracy towards ZYL px, they will continue to rust!!

The second picture, is that BALAKA lounge at ZIA?

Boeing offers to bring forward Boeing 777s to Biman?

Biman offered remedy to
aircraft shortage
Humayun Kabir Bhuiyan

US plane maker Boeing has proposed Biman Bangladesh Airlines to deliver two Boeing-777 aircrafts two years ahead of the schedule for delivery which will help the national flag carrier improve services.
Owing to aircraft shortage, Biman had to trim a number of its routes in past few years. The closed routes included Dhaka-New York, Dhaka-Frankfurt, Dhaka-Paris and Dhaka-Tokyo.
Recently it has suspended Dhaka-Delhi and Dhaka-Bangkok routes reducing Biman’s number of international destinations to 16. Also, it has reduced frequencies on number of routes.
According to the agreement between Biman and Boeing signed in 2008, four Boeing-777 aircrafts are scheduled to be delivered by December 2013.
‘They [Boeing] have put forward a proposal to hand over two Boeing-777 by 2011,’ Muhammad Zakiul Islam, managing director and chief executive officer of Biman, told New Age.
‘The matter was raised before the board of directors of Biman on Saturday. Having discussed the issue the members termed the proposal good. Since financial aspects are involved, we will communicate with the concerned ministry,’ he said.
Replying to a question, Zakiul, a retired air commodore, said that shortage of aircrafts is nothing new in Biman and that the airline has been experiencing the problem since its birth in 1972.
‘We are trying to address the problem,’ he added.
Nafees Ahmed Imtiazuddin, director planning of Biman, told New Age that the proposal to deliver two Boeing-777s ahead of the schedule was made last month.
‘It is a good proposal. It will reduce the cost of the aircrafts,’ he said.
Nafees said that if the aircrafts are available in the fleet by 2011, they would be used right away on the middle-eastern routes that are profitable.
He said that in order to get these aircrafts, the government of Bangladesh would have to provide bank guarantee of 15-20 per cent of the total value of the aircrafts.
‘We have already written to the ministry requesting the guarantee. If necessary we will write again,’ Nafees said.
He informed that the 777s are scheduled to be delivered within July-December of 2013, 787s in 2019-2020 and 737s in 2015.
During the regime of the immediate-past caretaker government in 2008, the national flag carrier signed agreement with Boeing to procure 10 new generation aircrafts.
Under the deal, Biman would procure four 777-300ERs (extended range), four 787-8 dreamliners and two 737-800s.
The agreement to purchase four 777s and four 787s was signed in Dhaka on April 22, 2008 while the deal to procure two 737s was signed in the US capital, Washington, on June 26, 2008.
Biman currently has four DC 10-30s, two Airbus A310-300s and two Fokker F-28s. Sometimes, some of the eight aircrafts are kept out of service due to various technical difficulties causing serious problems in maintaining schedules.
At the moment, one DC 10-30 is out of service for technical reasons. The managing director of Biman said the DC 10-30 would be in service within this month.

http://www.newagebd.com/2009/jul/07/busi.html#4

I can imagine that with other airlines pushing out options / canceling orders, this would not be too difficult for Boeing -- but why not offer all 4 T7s earlier than the original schedule. Also, seems odd that they can't deliver the 737s before 2015.

...they wanted to have their laggages with them, and not have to wait 3-4 days for them. Most of the passengers were going to outskirt villages in Sylhet, so it was not possible for them to travel to the airport everyday to see if their belongings have arrived...Contrast this with other airlines (like BA) who will deliver the baggage to your door if it does not arrive with you on the flight. Not that this would be acceptable for someone who's gone for a week's holiday and with the risk that most of their valuables would be missing. :ohno:

The solution is to do LHR-ZYL-DAC and one wonders why BG are not pursuing this now that BA is no longer in the equation (even if to get it refused by UK CAA!)

Looking at it from a customer perspective, they were sold a LHR-DAC-ZYL flight with no change of aircraft (and an added cost of usually around £50 for the "priviledge"). If they'd wanted a LHR-DXB-DAC + DAC-ZYL connection, they would've taken EK rather than BG.

There was no way of knowing there was a waiting aircraft for them (who'd believe a Biman minion nowadays?) and there was a 70%+ chance of their luggage not going with them if they transferred to the F28. Being non-versant in aircraft safety, they did not understand (and would not have believed Biman) that there were any safety issues. The fact they eventually made the flight without any problems confirmed their suspicions that BG was just trying to get out of flying them to ZYL as sold.

This is all from experience having flown BG since the 80s - although I wouldn't touch them with a bargepole now (along with a lot of other PAX who are migrating to EK, QR, etc).

This particular case was different in many ways, and had it not been that, I wouldn't have even mentioned it here. Here's why: I don't know if BG sells its LHR-DXB-DAC-ZYL with a no change of aircraft commitment, but even if they do, any airline always reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to change equipment any time they wish to, without even having to give any explanation to the pax concerned. In this case, the pilots on duty had reached their continuous duty limits and the Captain himself explained the issue in a layman's term to the pax, only to receive verbal abuses. The F-28 was parked just one parking stand away, and while the standoff reached its peak, the baggage of the 70 pax had already been loaded into the F-28 (all of them since the cargo hold was empty).

Despite all the reasoning, BG was on the backfoot and succumbed to the passengers' demands simply because it know how 'believable' they are to their passengers...which is the reason behind this incident. But my point is, if I as a passenger can't place the bare minimum level of trust on the carrier in question, I wouldn't even think for a moment to fly on it at the first place. Once I've bought their ticket and hopped onboard, I ought to have that minimum degree of trust that they'll do the best they can to get me where I want to go!

The deduction I made from seeing the whole incident LIVE is that while Biman must learn to become more believable, its passengers must learn to have the minimum sense of belief in them.

I can imagine that with other airlines pushing out options / canceling orders, this would not be too difficult for Boeing -- but why not offer all 4 T7s earlier than the original schedule. Also, seems odd that they can't deliver the 737s before 2015.

Trust me, Boeing can and most probably will deliver all 4x 777s to Biman by 2011. This offer came from Boeing before Air India confirmed to cancel its 7x 777-300ER orders. Boeing will probably also agree to keep the payment schedule as agreed during the placing of the order, rather than to push Biman to bring it forward with the delivery of the aircraft.

As for the 737s, they're unlikely to be brought forward because unlike the 777s and 787s, the 737 orders have seen fewer cancellations and the current backlog stands at 2,137 frames! I'm not sure about the current production rate of 737s at Boeing, but even at 30 per month, that's almost 6 years worth of backlog and 2015 seems quite on track for BG!

This particular case was different in many ways, and had it not been that, I wouldn't have even mentioned it here. Here's why: I don't know if BG sells its LHR-DXB-DAC-ZYL with a no change of aircraft commitment, but even if they do, any airline always reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to change equipment any time they wish to, without even having to give any explanation to the pax concerned. In this case, the pilots on duty had reached their continuous duty limits and the Captain himself explained the issue in a layman's term to the pax, only to receive verbal abuses. The F-28 was parked just one parking stand away, and while the standoff reached its peak, the baggage of the 70 pax had already been loaded into the F-28 (all of them since the cargo hold was empty).

Despite all the reasoning, BG was on the backfoot and succumbed to the passengers' demands simply because it know how 'believable' they are to their passengers...which is the reason behind this incident. But my point is, if I as a passenger can't place the bare minimum level of trust on the carrier in question, I wouldn't even think for a moment to fly on it at the first place. Once I've bought their ticket and hopped onboard, I ought to have that minimum degree of trust that they'll do the best they can to get me where I want to go!

The deduction I made from seeing the whole incident LIVE is that while Biman must learn to become more believable, its passengers must learn to have the minimum sense of belief in them.

While I agree completely, and had it been in any other country, these passengers would have probably been thrown in the slammer, perhaps this and other incidences like these, are little comeuppance(s) for Biman that they so much deserve? My sympathy likes with the "airline" but not Biman.

Hi mate, it's simple to simpathy with the aircrew ect ect...But is it not time for Biman to realise that they need to do LHR-ZYL-DAC. That will solve all the problems the UK bound px have with Biman.

If I'm not mistaken, the current ASA between Bangladesh and UK does not permit ZYL-LHR (any London airport), courtesy of BG and GoB. This was so as to deprive BA to operate LHR-ZYL.

Now that no British carrier flies to Bangladesh and will probably not do so in the foreseeable future, GoB ought to renegotiate the ASA with provision for direct LHR-ZYL.

..............

As for the 737s, they're unlikely to be brought forward because unlike the 777s and 787s, the 737 orders have seen fewer cancellations and the current backlog stands at 2,137 frames! I'm not sure about the current production rate of 737s at Boeing, but even at 30 per month, that's almost 6 years worth of backlog and 2015 seems quite on track for BG!

BG better get into some long term dry lease arrangement for the 737s soon!

If I'm not mistaken, the current ASA between Bangladesh and UK does not permit ZYL-LHR (any London airport), courtesy of BG and GoB. This was so as to deprive BA to operate LHR-ZYL.

Now that no British carrier flies to Bangladesh and will probably not do so in the foreseeable future, GoB ought to renegotiate the ASA with provision for direct LHR-ZYL.

But, the big question is WILL THEY? GoB & Biman, my guess is as good as yours. I just don't understand, what satisfaction does Biman get out of this. Why put your payng passengers in this situation??

If I'm not mistaken, the current ASA between Bangladesh and UK does not permit ZYL-LHR (any London airport), courtesy of BG and GoB. This was so as to deprive BA to operate LHR-ZYL.

Now that no British carrier flies to Bangladesh and will probably not do so in the foreseeable future, GoB ought to renegotiate the ASA with provision for direct LHR-ZYL.

If I were 'the Brits', I'd turn a deaf ear to Biman & GoB. BA for long wanted access to ZYL, only to be denied time and again.

Payback is a bitch!

If I were 'the Brits', I'd turn a deaf ear to Biman & GoB. BA for long wanted access to ZYL, only to be denied time and again.

Payback is a bitch!

That's for sure. Yeah, I'd turn them down as well.

The second picture, is that BALAKA lounge at ZIA?

No, the first and second pictures look like the domestic terminal in Dhaka.

If I were 'the Brits', I'd turn a deaf ear to Biman & GoB. BA for long wanted access to ZYL, only to be denied time and again.

Payback is a bitch!

Yes, Bitch! as in the GoB, both of them! get my drift?

...Despite all the reasoning, BG was on the backfoot and succumbed to the passengers' demands simply because it know how 'believable' they are to their passengers...which is the reason behind this incident. But my point is, if I as a passenger can't place the bare minimum level of trust on the carrier in question, I wouldn't even think for a moment to fly on it at the first place....Yep - Biman have cried wolf too many times. Regarding your last point, when there is no other choice, and while BG operate this monopoly, passengers do fly on a wing and a prayer (pardon the pun http://sc.webmessenger.msn.com/10.1.0323.0/session/images/emoticons/smile_regular.gif :)) to avoid a 4-5 hour road trip on top of their 15 hour flight and are forced to take such drastic actions when it seems like they are being fleeced out of their money and taken for a ride.

It is Biman's perogative to be able to alter flights at their discretion (99% of the time being due to their own scheduling failures) but passengers also have the right to protest. In situations like these, it is up to Biman to coax them onto the alternative or frog march them off under arrest. With a respectable airline, the solution would have been to refund the pax (before putting them on the connecting flight), the surcharge for the DAC-ZYL portion of the flight due to the inconvenience caused to the passengers.

The solution to this long standing problem is of course LHR-DXB-ZYL-DAC.

Trust me, Boeing can and most probably will deliver all 4x 777s to Biman by 2011. This offer came from Boeing before Air India confirmed to cancel its 7x 777-300ER orders. Boeing will probably also agree to keep the payment schedule as agreed during the placing of the order, rather than to push Biman to bring it forward with the delivery of the aircraft.

As for the 737s, they're unlikely to be brought forward because unlike the 777s and 787s, the 737 orders have seen fewer cancellations and the current backlog stands at 2,137 frames! I'm not sure about the current production rate of 737s at Boeing, but even at 30 per month, that's almost 6 years worth of backlog and 2015 seems quite on track for BG!

I do hope all 4x B777s are delievered by 2011, that will be a good news! Plus, I think it would be better to have 2x leased B777 aswell so that we can operate to few more routes efficiently.

btw Imran bro, do u knw if they are gonna be equipped with personal TVs and stuff?

The solution to this long standing problem is of course LHR-DXB-ZYL-DAC.

And while digging into the matter today, I just found yet another rather unpalatable reason why Biman doesn't do DAC-ZYL-LHR-ZYL-DAC: there's no refueling facility at ZYL!

