New system allows such flights if destination airport has two or more runways, and if there’s good weather and a 5 km visibility when the plane is an hour away.
A Boeing 777-200LR caught fire Wednesday at Delhi airport while being prepared for a flight to San Francisco. Air India officials termed it a ‘minor accident’.
It is obscene that a man so detached from India should occupy such a powerful position in a party that governed India for most of its republican history.
About 300 employees had called in sick Wednesday, allegedly in protest against mismanagement of airlines. Remaining staff given ultimatum to rejoin work by end of Thursday.
A theme has not yet emerged for BJP & people see lack of a contest, which makes it unexciting. For all these reasons, 2024 is turning out to be an unexpectedly theme-less election.
Had flying without extra fuel been an option it would not have been put there in the first place. Some analyst suggested that flights going for this should fly with less full cabin and payload. I doubt airlines would do that. So first come up with some solid solutions to mitigate the risks and then talk about it.
Another hare brained idea at the cost of the lives of passengers and the aircraft itself. Enough of jugaad style management in the country. It shows the reigning flavour of management in the country – impulsive, high handed, arbitrary and self congratulatory without application of well rounded discussions and deliberation. It’s a dangerous trend and must not be allowed. Let experts also have a say in such decision making process for safety and overall managerial competence.
Firstly the entire article is flawed. I have read the entire Notice on this and it’s only applicable for flights into Hyderabad . They do carry extra fuel for unforseen circumstances. They don’t nominate an alternate airport because Hyderabad has two operational parallel runways at all times. But extra fuel is carried and moreover it’s only applicable if the weather at destination (Hyderabad) is more than 6 km visibility along with clear skies. It’s perfectly safe.
This practice is fine in summer where the destination aerodrome has 2 runways operational or one aerodrome nearby but should not be excercised in rainy and winter foggy conditions as at those time the aircraft will have to divert to alternate aerodrome DGCA should look and note this .
In other words, to save ~Rs.10k per flight or ~$140, they’re willing to risk the total loss of a ~$100M aircraft, with all crew and passengers aboard. That is the brilliancy of the new era of Monkey-Jugaad for India. Good luck to the kids!
This is not at all an option to savings. They can do a lot of savings other than risking passengers life. There has to be other way around. We know that it’s not six sigma when it comes to weather. Anything can happen to weather. Every flight should carry extra fuel for alternate landing.
Is this some kind of bizarre thought from the top? Where from the related parties got the audacity to play with the life risk of passengers? What if there are some unusual developments in the climate and at destination airport at the time of landing? Who will save the lives of the passengers then given there is no way to reach alternate airport and landing is impossible? For whom these less carbon emission and environmental hazards and blah blah are being doled out? Not for the dead I assume. This is NOT acceptable. We are not puppets that some illogical , whimsical decisions will snap out