On the outbound leg from DAC, a capable aircraft (DC-10, 777) would be too heavy to land at ZYL if it uplifts from DAC the fuel that'd be required to make it to LHR. On the inbound leg though, LHR-ZYL would be technically possible, without refueling at ZYL, since DAC can be loaded into the flightplan as the alternate airport.

However, even if there was a refueling facility at ZYL, it'd still require the ASA to be amended to include ZYL as a point.

So much for the flaunted "international airport" which was inaugurated latest by the CG regime!

btw Imran bro, do u knw if they are gonna be equipped with personal TVs and stuff?

Not sure about "stuff", but the 777s and 787s will have PTVs in economy as well. ;)

And while digging into the matter today, I just found yet another rather unpalatable reason why Biman doesn't do DAC-ZYL-LHR-ZYL-DAC: there's no refueling facility at ZYL!

On the outbound leg from DAC, a capable aircraft (DC-10, 777) would be too heavy to land at ZYL if it uplifts from DAC the fuel that'd be required to make it to LHR. On the inbound leg though, LHR-ZYL would be technically possible, without refueling at ZYL, since DAC can be loaded into the flightplan as the alternate airport.

However, even if there was a refueling facility at ZYL, it'd still require the ASA to be amended to include ZYL as a point.

So much for the flaunted "international airport" which was inaugurated latest by the CG regime!There are other obstacles (although less of an issue) why DAC-ZYL-LHR-ZYL-DAC won't be possible currently (ZYL is not a 24x7 airport and BG insists on scheduling post-midnight flights to LHR) but, as you say, DAC-DXB-LHR-DXB-ZYL-DAC should not be a problem.

To be fair to the CG regime, they did at least raise the issue of a refuelling facility at ZYL (http://www.newagebd.com/2007/nov/01/nat.html) (unlike the elected governments) but, if the report is to be believed, it seems Padma is at fault :nuts:. I would've thought Padma would be a supplier rather than dictating infrastructure and policy which is CAABs role.

If you look back over the last 10-15 years, there have been a number of times that ZYL has been "inaugurated" as an "International" airport yet it can't be reached from any other country (well except a single BG flight from DXB last I knew and a couple of Hajj flights each year)!

To be fair to the CG regime, they did at least raise the issue of a refuelling facility at ZYL (http://www.newagebd.com/2007/nov/01/nat.html) (unlike the elected governments) but, if the report is to be believed, it seems Padma is at fault :nuts:. I would've thought Padma would be a supplier rather than dictating infrastructure and policy which is CAABs role.

If you look back over the last 10-15 years, there have been a number of times that ZYL has been "inaugurated" as an "International" airport yet it can't be reached from any other country (well except a single BG flight from DXB last I knew and a couple of Hajj flights each year)!

From what I know, Padma should be happy to sell jet-fuel and should be happy to set up facilities to increase the volume of sales because jet-fuel is what they can sell at a profit (unlike Diesel for example). I don't see any point in CAAB and Padma to point fingers at each other...the CAAB and the BPC (and Padma) are all govt. entities and it is the government's responsibility to make sure that all factors are well-coordinated to collaboratively achieve the objective. That's where I see a dismal failure in part of the CG, and all other governments behind and ahead of them.

Not sure about "stuff", but the 777s and 787s will have PTVs in economy as well. ;)

haha by "stuff", I meant to say lie-flat seats in J-class, legrests in Y-class seats, and all those modern services u knw :P

From what I know, Padma should be happy to sell jet-fuel and should be happy to set up facilities to increase the volume of sales because jet-fuel is what they can sell at a profit (unlike Diesel for example). I don't see any point in CAAB and Padma to point fingers at each other...the CAAB and the BPC (and Padma) are all govt. entities and it is the government's responsibility to make sure that all factors are well-coordinated to collaboratively achieve the objective. That's where I see a dismal failure in part of the CG, and all other governments behind and ahead of them.

just saw in TV headline that jet-fuel supplier Padma's workers went on strike 2day??

Biman and CAAB needs to be taught a lesson!

brother Imran,

watch this video please (EK landing at ZIA) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSPEb6BIrZg

from the video, when the aircraft taxiis, whats tht construction stuff seen beside the taxiway??

and next to the 9W aircraft, what airlines is tht??

but daimm, we have a huge freakin space for expansion honestly!

when the aircraft taxiis, whats tht construction stuff seen beside the taxiway??

Ramp area extension works.

and next to the 9W aircraft, what airlines is tht??

Air Europa B767-300ER; military charter.

^^ hmm thanx :) altho i was expectin a bigger construction stuff than just ramp expansion :P

just curious, has Bangla Biman ever flown to Colombo ? are there plans to extend the service to Colombo in the future ? How about private carriers ?

I saw Easyfly Express BAe 748-2A series aircraft... Looks an awesome machines that is well maintained and a nice colour scheme...

just curious, has Bangla Biman ever flown to Colombo ? are there plans to extend the service to Colombo in the future ? How about private carriers ?

I think Bangladesh Airlines used to fly to Colombo few years back, although not sure! I am sure they may resume Colombo flights when they receive new aircrafts! From private carriers, BEST AIR used to fly Dhaka- Colombo- Male but now, they suspended their flights due to many problems lol!

just curious, has Bangla Biman ever flown to Colombo ? are there plans to extend the service to Colombo in the future ? How about private carriers ?


I don't think Biman ever operated that route -- they had Colombo on their "plans" for many years, but it never materialized.

Best Air did fly the DAC-CMB-MLE route, but not sure for how long - the inaugural flight went tech in MLE and spent 16 hours there! Obviously, Best Air is no longer flying.

SriLankan did fly the route, but suspended it after the LTTE attack on Colombo airport that wiped out a large part of their fleet. It was never resumed.

Best,

Wasim / Planemananyc

I saw Easyfly Express BAe 748-2A series aircraft... Looks an awesome machines that is well maintained and a nice colour scheme...

Easyfly is the new kid on the block with ambitious growth plan in cargo/freight sector. The HS/BAe 748 is primarily for shrimp transport with off-season lease. They are/were trying to lease an Il-62 for regular cargo flight from Dhaka to London via some Middle-Eastern destination, most likely Dubai.

From what I know, Padma should be happy to sell jet-fuel and should be happy to set up facilities to increase the volume of sales because jet-fuel is what they can sell at a profit (unlike Diesel for example). I don't see any point in CAAB and Padma to point fingers at each other...the CAAB and the BPC (and Padma) are all govt. entities and it is the government's responsibility to make sure that all factors are well-coordinated to collaboratively achieve the objective. That's where I see a dismal failure in part of the CG, and all other governments behind and ahead of them.

The sales of jet fuel has gone up significantly in recent time (some 3.1 million M. Ton per year now) even with Osmany and BPC is building some extra storage facility in Chittagong to accommodate the additional requirement. For the record, however, BPC is now making profit for most types of fuel they sell, because of declining global price and non-adjustment of selling price by the government. BPC has also dropped the supplementary duty for Jet Fuel and set a simple two-slab duty structure (for refined and non-refined oil).

The sales of jet fuel has gone up significantly in recent time (some 3.1 million M. Ton per year now) even with Osmany and BPC is building some extra storage facility in Chittagong to accommodate the additional requirement. For the record, however, BPC is now making profit for most types of fuel they sell, because of declining global price and non-adjustment of selling price by the government. BPC has also dropped the supplementary duty for Jet Fuel and set a simple two-slab duty structure (for refined and non-refined oil).

Does it mean they (BPC) have added or going to add, the much needed (re)fueling facility at Osmany International?

Does it mean they (BPC) have added or going to add, the much needed (re)fueling facility at Osmany International?

The refueling facility at Osmani International Airport has already received go ahead from the GoB and Padma (one of the 3 distributor of BPC and the one which deals with Jet fuel) has already set up the necessary infra-structure in the airport as far as I know. The BPC's version is simple, they do not have any demand in ZYL as yet, as whether BG or any other carrier will start operation from ZYL or not can not be their headache.

The refueling facility at Osmani International Airport has already received go ahead from the GoB and Padma (one of the 3 distributor of BPC and the one which deals with Jet fuel) has already set up the necessary infra-structure in the airport as far as I know. The BPC's version is simple, they do not have any demand in ZYL as yet, as whether BG or any other carrier will start operation from ZYL or not can not be their headache.

As far as I know, BG had officially requested BPC to take initiatives to set up a refueling facility at ZYL 3 years ago. A copy of that letter was given to the CAAB as well. Of course, Biman wasn't persistent with the idea because they knew that they'd have to let BA into ZYL if BG had to be allowed to operate ZYL-LHR. What beats me is how the airport was 'inaugurated' several times as an 'international airport' without having a fuel facility in it!

As far as I know, BG had officially requested BPC to take initiatives to set up a refueling facility at ZYL 3 years ago. A copy of that letter was given to the CAAB as well. Of course, Biman wasn't persistent with the idea because they knew that they'd have to let BA into ZYL if BG had to be allowed to operate ZYL-LHR. What beats me is how the airport was 'inaugurated' several times as an 'international airport' without having a fuel facility in it!

Technically, the airport is not without refueling facility now, as the infrastructure is in place, though not sure whether those were in place during multiple inaugurations (by three different government I believe). The only thing is Padma Oil is not maintaining any reserve over there because of lack of demand. Interestingly, one source in BPC mentioned to me (not sure about the authenticity though), they developed required refueling facility in Bogra, Shamshernagar and Lalmorinhat for them to be used as forward base of BAF and they have full fledged refueling facility at Jessor for BAF academy use.

Anyway, the state that BG is in right now, it would be foolish to expect them to operate from three bases at DAC, CGP and ZYL. I always think BG should focus on DAC and CGP only with their vulnerable fleet strength. Even from CGP their focus should be on regional routes only unless they can increase their fleet size (highly improbable in near future). That's why we disparately need a reasonable second operator from Bangladesh... to complement Biman and choose CGP or ZYL as their primary base. Unfortunately, the existing operators always wanted to replace BG and rather than complementing it, they tried to enter in to a competition which has brought good to no one (may be indirectly benefited some foreign operators...)!

http://www.counterpunch.org/garcia07012009.html

http://www.counterpunch.org/garcia07012009.html

The ranking for safety of nine modes of transportation on the basis of deaths per billion journeys (the basis of insurance rates) is: bus (4.3), rail (20), van (20), car (40), foot (40), water (90), air (117), bicycle (170), motorcycle (1640).

Don't know about you guys, but I've definitely past the age of riding bicycles and motorcycles. If the stats above are true, one have all the reason on earth to be skeptic about air travel...

Anyway, parts of the article essentially sounds genuine 'counter-punch' as befits 'America's Best Political Newsletter'... praising the American Manufacturer and its technical superiority... However, I also firmly believe that the mystery surrounding AF 447 should be solved for the benefit of both passengers and aviation industry as a whole.

Thanks a ton for sharing it.

The ranking for safety of nine modes of transportation on the basis of deaths per billion journeys (the basis of insurance rates) is: bus (4.3), rail (20), van (20), car (40), foot (40), water (90), air (117), bicycle (170), motorcycle (1640).

Don't know about you guys, but I've definitely past the age of riding bicycles and motorcycles. If the stats above are true, one have all the reason on earth to be skeptic about air travel...

Anyway, parts of the article essentially sounds genuine 'counter-punch' as befits 'America's Best Political Newsletter'... praising the American Manufacturer and its technical superiority... However, I also firmly believe that the mystery surrounding AF 447 should be solved for the benefit of both passengers and aviation industry as a whole.

Thanks a ton for sharing it.

I'm not sure whether the writer intended to highlight and thereby indirectly praise the US manufacturer. I thought the focus of the article was to question the reliability factor of composite materials used in today's commercial aircraft that Airbus and Boeing use, just as much.

Don't know about you guys, but I've definitely past the age of riding bicycles and motorcycles.

Well mate, more than the age, you and I are definitely past the weight (me nearing a 100 kilos) to ride on bicycles and motorcycles (except maybe the Harley's!)...and also the RJ's! :D

Technically, the airport is not without refueling facility now, as the infrastructure is in place, though not sure whether those were in place during multiple inaugurations (by three different government I believe). The only thing is Padma Oil is not maintaining any reserve over there because of lack of demand. Interestingly, one source in BPC mentioned to me (not sure about the authenticity though), they developed required refueling facility in Bogra, Shamshernagar and Lalmorinhat for them to be used as forward base of BAF and they have full fledged refueling facility at Jessor for BAF academy use.

Anyway, the state that BG is in right now, it would be foolish to expect them to operate from three bases at DAC, CGP and ZYL. I always think BG should focus on DAC and CGP only with their vulnerable fleet strength. Even from CGP their focus should be on regional routes only unless they can increase their fleet size (highly improbable in near future). That's why we disparately need a reasonable second operator from Bangladesh... to complement Biman and choose CGP or ZYL as their primary base. Unfortunately, the existing operators always wanted to replace BG and rather than complementing it, they tried to enter in to a competition which has brought good to no one (may be indirectly benefited some foreign operators...)!

I don't agree with, the new local operaters want to do it, but it's Biman with their GoB help that is standing in front. I don't think Biman want's any competion let alone allow other carrier as a complement. If they have it their way, Monopoly will be a good idea.[/B]

I don't agree with, the new local operaters want to do it, but it's Biman with their GoB help that is standing in front. I don't think Biman want's any competion let alone allow other carrier as a complement. If they have it their way, Monopoly will be a good idea.[/B]

There are 2 important things all pvt operators should realize, and accept: (i) Biman, like any other state-owned carrier, will always be entitled to greater privileges (than the pvt operators) from the government, and (ii) Biman, like any other state-owned carrier, does not have to be profitable (unlike pvt operators) to make their business case 'feasible'.

I agree with QGR that thus far, the pvt pax operators have essentially been mesmerized with elbowing Biman out of the game, and have in the end found themselves in a miserable state. Take Z5 and DXB for example...no one told Z5 to (or stopped them from) get the 747 and launch DXB. What BG did is they simply slashed the fares between DAC-DXB to such a level that Z5 found themselves in a pile of s*&t in a matter of less than 3 months. Now is BG to be blamed for Z5's pre-assumption that they'd be gifted with the rights to fly to KSA?

Likewise, if any pvt operator launch a competing service with BG on the ZYL-DAC-ZYL flight, I can guarantee that if BG plays its business cards right, the pvt operator(s) on that route would fall on its face within a matter of months...and BG won't lose a penny!

In my humble opinion, the pvt operators should identify their growth opportunities in doing things that BG can't do, rather than attempting stunts which BG can, if it wants to, screw up completely to the woes of the pvt operators.

Biman is state owned. they will always have the GoB backing them financially. remember the time when Biman owed BPC millions of Taka. i believe it was GoB who bailed Biman out. they wont do that to any Private operators. if biman was a private airliner for Bdesh Biman would of get liquated ages ago.

There are 2 important things all pvt operators should realize, and accept: (i) Biman, like any other state-owned carrier, will always be entitled to greater privileges (than the pvt operators) from the government, and (ii) Biman, like any other state-owned carrier, does not have to be profitable (unlike pvt operators) to make their business case 'feasible'.

I agree with QGR that thus far, the pvt pax operators have essentially been mesmerized with elbowing Biman out of the game, and have in the end found themselves in a miserable state. Take Z5 and DXB for example...no one told Z5 to (or stopped them from) get the 747 and launch DXB. What BG did is they simply slashed the fares between DAC-DXB to such a level that Z5 found themselves in a pile of s*&t in a matter of less than 3 months. Now is BG to be blamed for Z5's pre-assumption that they'd be gifted with the rights to fly to KSA?

Likewise, if any pvt operator launch a competing service with BG on the ZYL-DAC-ZYL flight, I can guarantee that if BG plays its business cards right, the pvt operator(s) on that route would fall on its face within a matter of months...and BG won't lose a penny!

In my humble opinion, the pvt operators should identify their growth opportunities in doing things that BG can't do, rather than attempting stunts which BG can, if it wants to, screw up completely to the woes of the pvt operators.

Like I said earlier, Biman get's a monopoly with the help of dirty GoB!! Than why bother giving out licences to pvt operaters. I personaly think some pvt operaters have shown in a short period of time, to be professional, on time schedual and overall good customer service officers. This in my book, a good start compaired to what Biman has to offer.

Pvt operaters, needs to be given certin route to operate, if their is an existing ASA agreement in place and, if Biman does not operate it currently. Can this happen?

Like I said earlier, Biman get's a monopoly with the help of dirty GoB!! Than why bother giving out licences to pvt operaters. I personaly think some pvt operaters have shown in a short period of time, to be professional, on time schedual and overall good customer service officers. This in my book, a good start compaired to what Biman has to offer.

Dirty GoB or not, it is called "protectionism" and all neighbors of Bangladesh practice it. Just look into the history of private airlines in India and Pakistan. In the era of globalization and free enterprise, the government cannot help but open up the civil aviation sector. With open skies, it is open season for one and all. Biman cannot be prevented from engaging in price war in order to protect its turf, just like a private carrier is free to do the same.

With limited number of equipment of the Bangladesh private airlines, I do not see how they can perform better in terms of on-time arrival but yes, they could always bend over backwards to provide better customer and cabin service, which Biman will probably never be able to match owing to the entrenched bureaucracy.


Pvt operaters, needs to be given certin route to operate, if their is an existing ASA agreement in place and, if Biman does not operate it currently. Can this happen?
It is entirely up to the private operators to find their niche market(s) where they expect to turn profits and lobby the government for more routes. If I'm not mistaken, there are many routes where there exists ASA, where Biman has no interest to operate and so, probably it would require some cajoling, pampering and of course speed money, to make GoB provide the necessary approvals.

I have a recent cost / profit analysis on the following routes for the Beech 1900D aircraft.. Routes are

DAC - CGP
DAC - ZYL
DAC - JSR
DAC - CXB
DAC - RJH

PM if you want a copy

Like I said earlier, Biman get's a monopoly with the help of dirty GoB!! Than why bother giving out licences to pvt operaters. I personaly think some pvt operaters have shown in a short period of time, to be professional, on time schedual and overall good customer service officers. This in my book, a good start compaired to what Biman has to offer.

Pvt operaters, needs to be given certin route to operate, if their is an existing ASA agreement in place and, if Biman does not operate it currently. Can this happen?

Guess what?!? A 'cleaner' GoB would actually give Biman an even greater degree of protection and privileges than any 'dirty' GoB, who, if lobbied effectively by the pvt operators would actually sacrifice Biman's interest to serve that of the pvt operators. One such pvt operator is already talking about being the # 1 airline in Bangladesh within 3 years time, thanks to their recent affiliation with people close to top ranks at the GoB!

Like I said earlier, state-owned carriers like Biman, with such a huge number of ethnic workforce around the world, does not have to be commercially profitable to make for a feasible business case...unlike any pvt operator who can't afford to remain unprofitable for too long. Therefore, the smartest thing for any pvt operator to do is to start off with areas where BG can't afford to be intimidating, gain some ground, and then throw challenges at BG.

Read back on 9W's story...and how they fought an even bigger obstacle in the form of indian Airlines / Air India, and a far more conservative government and its aviation policies, to become what they have. The current recession have surely hit them, but they'll be back up again once the world economy would begin to recover.

I don't think Biman ever operated that route -- they had Colombo on their "plans" for many years, but it never materialized.

Best Air did fly the DAC-CMB-MLE route, but not sure for how long - the inaugural flight went tech in MLE and spent 16 hours there! Obviously, Best Air is no longer flying.

SriLankan did fly the route, but suspended it after the LTTE attack on Colombo airport that wiped out a large part of their fleet. It was never resumed.

Best,

Wasim / Planemananyc

I think Bangladesh Airlines used to fly to Colombo few years back, although not sure! I am sure they may resume Colombo flights when they receive new aircrafts! From private carriers, BEST AIR used to fly Dhaka- Colombo- Male but now, they suspended their flights due to many problems lol!

Thanks for the comments. Its such a shame that there is NO direct flight between SL and Bangladesh even though they are geographically close. The way SL Airlines is going I dont think they will fly Dhaka anytime soon, even though there were some plans to fly to Katmandu. Possibly it might be upto some budget airlines again to do the work I think.

It is a shame that there is hardly any people contact, cultural contact between countries that are part of the SAARC with a long common history :(

Has Bangladeshis started touring other countries? I know there are more Indian tourists now, and in Sri Lanka too, but most ofthem want to visit the west or Singapore, but never know what is in thier own backyard. I think SAARC should put in more effort to bring the South Asian countries together, give concession to tourists etc possibly.

^^ Bangladeshis mainly tour Dubai, Thailand, Singapore and Malaysia.

-A Colombo-Dhaka flight wont be financially viable for the time being. Both Biman and the private operators are focusing on routes which have large expatriate population.

^^ yes ofcourse, that is commercially more viable. Same with UL. But I still I tihk there is pottential, they target the Middle East & India or the west. Does Bangaldesh allow foreign carriers to transit at Dhaka ? If so routes like Colombo-Dhaka-Shanghai/Beijing/Tokyo could be possibly given that UL already operates to Beijing and Tokyo successfully. Or even more possible is Colombo-Kolkata-Dhaka.

^^ Bangladeshis mainly tour Dubai, Thailand, Singapore and Malaysia.

-A Colombo-Dhaka flight wont be financially viable for the time being. Both Biman and the private operators are focusing on routes which have large expatriate population.

^^ yes ofcourse, that is commercially more viable. Same with UL. But I still I tihk there is pottential, they target the Middle East & India or the west. Does Bangaldesh allow foreign carriers to transit at Dhaka ? If so routes like Colombo-Dhaka-Shanghai/Beijing/Tokyo could be possibly given that UL already operates to Beijing and Tokyo successfully. Or even more possible is Colombo-Kolkata-Dhaka.

Colombo-Dhaka flight may well be a highly feasible route considering the fact that there is a large Sri Lankan population leaving in Bangladesh (Second largest expat population leaving in BD after Korean). Also with civil war over in SL, there should be a bright prospect for more point to point connectivity, e. g. DAC-CMB or even CGP-CMB, as I think significant ocean container traffic will divert to Colombo from Singapore/Port Klang.

As for transit, obviously it is allowed in Dhaka. The question is whether UL has 5th freedom right (i. e. can take passenger/cargo for onward destination), and if yes, then which routes. I am not sure what exactly is covered in the current ASA between SL and BD.

Guess what?!? A 'cleaner' GoB would actually give Biman an even greater degree of protection and privileges than any 'dirty' GoB, who, if lobbied effectively by the pvt operators would actually sacrifice Biman's interest to serve that of the pvt operators. One such pvt operator is already talking about being the # 1 airline in Bangladesh within 3 years time, thanks to their recent affiliation with people close to top ranks at the GoB!

Absolutely spot on... With the current state of affairs, BG should continue to enjoy logical protection from state. I never support BG to be state-run, but the fact is, as long as it remains state-owned, it will be state-run...

Besides, I am not too confident on the 'professionalism' of the existing private operators. They did set some basic service standard, but there was nothing extra-ordinary about it. Keeping aside the fact that some of them went down mainly due their 'professionalim', or lack of it rather, as a customer, I traveled 5/6 times on Z5, couple of times each with United, Aviana and the defunct AeroBengal over a period of time. There were flight delays, technical difficulties, abrupt flight cancellation (frequent in return leg to Dhaka) and ground people's ignorance on flight status etc. More than that, recent experience of traveling in a non-A/C flight on both leg was anything but satisfying. The only reason I choose those private operators over BG was simply because of punctuality and as I said even that was sometime missing with those operators...

Well mate, more than the age, you and I are definitely past the weight (me nearing a 100 kilos) to ride on bicycles and motorcycles (except maybe the Harley's!)...and also the RJ's! :D

He he he... me over 100 kilos and counting....:cheers:

Colombo-Dhaka flight may well be a highly feasible route considering the fact that there is a large Sri Lankan population leaving in Bangladesh (Second largest expat population leaving in BD after Korean).

This is news to me. Are you sure ?

Also with civil war over in SL, there should be a bright prospect for more point to point connectivity, e. g. DAC-CMB or even CGP-CMB, as I think significant ocean container traffic will divert to Colombo from Singapore/Port Klang.

As for transit, obviously it is allowed in Dhaka. The question is whether UL has 5th freedom right (i. e. can take passenger/cargo for onward destination), and if yes, then which routes. I am not sure what exactly is covered in the current ASA between SL and BD.

Good point, thanks. I think at present UL transits at Mumbai ( for Karachi ), at Male ( for London and Tokyo ) at BKK ( for Hongkong ) and at KL ( for Singapore ).

Since UL doesnt fly to Bangladesh I too am not sure of what agreement UL has with Bangladesh. But I, like you do think it is well worth exploring the option as budget travel and tourism is expanding in the region !

SriLankan may resume their Dhaka flights next year, AFAIK from a previous post in "Bangladesh Aviation - Part 3" thread!
Anyone has any idea how many Bangladeshis there may be in Sri Lanka?? If it is above 10-15,000....then I think it will be feasable!

Colombo-Dhaka flight may well be a highly feasible route considering the fact that there is a large Sri Lankan population living in Bangladesh (Second largest expat population living in BD after Korean). Also with civil war over in SL, there should be a bright prospect for more point to point connectivity, e. g. DAC-CMB or even CGP-CMB, as I think significant ocean container traffic will divert to Colombo from Singapore/Port Klang.

As for transit, obviously it is allowed in Dhaka. The question is whether UL has 5th freedom right (i. e. can take passenger/cargo for onward destination), and if yes, then which routes. I am not sure what exactly is covered in the current ASA between SL and BD.

hmm I never knew Koreans were the largest expat population in BD, I always thought it would be either Chinese or American! then I guess Korea should have a direct flight with us, especially a lot of workers are going to korea!
lol maybe Imran bro may be able to tell us how many Bangladeshis we need in a certain country to have feasable direct flights! ;)

hmm I never knew Koreans were the largest expat population in BD, I always thought it would be either Chinese or American! then I guess Korea should have a direct flight with us, especially a lot of workers are going to korea!
lol maybe Imran bro may be able to tell us how many Bangladeshis we need in a certain country to have feasable direct flights! ;)

DAC-ICN flight, direct or via probably some Chinese destination, should be a hot cake and needed as well for our economy as South Korea is a key source of FDI in BD.

^^ I hope Asiana Airlines establishes a Dhaka - Beijing/Shanghai - Soeul route

(Second largest expat population leaving in BD after Korean). Also with civil war over in SL, there should be a bright prospect for more point to point connectivity, e. g. DAC-CMB or even CGP-CMB, as I think significant ocean container traffic will divert to Colombo from Singapore/Port Klang.

As for transit, obviously it is allowed in Dhaka. The question is whether UL has 5th freedom right (i. e. can take passenger/cargo for onward destination), and if yes, then which routes. I am not sure what exactly is covered in the current ASA between SL and BD.

Not to mention thousands of Bangladeshi working in Korea. I was amazed by how many Deshis I ran into when I was in Seoul a few years ago -- and almost every Korean I spoke to said they knew Bangaldeshis working in Korea.

Best,

Wasim / Planemannyc

Came across the customs duty structure on Aircraft/Spacecraft and I was rather surprised to find out Helicopter or Aircraft are duty free item in BD! Here's the list if anyone is interested....

http://i427.photobucket.com/albums/pp352/QGR14/Chapter_88_AircraftSpacecraftandPar.jpg

Came across the customs duty structure on Aircraft/Spacecraft and I was rather surprised to find out Helicopter or Aircraft are duty free item in BD!

Thank you for giving me the perfect opportunity to claim credits for this...;)

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/letter1.jpg

Applause...tomatoes...rotten eggs...anyone? :tyty:

Thank you for giving me the perfect opportunity to claim credits for this...;)

.....

Applause...tomatoes...rotten eggs...anyone? :tyty:

Hummm... not sure whether you deserve applause or rotten eggs for this...:)

While on the face of it, it's good for commercial aviation, but there's a big loophole in the duty structure, in a sense that, it has not specified the use of aircraft. If someone wants to bring corporate jet or a chopper for personal use (there are lot of people who essentially have money for these...), that will also fall under the zero duty bracket, whereas you have to pay some 350% duty for importing a 3 litter SUV!!! That's simply crazy...

Besides, inclusion of Spacecraft, suborbital, launch vehicle etc. in customs duty structure of Bangladesh, clearly shows there's a lot of garbage in it.

Hummm... not sure whether you deserve applause or rotten eggs for this...:)

While on the face of it, it's good for commercial aviation, but there's a big loophole in the duty structure, in a sense that, it has not specified the use of aircraft. If someone wants to bring corporate jet or a chopper for personal use (there are lot of people who essentially have money for these...), that will also fall under the zero duty bracket, whereas you have to pay some 350% duty for importing a 3 litter SUV!!! That's simply crazy...

Inherent message: buy planes to commute and get rid of the SUV's. Should be more fun!

Besides, inclusion of Spacecraft, suborbital, launch vehicle etc. in customs duty structure of Bangladesh, clearly shows there's a lot of garbage in it.

Garbage? How dare you!! That's a part of our 2020 vision...episode 1 is 'Digital (or is it 'dizzytaal'?) Bangladesh'...and episode 2 shall be 'Bangladesh in Space Age'...and the customs department is already ready!

:D

^^ HAHAHA :lol:

Imran bhai, what u think about the comments from post # 370 - 373 lol?? please say sumthin :)

lol maybe Imran bro may be able to tell us how many Bangladeshis we need in a certain country to have feasable direct flights! ;)

How many 'emiratis' do you think are scattered over the globe? And how does EK do what they've been and are doing?? :)

There's no such rationale as you asked. It depends on the airline, the country, and their objectives and policies.


^^ I hope Asiana Airlines establishes a Dhaka - Beijing/Shanghai - Soeul route

Unlikely. The likelihood of seeing an eastern airline as the 3rd carrier from the Star Alliance into DAC is very slim. If anyone, it'll be Korean Air itself.

^^ bro, i should give award u for reading my mind about "Emirates" part ;)
indeed, there are hardly any Emiratis, but EK is successful due to the migrant workers from South Asia and tourism!
all these days, I sort of thought that we need a Bangladeshi diaspora of at least 50,000 ppl to have a direct feasable flight lol, but then I thought, BG used to operate to Frankfurt, Paris, Amsterdam, Brussels etc and the bangladeshis there are far less than 50,000 so yeah...... I guess, having a diaspora isnt a main point! :)

and why is it unlikely to see a 3rd Star Alliance carrier in DAC? any restrictions?

^^
Say Imran, why do you think no Korean carrier is interested in direct flights between DAC-ICN, when there is such a large expat Korean population Bangladesh? And indeed if it is true that the second largest expat population are the Sri Lankans, how come neither BG nor UL want to exploit the market (sector), if it does exist?

Imran bro, can u pleasee also tell me which Cargo aircraft provides the highest/maximum range?? cuz the B777F seems to provide only about 9000kms and B747-8 about 8000 kms, isnt there higher range than this??

^^
Say Imran, why do you think no Korean carrier is interested in direct flights between DAC-ICN, when there is such a large expat Korean population Bangladesh? And indeed if it is true that the second largest expat population are the Sri Lankans, how come neither BG nor UL want to exploit the market (sector), if it does exist?

Didnt Best Air try this in their NG 737-200???? What were the loads like

...and why is it unlikely to see a 3rd Star Alliance carrier in DAC? any restrictions?

I said an "eastern airline" as a 3rd carrier from Star Alliance is unlikely. A large number of pax between Bangladesh and Korea is carried by SQ and TG (others carried by Dragonair, China Eastern, etc.), and for each pax carried by SQ & TG from DAC to ICN, Asiana gets something like a 'royalty' fee. Since the volume of pax travelling to ICN from DAC is still lower than that between DAC to BKK or SIN, the surplus capacity provided by SQ and TG is enough to cater for pax bound to ICN and does not make a case for Asiana to operate flights to DAC when it already earns enough in royalties from TG and SQ.

^^ Say Imran, why do you think no Korean carrier is interested in direct flights between DAC-ICN, when there is such a large expat Korean population Bangladesh? And indeed if it is true that the second largest expat population are the Sri Lankans, how come neither BG nor UL want to exploit the market (sector), if it does exist?

Asiana for the reason above, but they could begin to serve DAC if the volume and the demand grows bigger. As for Korean Air, I really don't know why they haven't looked into DAC yet. The only reason could be that their appropriate fleet of airplanes (737s or 767s) may already be well tied up on other routes.

As for flights between Dhaka and Colombo, I don't think UL has the capacity available at the moment, and now that they've parted from EK, I'm not too sure how well they'll be planning to run themselves. I rather thought that a pvt Sri Lankan carrier (can't recall the name right now) would begin to serve DAC. As for Biman, what more can you do with an airline whose fleet is dwindling while the staffing is expanding by the day? Sustaining operations to existing routes has become a challenge, and opening a route to Colombo isn't on their priority list at the moment.

Imran bro, can u pleasee also tell me which Cargo aircraft provides the highest/maximum range?? cuz the B777F seems to provide only about 9000kms and B747-8 about 8000 kms, isnt there higher range than this??

Unlike the passenger market which is making more and more point-to-point services possible, the cargo market will continue to use the hub-and-spoke model simply because of the convergence pattern and facilities available. Hence, there is no real need for any freighter with more range than what the 777F, 747F, or the A380F can offer. Can you think of any pair of cargo hubs that are busy enough between them and is more than 9,000 kms apart?

Sri Lankan company called Deccan Aviation?

^^ most prolly Mihin Lanka, but theres also Deccan Lanka, and Expo Aviation.

10 July, 2009


Celebrating two years of operation

United Airways celebrates two years of its service today. On the 10th of July 2007 the leading private airline in Bangladesh started its operation with its maiden flight from Dhaka to Sylhet. The pioneers of this airline are non-resident Bangladeshi (NRB) particularly from Sylhet.

Starting with one Dash 8-100 aircraft, the airlines now owns two of these aircraft and one Jet Aircraft MD-83 through outright purchase and operates daily flights from Dhaka to Chittagong, Sylhet, Jessore, Cox’s Bazar, Barisal, Saidpur and Kolkata. It also plans to operate to Dubai from 16th July 2009 and also to operate Kuala Lumpur, Kathmandu, Bangkok shortly and doing necessary feasibility study for the Canton & Yangon operation.

As a part of 2nd year anniversary, induction of recently purchased jet aircraft MD-83 on 10th July 2009 at Zia International Airport, Dhaka at 1700hrs is being held.

Chairman and Managing Director Capt. Tasbirul Ahmed Choudhury said “Recalling many airlines have yield to the challenge, we definitely want to survive and increase our fleet as this is the right time to procure desired aircraft. We are in the process of buying two more MD-83 by the end of this year”.

The carrier plans to expand its fleet by adding Boeing 767-300ER by next year to fly to London and other Gulf destinations. UK and Gulf is the most important market for Bangladeshi airlines as one in two people who fly abroad goes to the six Gulf countries and UK.

On this auspicious occasion of its 2nd Birthday, the management of United Airways has expressed their gratitude to all its patrons and well wishers, and in particular, all the Govt. agencies for their heartfelt support in making United, a success story.

Honorable Minister for Civil Aviation and Tourism, GM Quader formally inaugurated the flight of newly introduced jet aircraft MD-83 of United Airways. On that occasion Mr. Abdul-Muyeed Chowdhury, Former Adviser to Caretaker Government and Mr Hedayatullah Al Mamoon, Secretary, Ministry for Civil Aviation and Tourism attended as a Special Guests. Among other High Officials of the Government, Senior Officials of the Financial Institutes, Civil Aviation Authority of Bangladesh, other Airlines, Journalists, investors and employees of United Airways are also present.

Chairman and Managing Director Capt. Tasbirul Ahmed Choudhury said “We are in the process of buying two more MD-83 by the end of this year”.

If they go ahead with this plan, I doubt if they'll live long enough to celebrate their 4th anniversary.

The carrier plans to expand its fleet by adding Boeing 767-300ER by next year to fly to London and other Gulf destinations.

Reminds me of a herd of sheep.

^^ most prolly Mihin Lanka, but theres also Deccan Lanka, and Expo Aviation.

Mihin Lanka indeed! I thought they had some plans sometime back to serve DAC...can anyone confirm or provide updates on that?

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/3587/displayphotor.jpg

^^ cant see ur pic BDAV :(

Mihin Lanka indeed! I thought they had some plans sometime back to serve DAC...can anyone confirm or provide updates on that?

lol I tried googling a bit but could'nt find proper results!

lol I tried googling a bit but could'nt find proper results!

I tried searching as well with nothing...

It may have been a rumour?

.... we definitely want to survive and increase our fleet as this is the right time to procure desired aircraft. We are in the process of buying two more MD-83 by the end of this year”.

Now why would MD-83 desirable to an airlines? I understand its availability and low cost of acquisition but than, 3 owned/purchased MD-83... that almost sounds suicidal to me!!! Any expert explanation on that???

Reminds me of a herd of sheep.

Both in terms of fleet and destination too... but the question is, why? It's natural that people will be motivated by success stories, but in this case there was hardly any success...

Now why would MD-83 desirable to an airlines? I understand its availability and low cost of acquisition but than, 3 owned/purchased MD-83... that almost sounds suicidal to me!!! Any expert explanation on that???



Both in terms of fleet and destination too... but the question is, why? It's natural that people will be motivated by success stories, but in this case there was hardly any success...


Thats the reason why the Bangladeshi airlines can never be the Virgin, Emirates, British Airways, American, etc. of Bangladesh!

For some reason the cheap option is always the best option... :(

I personally think United should use this money to lease/ buy planes like 737 or 767.
Buying an MD-83 is basically pouring money in the drain, its not like they can ever sell it. The thought of a "Bangladeshi operator" would scare any potential buyer 3000 miles before even looking at the aircraft!
So I guess these plane have taken a one-way ticket to Bangladesh?

Imran bhai do you think this is the case for BD aircraft(s)?

Thats the reason why the Bangladeshi airlines can never be the Virgin, Emirates, British Airways, American, etc. of Bangladesh



I dont except Bangladesh to have any "Emirates-type" airline before 2020! and by that time, Emirates will cross 250 aircrafts! We are AGES behind! thanks to the corrupt officials & govts!

More aircraft to be taken on lease

Civil Aviation and Tourism Minister GM Quader yesterday said the hajj pilgrims would not face any flight crisis this year as several aircraft would be added to Biman fleet on lease within one and half months.

“We hope the pilgrims will face no problem in hajj flights this year as we'll take some new aircraft on lease within one and half months,” he told reporters after attending the inaugural ceremony of Jet Aircraft MD-83 of United Airways marking its 2nd anniversary.

The minister said the process of modernising Biman is going on by removing the aircraft crisis and reforming its management.

“We've taken all necessary steps to resolve Biman's flight crisis. A total of three Boeing-777s, two 737 and one 747 Airbus would join the fleet soon and one more 747 aircraft would be included on lease, if necessary,” Quader said.

Chairman and managing director of the United Airways Captain Tasbirul Ahmed Chowdhury said they want to survive in the market by increasing their aircraft “as this is the right time to procure new generation aircraft.”

He also said they are also in the process of buying two more MD-83 aircraft and those will be here by the yearend.

Biman Chairman Jamaluddin and Civil Aviation and Tourism Secretary Hedayetullah Al Mamoon also addressed the function.


http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=96430

More aircraft to be taken on lease

Civil Aviation and Tourism Minister GM Quader yesterday said the hajj pilgrims would not face any flight crisis this year as several aircraft would be added to Biman fleet on lease within one and half months.

“We hope the pilgrims will face no problem in hajj flights this year as we'll take some new aircraft on lease within one and half months,” he told reporters after attending the inaugural ceremony of Jet Aircraft MD-83 of United Airways marking its 2nd anniversary.

The minister said the process of modernising Biman is going on by removing the aircraft crisis and reforming its management.

“We've taken all necessary steps to resolve Biman's flight crisis. A total of three Boeing-777s, two 737 and one 747 Airbus would join the fleet soon and one more 747 aircraft would be included on lease, if necessary,” Quader said.

Chairman and managing director of the United Airways Captain Tasbirul Ahmed Chowdhury said they want to survive in the market by increasing their aircraft “as this is the right time to procure new generation aircraft.”

He also said they are also in the process of buying two more MD-83 aircraft and those will be here by the yearend.

Biman Chairman Jamaluddin and Civil Aviation and Tourism Secretary Hedayetullah Al Mamoon also addressed the function.


http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=96430

LOOOL at 747 "Airbus" :lol:

btw, Emirates SkyCargo doesnt fly to DAC anymore?? just saw in wiki and their website that they dont have the DAC route!! pretty surprising!

Mihin Lanka indeed! I thought they had some plans sometime back to serve DAC...can anyone confirm or provide updates on that?

Mihin Lanka is a govt. owned budget airlines that is not doing well and not many people are happy with it as it is running at a loss I think. I will be surprised if they will expand let alone survive for long.

Apart from Mihin Lanka yes there is Expo Air which does domestic flights from Colombo to norther Sri Lanka and also cargo flights to Male I think. I dont think Dhaka would be in their plans anytime soon.

As for UL itself, like you mentioned in an earlier post, their parting with EK has cost the airlines a lot. UL is reducing its routes ie. no more flight to Goa & Kozhikode etc. However they are planning a Colombo-Kolkata-Katmandu route I think, which is surprising. If UL does Kolkata and misses out Dhaka to Katmandu, then it means UL thinks Dhaka is not a profitable route.

I wish there is direct connectivity between Colombo and Dhaka soon though, and certainly would advocate the idea of UL connecting to China via Dhaka.

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/3587/displayphotor.jpg

where was this photo taken, Dhaka?

LOOOL at 747 "Airbus" :lol:

This is keeping (in line) with, "airliner" (instead of airline), "wide-body 737", et al. If you want misinformation, read Bangladesh newspapers!

This is keeping (in line) with, "airliner" (instead of airline), "wide-body 737", et al. If you want misinformation, read Bangladesh newspapers!


I have just seen a news report on ATN Bangla, the reporter is quoteing "United Airline" even thought she is standing yards away from the the MD-83 which is displaying in very large lettering as United Airways!!!!:nuts:

If they go ahead with this plan, I doubt if they'll live long enough to celebrate their 4th anniversary.




Reminds me of a herd of sheep.

GMG is doing OK with their MD's, it's only the 747 that was a problem for them.

I have a question. Since United Airways and United Airlines sound so similar, could there be a potential lawsuit by UAL due to the copying of the name. I know that United Airways will fly to Dubai soon, and so does United Airlines. Could that lead to the beginning of "copying of name" lawsuit?

GMG is doing OK with their MD's, it's only the 747 that was a problem for them.

The MD's aren't nearly the right choice of aircraft, and United will soon find out why. Just wait till the fuel price creeps up a bit more and the heavy checks become due. But of course, I understand the choice was made following GMG's footsteps yet another time, but even they haven't been stupid enough to "buy" the MD's!

I have a question. Since United Airways and United Airlines sound so similar, could there be a potential lawsuit by UAL due to the copying of the name. I know that United Airways will fly to Dubai soon, and so does United Airlines. Could that lead to the beginning of "copying of name" lawsuit?

It was sheer stupidity on their part to choose this name. Risks of facing lawsuits apart, there's hardly any point in choosing a name that'd confuse general travellers, just like it did to that ATN reporter.

Common sense is not so common these days.

where was this photo taken, Dhaka?

Dubai.

See: http://myaviation.net/search/photo_search.php?id=01629264&size=large

Best,

Wasim / Planemannyc

where was this photo taken, Dhaka?

MSN 49790; YOM 1989; originally delivered to Spanair. From my records, there are MD-83s in better conditions available for sale & lease.

I have a question. Since United Airways and United Airlines sound so similar, could there be a potential lawsuit by UAL due to the copying of the name. I know that United Airways will fly to Dubai soon, and so does United Airlines. Could that lead to the beginning of "copying of name" lawsuit?

I can remember a long, long time ago United Airlines filed a lawsuit against Etihad Airways because Etihad can be translated as meaning United or Unity. I can't find the article or any reference about that anymore, has anyone heard of this before?

If that was true then United Airways (BD) will have to be very careful with all the routes United Airlines has.

MSN 49790; YOM 1989; originally delivered to Spanair. From my records, there are MD-83s in better conditions available for sale & lease.

I would have thought that this aircraft would be in good condition given that it was operated in Europe before.

I can remember a long, long time ago United Airlines filed a lawsuit against Etihad Airways because Etihad can be translated as meaning United or Unity. I can't find the article or any reference about that anymore, has anyone heard of this before?

"When Etihad formed, United Airlines disapproved of Etihad's name as it is Arabic for ''United''. However, it was later deemed unnecessary as Etihad would be trading under the Arabic name."

^^^This used to be on wikipedia, but its not there anymore.

I would have thought that this aircraft would be in good condition given that it was operated in Europe before.

I am sure it was in good condition during it's time. Unfortunately it has well past it's prime...

Anyway, I hope United does better with DXB than GMG. More than the their choice of aircraft, they have probably chosen an wrong time. With EK running 17 flights a week with 400+ seater (though a lot of their passengers are for onward destinations) and BG 5/6 flight with at least 3 of them with 300+ seater and Etihad/Gulf/Air Arabia also feeding to this route, I wonder how long the demand will sustain, especially with present economic scenario and seasonal pattern of traffic in this route...

If that was true then United Airways (BD) will have to be very careful with all the routes United Airlines has.

It doesn't matter if they serve the same routes or not. I'd reckon UA will be up at it with a lawsuit sooner or later.

I would have thought that this aircraft would be in good condition given that it was operated in Europe before.

Didn't say it is in a poor condition...only said there are much better ones available since they for some inexplicable reasons decided to "buy" rather than lease.

^^
Yes, for an airline that barely got started it was a bad decision to buy instead of lease. I wouldn't be surprised if United Airways meets the same fate with its mad dog that Z5 had with its jumbo.

What I fail to understand why this mindless follow the herd mentality. I am yet to see any of these private carriers come up with a completely different mode of operation, route structure, equipment, etc., that probably would have much better chance of success.

I have a question. Since United Airways and United Airlines sound so similar, could there be a potential lawsuit by UAL due to the copying of the name. I know that United Airways will fly to Dubai soon, and so does United Airlines. Could that lead to the beginning of "copying of name" lawsuit?

United Airways IATA code is 4H
United Airlines IATA code is UA

United Airways callsign: United Bangladesh
United Airlines callsign: United

United Airways ICAO:UBD
United Airlines ICAO:UAL


I hope this will explain that United Airways (BD) Ltd is different to United Air Lines,Inc.

The word "UNITED" can not be copyrighted. It is a common word, unlike Pepsi or McDonalds.

BUT than again: if there were a new start up in the UK called "British Airline" than I would expect "British Airways" might get a little pi$$ed off!!:bash:

United Airways callsign: United Bangladesh
United Airlines callsign: United

Among other things, that callsign 'United Bangladesh' can create a lot of confusion for both UA and BG. I wonder, how is that callsign handled by ATC/Zia approach so far!

Among other things, that callsign 'United Bangladesh' can create a lot of confusion for both UA and BG. I wonder, how is that callsign handled by ATC/Zia approach so far!

maybe iasif can tell us?

It was sheer stupidity on their part to choose this name. Risks of facing lawsuits apart, there's hardly any point in choosing a name that'd confuse general travellers, just like it did to that ATN reporter.

Common sense is not so common these days.

That's a good one Imran Bhai!

I hope this will explain that United Airways (BD) Ltd is different to United Air Lines,Inc.

The word "UNITED" can not be copyrighted. It is a common word, unlike Pepsi or McDonalds.

BUT than again: if there were a new start up in the UK called "British Airline" than I would expect "British Airways" might get a little pi$$ed off!!:bash:

Even without any explanation, everyone here understands that United Airlines and United Airways are different entities. :)

The fact that remains is "United Airlines" is an international registered trademark, and if they go to the courts saying that the operator with the name "United Airways" with assigned IATA and ICAO codes infringes the trademark of United Airlines, they'll win it hands down...the reason being largely that these are two companies engaged in the same area of business internationally.

Unlike Jet Airways of India, the 'desi' United doesn't have a ground for appeal. Here's something relevant:
http://www.indianexpress.com/oldStory/71822/

:)

Among other things, that callsign 'United Bangladesh' can create a lot of confusion for both UA and BG. I wonder, how is that callsign handled by ATC/Zia approach so far!

ATC: United Bangladesh and Bangladeshi, the tower hereby confirms that you folks are on your own on the approach till landing. Please behave and mind each other's wings and get on the ground...oh well...you're gonna make it to the ground anyways even if you don't behave! Godspeed...over and out!
*click* (all radios turned off)

^^ nice one :lol:

Even without any explanation, everyone here understands that United Airlines and United Airways are different entities. :)

The fact that remains is "United Airlines" is an international registered trademark, and if they go to the courts saying that the operator with the name "United Airways" with assigned IATA and ICAO codes infringes the trademark of United Airlines, they'll win it hands down...the reason being largely that these are two companies engaged in the same area of business internationally.

Unlike Jet Airways of India, the 'desi' United doesn't have a ground for appeal. Here's something relevant:
http://www.indianexpress.com/oldStory/71822/

:)

Jet Airways (India) Ltd ran into a fake company with the exact SAME name of Jet Airways Inc. But even than Jet Airways (India) Ltd was able to overcome it.

But, here we have United Airways Bangladesh Ltd and United Air Line,Inc. we alrady have a difference in name.

Personally, I feel United Air Lines,Inc might kick off a fuss, when and if ever United Airways (BD) Ltd starts flight into the US, which I think is a very long way away. and even if, United Airways (BD) Ltd did do the unthinkable, I think United Air Lines, Inc might not be too fussed with a Bangladeshi airline doing a few flight a week into NY.

I can understand, they were not happy with Etihad, because they realise that the Emiraties have the finance in place that might cause them problems. But in this case, they will not be too worried a little fish!

Jet Airways (India) Ltd ran into a fake company with the exact SAME name of Jet Airways Inc. But even than Jet Airways (India) Ltd was able to overcome it.

But, here we have United Airways Bangladesh Ltd and United Air Line,Inc. we alrady have a difference in name.

Personally, I feel United Air Lines,Inc might kick off a fuss, when and if ever United Airways (BD) Ltd starts flight into the US, which I think is a very long way away. and even if, United Airways (BD) Ltd did do the unthinkable, I think United Air Lines, Inc might not be too fussed with a Bangladeshi airline doing a few flight a week into NY.

I can understand, they were not happy with Etihad, because they realise that the Emiraties have the finance in place that might cause them problems. But in this case, they will not be too worried a little fish!

It will not require UALBD to start serving the US for UA to raise their point.

I have a bit of a relationship with United Services (the mx subsidiary of UA) and from what I've heard, an act from heir side is in the cooking.

It will not require UALBD to start serving the US for UA to raise their point.

I have a bit of a relationship with United Services (the mx subsidiary of UA) and from what I've heard, an act from heir side is in the cooking.

It's all about (ready) brand recognition.

It will not require UALBD to start serving the US for UA to raise their point.

I have a bit of a relationship with United Services (the mx subsidiary of UA) and from what I've heard, an act from heir side is in the cooking.

I think as common Bangladeshis, we all need to support the Bangladeshi carrier and not side with the US one.

of course, United Airways (BD) ltd or any other Bangladeshi private carrier will have their enemys, whom might go out of their way to bring the subject matter to the light of United Air Line, Inc. Whether, they will do something about it? only time will tell. I dought it.

I think as common Bangladeshis, we all need to support the Bangladeshi carrier and not side with the US one.

of course, United Airways (BD) ltd or any other Bangladeshi private carrier will have their enemys, whom might go out of their way to bring the subject matter to the light of United Air Line, Inc. Whether, they will do something about it? only time will tell. I dought it.

1. As much as I'd like to support local folks, I can't blindly support any stupidity on their part.

2. No one will have to bring the matter to the attention of UA. In this Internet age, you really can't expect them not to know.

1. As much as I'd like to support local folks, I can't blindly support any stupidity on their part.

2. No one will have to bring the matter to the attention of UA. In this Internet age, you really can't expect them not to know.

1. Bengali always Bengali mahre!!

2. Hummmmmmm................................................

[B]NEWS FLASH

United Kingdon is sueing United States of America for using the word "United":lol:

The Kingdon in a press release said: We were a more civalised socity and more established way of life than these cowboys.:lol:

Now, that's a trial of the century.:speech:

[B]NEWS FLASH

United Kingdon is sueing United States of America for using the word "United":lol:

The Kingdon in a press release said: We were a more civalised socity and more established way of life than these cowboys.:lol:

Now, that's a trial of the century.:speech:

Ahem -- I think @Akbar is smoking a big fat one :tongue4:;):naughty:

^^ :lol:

“We've taken all necessary steps to resolve Biman's flight crisis. A total of three Boeing-777s, two 737 and one 747 Airbus would join the fleet soon and one more 747 aircraft would be included on lease, if necessary,” Quader said.



An Airbus 747?

1. Bengali always Bengali mahre!!

Without meaning to sound like a racist, I feel that it is our own inability to accept rational criticism and unbiased judgment that significantly hinders our progress and prosperity.

Only if we weren't like that, we 'Bengalis' would have been far lesser humiliated by our own selves.

Apologies for the irrelevant post, and Mods are free to trash it.

Deccan group, i.e Deccan are Deccan... Same country... Thats why you shall see the ATR42-500 operating in Sri Lanka.

Expo Aviation are still running around with 40you FK-27's?!

It will not require UALBD to start serving the US for UA to raise their point.

I have a bit of a relationship with United Services (the mx subsidiary of UA) and from what I've heard, an act from heir side is in the cooking.

What are the consequences for UALBD if UAL do go ahead with a lawsuit? :bash:

Akbar1 does Capt. Tasbirul have any other names in mind if you are forced to change the company name?

How about AirBangla? I personally think that this is a very brandable name for a Bangladeshi airline.

I think as common Bangladeshis, we all need to support the Bangladeshi carrier and not side with the US one.

of course, United Airways (BD) ltd or any other Bangladeshi private carrier will have their enemys, whom might go out of their way to bring the subject matter to the light of United Air Line, Inc. Whether, they will do something about it? only time will tell. I dought it.

You are missing the point. Bangladeshis supporting Bnagladeshis/Bangladeshi products is irrelevant. Same holds true for "having enemies" and all that junk. In business there will always be rivals. It was not too bright on the part of the management of this company to use that name to begin with. In Bangladesh everybody appears to conduct business by the seat of their pants. In other parts, they do basic research even just to select the name of the company for any possible conflicts or potential legal issues.

What are the consequences for UALBD if UAL do go ahead with a lawsuit? :bash:

Depends entirely on the claims to be made in the lawsuit. For the East-African "Delta Connection", it was quite bad:

http://www.nation.co.ke/News/-/1056/592478/-/u65lw9/-/index.html

Depends entirely on the claims to be made in the lawsuit. For the East-African "Delta Connection", it was quite bad:

http://www.nation.co.ke/News/-/1056/592478/-/u65lw9/-/index.html

Delta actually used to use the brand name "Delta Connection" for all its feeder services. Not sure what they'll be using now since Northwest used to call its, "Northwest Airlink".

You are missing the point. Bangladeshis supporting Bnagladeshis/Bangladeshi products is irrelevant. Same holds true for "having enemies" and all that junk. In business there will always be rivals. It was not too bright on the part of the management of this company to use that name to begin with. In Bangladesh everybody appears to conduct business by the seat of their pants. In other parts, they do basic research even just to select the name of the company for any possible conflicts or potential legal issues.


Like I said:

United Kingdom is sueing United States of America for using the word "UNITED".:hahaha:

Yes the company can always use a different name, and rebrand themselfs, but that's not the point. Just because United Air Lines, Inc. is a big fish, does not always make them have everything their own way.

A law suite by this big brand will be a blessing for United Airways (BD) Ltd, it will provide huge amount of free publicity. Atleast United Ayrways (BD) Ltd will be taken to court by a big fish, unlike Jet Airways (India) Ltd with their fake Jet Airways.Inc.

:cheers:

Like I said:

United Kingdom is sueing United States of America for using the word "UNITED".:hahaha:

Yes the company can always use a different name, and rebrand themselfs, but that's not the point. Just because United Air Lines, Inc. is a big fish, does not always make them have everything their own way.

A law suite by this big brand will be a blessing for United Airways (BD) Ltd, it will provide huge amount of free publicity. Atleast United Ayrways (BD) Ltd will be taken to court by a big fish, unlike Jet Airways (India) Ltd with their fake Jet Airways.Inc.

:cheers:

Free publicity isn't always the best publicity.

Have you thought about what would happen to the company. It will take double effort for United BD to get their reputation and confidence back.

Also is it really "free"?
I mean surely UAL will sue United BD and claim for costs and damages???
And believe you me these will run into the millions.

^^ Exactly, a lawsuit would cost UALBD a ton of money. This is what I don't understand - UALBD boasts that it has been founded by NRBs. I am sure (hope) most of those NRBs have heard of UAL Inc., and the consequences of a lawsuit of copying someone's name, then why did they go ahead and name their company United Airways??

^^

The possibility of UA filing a law suit and winning it against United Airways BD will depend on several factors, including and most importantly, where the law suid is being filed. Honestly speaking, if UA was my client and asked my opinion on filing a case against United Airways, my primary reaction would have ' what on earth for!!!'. Having said that, I never really liked that name and more than that, the font they are using.

One thing, I hate to be a party spoiler, but we aren't really discussing aviation here any more....:cheers:

The US-based Boeing Commercial Airplanes has expressed its interest to sell their new-generation aircraft to the country's flag career-- Biman Bangladesh Airlines.

Miguel Santos, director of International Sales for Boeing Commercial Airplanes, expressed this during a meeting with Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina at her official residence Jamuna in Dhaka yesterday.

Santos also informed the Prime Minister about the outcome of his recent meeting with the civil aviation and tourism minister and high officials of the Biman Bangladesh Airlines Limited regarding the sale of Boeing aircraft to Bangladesh.

US Ambassador in Dhaka James F Moriarty accompanied the Boeing official in the meeting.

http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=96671

The US-based Boeing Commercial Airplanes has expressed its interest to sell their new-generation aircraft to the country's flag career-- Biman Bangladesh Airlines.

Miguel Santos, director of International Sales for Boeing Commercial Airplanes, expressed this during a meeting with Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina at her official residence Jamuna in Dhaka yesterday.

Santos also informed the Prime Minister about the outcome of his recent meeting with the civil aviation and tourism minister and high officials of the Biman Bangladesh Airlines Limited regarding the sale of Boeing aircraft to Bangladesh.

US Ambassador in Dhaka James F Moriarty accompanied the Boeing official in the meeting.

http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=96671

Huh? What does it mean? What do they mean? The 737/777/787 ordered by BG aren't Boeing aircraft? This kind of news reporting, typical in Bangladesh, irritates me so!

^^ Exactly, a lawsuit would cost UALBD a ton of money. This is what I don't understand - UALBD boasts that it has been founded by NRBs. I am sure (hope) most of those NRBs have heard of UAL Inc., and the consequences of a lawsuit of copying someone's name, then why did they go ahead and name their company United Airways??

Quite right. It will bankrupt the airline if sued by UA. At the same time, it is relevant where the lawsuit is filed, as pointed out by QGR. In Malaysia McDonald's fast food chain sued a small fish, a local malay restaurant for using the name McCurry, which, it lost in the appeals court in Malaysia.

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE53S34O20090429

I doubt the Bangladesh judiciary has the backbone to stand up to a US conglomerate. So Akbar1, if I were you, I would be so gleeful and invite such a fate for your favorite underdog.

^^ exactly, they should say in more details, about what type of aircrafts and when is it gonna be delivered etc

Let me analyse what aircraft BG should use in which routes when:

a) we have the leased 3x B777-200/200ER, 2x B737-800, and 1x B747 (hajj aircraft ?) by this year.
b) we have all 4x B777-300ER by 2011.
c) we have all 4x B787-8 and 2x B737-800NG by 2015 & 2019


a) if the B747 is used for Hajj, then definitely it will serve Jeddah. the 2x B737-800 may serve New Delhi, Kathmandu, Bangkok, Kolkata, Karachi, and perhaps, Mumbai? the 3x B777-200/200ER may serve Kualalampur, Singapore, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Dubai, Riyadh, Tripoli, London, New York, Rome, Brussels, and Frankfurt. the rest Muscat, Doha, Kuwait, Abudhabi, Bahrain may be served with the existing DC-10-30s.

b) by 2011, inshallah if we have all 4x B777-300ERs along with some other aircrafts (im not sure if DC-10s will be phased out by then and if we will have sum leased aircrafts or not), we may be able to operate to Toronto, Beijing, Soeul, Sydney, Manchester, Athens, Amsterdam & Paris.

c) by 2019, we shall probably have 10 new aircrafts at least (with few leased ones perhaps) and we may be able to operate to at least 40 routes by then :)

a) if the B747 is used for Hajj, then definitely it will serve Jeddah. the 2x B737-800 may serve New Delhi, Kathmandu, Bangkok, Kolkata, Karachi, and perhaps, Mumbai? the 3x B777-200/200ER may serve Kualalampur, Singapore, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Dubai, Riyadh, Tripoli, London, New York, Rome, Brussels, and Frankfurt. the rest Muscat, Doha, Kuwait, Abudhabi, Bahrain may be served with the existing DC-10-30s.

So, what about the A310s? BG has called for a tender to add a third one (interestingly with any engine option!!!). Though there is active plan, PM can't use all the three for VIP travel...:)

Not to mention, I hope we are going to see the F28s flying high even in 2019!!!

Miguel Santos, director of International Sales for Boeing Commercial Airplanes, expressed this during a meeting with Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina at her official residence Jamuna in Dhaka yesterday

I wonder what this chap is doing in Dhaka! Strong rumor in Banking arena is, finally we are going to see an 'Air Force One' type VIP air craft for PM!!

Check this out:

http://www.reuters.com/article/americasDealsNews/idUSTRE56B0SW20090712

This wasn't a pretty little courtesy call as it may appear reading the Daily Star report.

Besides what a shame that Mr. Santos hasn't expressed his eagerness to sell its new-generation aircraft to country's premier private airline!!!

Huh? What does it mean? What do they mean? The 737/777/787 ordered by BG aren't Boeing aircraft? This kind of news reporting, typical in Bangladesh, irritates me so!

So that irritated you ... eh? Take a look at this one:

http://nation.ittefaq.com/issues/2009/07/12/news0683.htm

I wonder what this chap is doing in Dhaka! Strong rumor in Banking arena is, finally we are going to see an 'Air Force One' type VIP air craft for PM!!

Check this out:

http://www.reuters.com/article/americasDealsNews/idUSTRE56B0SW20090712

This wasn't a pretty little courtesy call as it may appear reading the Daily Star report.

Besides what a shame that Mr. Santos hasn't expressed his eagerness to sell its new-generation aircraft to country's premier private airline!!!

Over the last 2 years, Mr. Santos had visited Dhaka 20+ times. The credit for bagging the Biman deal goes almost entirely to him. Last May, he met the Minister, MoCAT along with Moriarty, and this time the PM, to ensure that the Boeing deal stays firm in place. There have been words going around that some people were trying to have the order cancelled to pursue their own offers. I think this particular visit would effectively ensure the first Pre-Delivery Payment originally scheduled to be made around this time.

As for the VIP jet for the PM, you're quite right about the rumours. Maybe it'll be a BBJ1/2 based on the 737NGs...who knows?! ;)

Over the last 2 years, Mr. Santos had visited Dhaka 20+ times. The credit for bagging the Biman deal goes almost entirely to him. Last May, he met the Minister, MoCAT along with Moriarty, and this time the PM, to ensure that the Boeing deal stays firm in place. .....

Boy, these folks must have such "pull" that they get to meet with the PM of a country? I wonder in how many other countries other than Bangladesh, such things are possible?

As for the VIP jet for the PM, you're quite right about the rumours. Maybe it'll be a BBJ1/2 based on the 737NGs...who knows?! ;)

Do these have the range for non-stop flights to Europe?

So, what about the A310s? BG has called for a tender to add a third one (interestingly with any engine option!!!). Though there is active plan, PM can't use all the three for VIP travel...:)

Not to mention, I hope we are going to see the F28s flying high even in 2019!!!

The A310-300 that will join Biman is MSN 642 unless ILFC defaults for the second time regarding delivery. The currently open RFP is a formality farce.

Add to that 3x 777s within the coming months for a 4-year lease. Not too sure about the Hajj 747. Biman might not need it if it gets a couple of 777s by mid-October. The 747 RFP was responded with 9 offers of which two have been shortlisted: HS-UTO by Orient Thai and 5N-MAD by Kabo (the same aircraft BG leased last year and is parked at DAC till date). HS-UTO is unlikely to get Saudi GACA clearance for technical issues, and Kabo has its own issues going on with Biman for a while now (including an USD 785,000 un-noticed overpayment by Biman through its lease period!).

2x 737-800s are supposed to come in from GECAS (Celestial Aviation) soon. I expect the new 777s to begin to get delivered from 2011 if not sooner. The DC-10s will not be around beyond 2010 at the maximum. Now you guys do your own fleet utilization brainstorming! :)

So, what about the A310s? BG has called for a tender to add a third one (interestingly with any engine option!!!). Though there is active plan, PM can't use all the three for VIP travel...:)

Not to mention, I hope we are going to see the F28s flying high even in 2019!!!

Why on earth those idiots called for a tender to add a 3rd A310??? cant they find anything better?? forget about VIP plane for the bloody PM! First BG, then PM's plane! If i see those tiny F28s flying in 2019, Ill make sure i blow them up before they can even think of take off!

Imran bhai, dont wanna do the fleet utilization again :) but I hope the leased B777s come with personal TVs at least ;)

Boy, this folks must have such "pull" that they get to meet with the PM of a country? I wonder in how many other countries other than Bangladesh, such things are possible?

At least the 10 other states I mentioned the other day as ones with Significant Safety Concern!

Do these have the range for non-stop flights to Europe?

Easily...and would you believe it...the www.boeing.com site is completely down right now as I post this one!!!??? I thought I'd give you the link to the BBJ site

^^ its working now I think!

....including an USD 785,000 un-noticed overpayment by Biman through its lease period!.

Un-noticed overpayment of USD 785,000/- only!!! Nice to know BG still have enough luxury for such lavish oversight...

....If i see those tiny F28s flying in 2019, Ill make sure i blow them up before they can even think of take off!

How? :D

If i see those tiny F28s flying in 2019, Ill make sure i blow them up before they can even think of take off!

As economically unpalatable the F-28s have become to operate today, when it was built in 1967 to enter service in 1969, it was an RJ well ahead of its time. I remember an early-70s flyer in which Fokker promoted the 12-minute turn-around capability of the F-28, at a time when quick turn-arounds weren't given nearly as much emphasis as today.

From the design and manufacturing point-of-view, the F-28 is also a fine example of Dutch craftsmanship. The wings are wonderfully aerodynamic, and the plane was built to operate out of short runways very efficiently.

But then, time is ruthless...and this is 2009. :)

As economically unpalatable the F-28s have become to operate today, .......
From the design and manufacturing point-of-view, the F-28 is also a fine example of Dutch craftsmanship. The wings are wonderfully aerodynamic, and the plane was built to operate out of short runways very efficiently.

But then, time is ruthless...and this is 2009. :)

Yes, I can recall that being one of its selling point, as well as from unpaved runways.

I know the Fokker company is long gone, but didn't anybody attempt to retrofit these aircraft with modern engines and avionics?

How? :D

lol if i see it on the ground, with an RPG-7, if its flying, ill use a QW-2 MANPAD! :D

(srry for being offtopic )

As economically unpalatable the F-28s have become to operate today, when it was built in 1967 to enter service in 1969, it was an RJ well ahead of its time. I remember an early-70s flyer in which Fokker promoted the 12-minute turn-around capability of the F-28, at a time when quick turn-arounds weren't given nearly as much emphasis as today.

From the design and manufacturing point-of-view, the F-28 is also a fine example of Dutch craftsmanship. The wings are wonderfully aerodynamic, and the plane was built to operate out of short runways very efficiently.

But then, time is ruthless...and this is 2009. :)

By now you know that there is hardly any poetry in me.... F-28, as I see, was not as much successful as Fokker's masterpiece F-27 Friendship. The design of Fellowship was similar to two of its preceding models BAC 1-11 and DC-9. There was nothing exciting about its sell performance as well (some 240 odd, and even if you consider the later developments like Fokker 70 or Fokker 100, it never went anywhere near Friendship, let alone successful models like DC-9).

Besides, the timing itself was, I would say, different and demanding. Late 60s and 70s was definitely the golden era of aviation and produced some of the revolutionary works. Staring from Boeing 747, 737, Airbus A300, McDonnell Douglas DC-9, DC-10, Lockheed L-1011, the Famous 'teen' series fighters (F-14, F-15 and F-16), Aérospatiale Concorde, Russian Mig-25, Mig -29 to later in 70s the spaces shuttles.... these all were genuine masterpiece and till now dominating in their respective field. The technological leapfrog these models/aircraft/spacecraft have demonstrated, I wonder, will it be ever matched in our lifetime. Just think about those BWB kind of stuffs... pathetic concept which will remain a mere concept for a while at least... I even doubt whether NASA can actually retire their Shuttle fleet by 2014 as they are yet to come up with a suitable solution.

Sorry for a long one... the bottom line is, I don't mind seeing birds like DC-10 or F-28 in an air show or aviation museum or in junk yards, but as far as flying is concerned I am far from being convinced by its 'golden past'...

lol if i see it on the ground, with an RPG-7, if its flying, ill use a QW-2 MANPAD! :D

(srry for being offtopic )

Don't forget to send me a PM... I will join in.. :guns1:

By now you know that there is hardly any poetry in me.... F-28, as I see, was not as much successful as Fokker's masterpiece F-27 Friendship. The design of Fellowship was similar to two of its preceding models BAC 1-11 and DC-9. There was nothing exciting about its sell performance as well (some 240 odd, and even if you consider the later developments like Fokker 70 or Fokker 100, it never went anywhere near Friendship, let alone successful models like DC-9).

Besides, the timing itself was, I would say, different and demanding. Late 60s and 70s was definitely the golden era of aviation and produced some of the revolutionary works. Staring from Boeing 747, 737, Airbus A300, McDonnell Douglas DC-9, DC-10, Lockheed L-1011, the Famous 'teen' series fighters (F-14, F-15 and F-16), Aérospatiale Concorde, Russian Mig-25, Mig -29 to later in 70s the spaces shuttles.... these all were genuine masterpiece and till now dominating in their respective field. The technological leapfrog these models/aircraft/spacecraft have demonstrated, I wonder, will it be ever matched in our lifetime. Just think about those BWB kind of stuffs... pathetic concept which will remain a mere concept for a while at least... I even doubt whether NASA can actually retire their Shuttle fleet by 2014 as they are yet to come up with a suitable solution.

Sorry for a long one... the bottom line is, I don't mind seeing birds like DC-10 or F-28 in an air show or aviation museum or in junk yards, but as far as flying is concerned I am far from being convinced by its 'golden past'...

True aviation enthusiasts like all birds, for their uniqueness. The Tristar (L1011) wasn't much of a success given its production numbers, yet I came across write ups praising the original jumbo in every sense. The F28 in its day was a workhorse and all of the operators got their monies worth, literally working them to the ground.

By now you know that there is hardly any poetry in me.... F-28, as I see, was not as much successful as Fokker's masterpiece F-27 Friendship. The design of Fellowship was similar to two of its preceding models BAC 1-11 and DC-9. There was nothing exciting about its sell performance as well (some 240 odd, and even if you consider the later developments like Fokker 70 or Fokker 100, it never went anywhere near Friendship, let alone successful models like DC-9).

Besides, the timing itself was, I would say, different and demanding. Late 60s and 70s was definitely the golden era of aviation and produced some of the revolutionary works. Staring from Boeing 747, 737, Airbus A300, McDonnell Douglas DC-9, DC-10, Lockheed L-1011, the Famous 'teen' series fighters (F-14, F-15 and F-16), Aérospatiale Concorde, Russian Mig-25, Mig -29 to later in 70s the spaces shuttles.... these all were genuine masterpiece and till now dominating in their respective field. The technological leapfrog these models/aircraft/spacecraft have demonstrated, I wonder, will it be ever matched in our lifetime. Just think about those BWB kind of stuffs... pathetic concept which will remain a mere concept for a while at least... I even doubt whether NASA can actually retire their Shuttle fleet by 2014 as they are yet to come up with a suitable solution.

Sorry for a long one... the bottom line is, I don't mind seeing birds like DC-10 or F-28 in an air show or aviation museum or in junk yards, but as far as flying is concerned I am far from being convinced by its 'golden past'...

Poetry for bankers is numerical, or so I understand! :)

There are 2 reasons why the F-28 didn't sell as well as it should've: (i) it wasn't American, and America was then the largest market for an RJ of that size, and McDD had the DC-9, and (ii) the overall global market wasn't ready for an RJ yet.

As for technological leapfrog in aircraft technology, there isn't much room for improvement on the tube-and-wing design itself. A leapfrog, if ever, will either be in a radically new design, or in the development of alternative fuel suitable for aviation. Until then, the B787 / A350XWB will be as close as we'll get.

True aviation enthusiasts like all birds, for their uniqueness. The Tristar (L1011) wasn't much of a success given its production numbers, yet I came across write ups praising the original jumbo in every sense. The F28 in its day was a workhorse and all of the operators got their monies worth, literally working them to the ground.

Speaking of the TriStar, I must say that while I love the DC-10 for its looks, the TriStar was actually technologically more superior than the DC-10. Its just that it entered the market a bit too late...by which time it lost enough of the war to the DC-10.

And it's a pity that our chances to see another commercial tri-jet is next to nothing!

...it wasn't American...

At least on aviation front, I have a great deal of respect for the Americans, especially McDonnell Douglas (I mean both the old Douglas Aircraft Company and the merged McDonnell Douglas). They have some unique masterpiece like DC-3, DC-9, A-4 Skyhawk, F-4 Phantom, F-15 Eagle and so on...

Like you I am also a big fan of DC-10 design and have to confess the fact that it looks as gorgeous as it was 35 years back... To me, Boeing 747 and DC-10 will probably remain two of the best looking aircraft in the commercial aviation history, just as the menacing look of F-4 Phantom and elegant looking F-16 Fighting Falcon in military aviation.

And just compare those with BWB... :puke:

sorry I am going a bit offtopic, but please join our newly created facebook page for SSC Bangladesh forum, thank u all :)

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=116104619253&ref=nf

(i posted it in "Spontaneous discussion" but this thread is one of the most active ones so i posted here too ;) )

I'm not sure if this has been discussed, but if Biman resumes the JFK-DAC flight, are they planning a non-stop or is it going to be thru some European airport like Brussels? I believe the 777-300 has the range to make it to Dhaka if the Polar route is used.

For those interested in some nostalgia, and especially for QGR and his love for the F-28...;)

A 1975 advert, when the F-28 was considered to have "outstanding fuel economy", could churn a profit off just 20 sold seats, and was the "quietest twin-jet in service"!

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd236/TheCoolOnes/Ad-75.jpg

How time changes everything! :)

I'm not sure if this has been discussed, but if Biman resumes the JFK-DAC flight, are they planning a non-stop or is it going to be thru some European airport like Brussels? I believe the 777-300 has the range to make it to Dhaka if the Polar route is used.

I don't expect Biman to serve any point in the US non-stop from Dhaka anytime soon (I'm just stopping short of saying 'ever'), whether or not they have the aircraft which can do it. There are several economic and regulatory issues to render this proposition futile.

For those interested in some nostalgia, and especially for QGR and his love for the F-28...;)

A 1975 advert, when the F-28 was considered to have "outstanding fuel economy", could churn a profit off just 20 sold seats, and was the "quietest twin-jet in service"!

How time changes everything! :)

We can count on Imran to dig up something like this, much to QGR's delight. :D
If I may add, the Friendship was a fine aircraft too. :)

The F-28 is an excellent aircraft, but unfortuntely now days its a grab bag of expensive stage two aircraft.

I remember when Flightwest brought them off Ansett back in late 90 early 00's and they were awesome.

An aircraft they used on the longreach run, and some high capacity run. Even a TSV - POM run. they were awesome, cheap reliable.

The last FK28 Biman got ex PB Air was an also awesome aircraft...

Unfortuantely the FK-28 is living its days out in Bangladesh and popping up in Europe.

Long live the FK28! [chant, chant, chant!]

The last FK28 Biman got ex PB Air was an also awesome aircraft...

This I strongly disagree on. Those 2x F-28s Biman got were not in an airworthy condition when bought for what was probably 4x-5x times more than the then value of the aircraft. Mir Nasir was the Minister then and at the induction, he said these were "modern, advanced aircraft"...and the first of the two aircraft were eventually flown by grounding an already in-service F-28 and taking the engine off it to put on the "new" one!

PB Air maintains their aircraft well, the only thing I can see if the aircraft were sold as is where is...

Then..... why did they purchase it at a silly price? When for what they purchased they could have got a Dash 8, maybe two...

Biman's fault?

PB Air maintains their aircraft well, the only thing I can see if the aircraft were sold as is where is...

Then..... why did they purchase it at a silly price? When for what they purchased they could have got a Dash 8, maybe two...

Biman's fault?

Skystar, you have a lot to learn about how government officials conduct business in Bangladesh and their motive/rationale behind any/every decision they make. :)

Now why would MD-83 desirable to an airlines? I understand its availability and low cost of acquisition but than, 3 owned/purchased MD-83... that almost sounds suicidal to me!!! Any expert explanation on that???



Both in terms of fleet and destination too... but the question is, why? It's natural that people will be motivated by success stories, but in this case there was hardly any success...

Another point to note maybe the availability of existing GMG pilots and engineers for this aircraft type... as a friend of mine in GMG told me that some pilots/engineers have already resigned to join United.. and as per him it was similar for the Dash-8s and the reason for others to bring in the same type of aircrafts.

Another point to note maybe the availability of existing GMG pilots and engineers for this aircraft type... as a friend of mine in GMG told me that some pilots/engineers have already resigned to join United.. and as per him it was similar for the Dash-8s and the reason for others to bring in the same type of aircrafts.

That would be a very good reason indeed.

PB Air maintains their aircraft well, the only thing I can see if the aircraft were sold as is where is...

Then..... why did they purchase it at a silly price? When for what they purchased they could have got a Dash 8, maybe two...

Biman's fault?

Here's a flashback (or two!):
http://www.thedailystar.net/2004/05/27/d40527011414.htm
http://www.thedailystar.net/2004/06/25/d40625012828.htm

Trash were bought for nearly US$ 3m. How much if it was pocketed is anyone's guess.

Another point to note maybe the availability of existing GMG pilots and engineers for this aircraft type... as a friend of mine in GMG told me that some pilots/engineers have already resigned to join United.. and as per him it was similar for the Dash-8s and the reason for others to bring in the same type of aircrafts.

I presume so... actually many of ex-GMG people joined United and RBA during the period where GMG was in deep financial crisis and issued mandatory leave with out pay for number of their employees.

But see, my point was more to do with MDs. Dash 8 is a decent choice for domestic/regional operation in BD and easy to get as well. GMG, to the best of my knowledge did not trained crews for MDs. So availability of pilot was probably not the reason to go for MDs for later operators....

How time changes everything! :)

Ahem... with your due permission, let me try to explain the 'time' here.... all those excellence of F-28 was in 1975, in last century or rather millennium.

Besides, F-28 got retired from the front line service within 20 years of it's introduction, unlike DC-9 or even F-27, the only genuine masterpiece from Fokker after its Trimotor (I forgot the actual model name, some F-7 or something).

I presume so... actually many of ex-GMG people joined United and RBA during the period where GMG was in deep financial crisis and issued mandatory leave with out pay for number of their employees.

But see, my point was more to do with MDs. Dash 8 is a decent choice for domestic/regional operation in BD and easy to get as well. GMG, to the best of my knowledge did not trained crews for MDs. So availability of pilot was probably not the reason to go for MDs for later operators....

Whether or GMG trained its own crews was not the issue perhaps. The idea was probably that Z5 had crews who weren't flying or weren't paid, and were available for the taking if the others just leased MD's as well. However, Z5 can get rid of those MD's at any time it wishes to and clean off their hands, whereas United will be having to honour its knots with the MD's more than they'd probably like to...and if they end up with the brilliant idea (pun intended) of buying 3 of them...they'll probably be carving their own RIP stone!

Besides, F-28 got retired from the front line service within 20 years of it's introduction, unlike DC-9...

No...no...no...the F-28 is still very much in frontline service...with BG...and if things don't go too well, they might be the only planes in service with Biman...like you said till 2019 or even longer! After all, it's the only plane Biman can do heavy checks on and have at least 5x times the spares required! ;)

And if it wasn't for Northwest, the DC-9s would have been a thing of long-gone past!

BTW, did you know that Biman was sure to get the F-50s if the chuckling General didn't seemingly fall in love, with the only non-female object in his life...the BAe ATP!

.......
BTW, did you know that Biman was sure to get the F-50s if the chuckling General didn't seemingly fall in love, with the only non-female object in his life...the BAe ATP!

Are you being sarcastic or funny about the general? It has been rumored that he got his due share from the ATP deal. Didn't he?

BTW, did you know that Biman was sure to get the F-50s if the chuckling General didn't seemingly fall in love, with the only non-female object in his life...the BAe ATP!

BG was about to get MD-11s as well and if the Government showed a little more interest in BG, it could possibly have replaced all its DC-10s in early 90s. By now BG should have 4x 777-200ER, 6x A330-200 and 3x A319-100 if GoB could have shown a little less greed in 2003-4, when Boeing and Airbus combined gave an excellent offer to BG.

As for ATP, how can I ever forget??? A part of the engine fell out in a lush green paddy field while the aircraft was cruising... and you ask me why I hate flying!!! Never the less, F-50/F-27 Friendship is essentially a good aircraft and I wonder why BG let go off its fleet of F-27 so early.

Are you being sarcastic or funny about the general? It has been rumored that he got his due share from the ATP deal. Didn't he?

Of course he got his "due share"...in cash and "kind"...or so I heard! ;)

Never the less, F-50/F-27 Friendship is essentially a good aircraft and I wonder why BG let go off its fleet of F-27 so early.

And guess what?! The F-27s were brought back to a near-mint state spending millions just before selling them off..and didn't even get the cost of maintenance paid for...let alone the aircraft!!

No...no...no...the F-28 is still very much in frontline service...with BG...and if things don't go too well, they might be the only planes in service with Biman...like you said till 2019 or even longer!

Huh... there is a raw Bangla saying 'Genji-er abar book pocket'... BG being most back-line airline, who cares what's there in the front line...

As I said, F-28 will survive more than the DC 10s, and BG may well consider launching a 'non-flying flight' with F-28s (pulled by some healthy deshi cows) over shorter routes by 2015 or so till, well, who knows... at least the safety factors will be much better and I may well start 'flying' with BG again...:D

BG was about to get MD-11s as well and if the Government showed a little more interest in BG, it could possibly have replaced all its DC-10s in early 90s.

McDD offered Biman a throwaway deal to sell the MD-11s, including a trade-in for the DC-10s. If that had been taken, BG's fleet could've been far more competitive and efficient even today.

As for ATP, how can I ever forget??? A part of the engine fell out in a lush green paddy field while the aircraft was cruising... and you ask me why I hate flying!!!

Ah...cmon...look at the brighter side...it could really fly with just one engine (even if the other fell of entirely)! :D

China Southern Airlines is starting their flight from 2nd August. it was delayed due to some incompleted formalities with CAAB (LOL)! They are gonna use B737-800......now this is what shocked me! I was expecting A330 to serve DAC, NOT 737! even China Eastern is served by B737

China Southern Airlines is starting their flight from 2nd August. it was delayed due to some incompleted formalities with CAAB (LOL)! They are gonna use B737-800......now this is what shocked me! I was expecting A330 to serve DAC, NOT 737! even China Eastern is served by B737

And why not the 737? I actually would've been surprised if they began to operate with anything bigger than the 737! Here's why: unlike for example Dragonair, China Southern doesn't have an established brand-recognition in Bangladesh yet...and China Eastern has gained some degree of reputation. In this situation, there's no reason for China Southern to believe that people will be jumping for them when they'll begin to serve DAC. That's just why they can start with the 737-800, risk less and try to gain some ground over a few months, and then they can always add capacity to address an increasing demand.

And why not the 737? I actually would've been surprised if they began to operate with anything bigger than the 737! Here's why: unlike for example Dragonair, China Southern doesn't have an established brand-recognition in Bangladesh yet...and China Eastern has gained some degree of reputation. In this situation, there's no reason for China Southern to believe that people will be jumping for them when they'll begin to serve DAC. That's just why they can start with the 737-800, risk less and try to gain some ground over a few months, and then they can always add capacity to address an increasing demand.

And the 737NGs, not be confused with Mr.NG's NG, is a very fine aircraft, I might add!

^^ yeah agreed with Iasif and TIslam bhai :), well I thought in a way that both China & BD have a large population :D

^^ yeah agreed with Iasif and TIslam bhai :), well I thought in a way that both China & BD have a large population :D

Well...the Chinese didn't jump for the A380s, did they? Instead the outnumbered 'Emiratis' did! Get that population dilemma out of your head now...it isn't always the most important factor behind an airline's success in business! :)

^^ most of its out by now ;)

^^ most of its out by now ;)

Manazir, I didn't know Oman Air flies to Chittagong. Why not Dhaka too?

Manazir, I didn't know Oman Air flies to Chittagong. Why not Dhaka too?

Probably, most Bangladeshi expats in Oman are from CGP and vicinity?

Manazir, I didn't know Oman Air flies to Chittagong. Why not Dhaka too?

Maybe interested to know they used to fly to DAC, but terminated that route a while back, who knows maybe they will start flying again when a few more of their A330 come into service.

here is a very interisitng teaser for you guys to Enjoy:

COMMERCIAL DIRECTORJob details


Get more details on Wynnwith
Salary band At least £60k
Salary £55504.16 -
Location Bangladesh
Job type Full time
Company Wynnwith

Contact Richard Khan
Job categories Airline Management, Airline/Office, Executive Positions, Managers/Office Support
Posted 14th Jul 2009
Expires 21st Jul 2009

Job Description
Our client is a rapidly growing and major airline in Bangladesh and due to their growth plans and fast developing network, they now require a Commercial Director.

Job Description:

To provide leadership and strategic direction to ensure growth and delivery of passenger & Cargo sales revenue worldwide in accordance with the corporate business plans and objectives for our client.

The scope also includes the commercial success of our client's network, growth of revenue, expansion of network, profitability of routes, brand building, customer service and the entirety of passenger and cargo sales & marketing.

The ideal candidate must have:

Over 15 years work experience out of which 10 years should be at management level in a related discipline.
Possess a deep understanding of the airline industry and a comprehensive knowledge of commercial aviation challenges.
Be strategically minded, service oriented and commercially focused.
Possess a thorough knowledge of airline passenger sales and marketing, marketing communications and customer service.
Should have the capability of setting up the department from scratch to cope with the planned growth of the airline.
You must display a proven leadership record with a demonstrated ability to engage and inspire the team to deliver organisational objectives.
Required to be result oriented, flexible in approach and able to produce results in a challenging environment.
Ideal candidate should have work experience either in the South Asian region or the Indian Subcontinent

Position is based in Dhaka/Bangladesh.

If you are interested in this vacancy, please apply online or contact Richard Khan on +44 1483 748 201 or email richard.khan@wynnwith.com

Apply for this job
To apply for this job, simply click on the "Apply for this job" button below right. By clicking the button you can track your applications through the website. Phone numbers and email addresses are removed from job details on purpose. Please do not email the website.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Any takers?
I am guessing this is for the post merger GMG-Beximco, or maybe United.

here is a very interisitng teaser for you guys to Enjoy:

COMMERCIAL DIRECTORJob details


Get more details on Wynnwith
Salary band At least £60k
Salary £55504.16 -
Location Bangladesh
Job type Full time
Company Wynnwith

Not a bad day's work for 120k USD, sitting in Bangladesh, if indeed they'd pay that much.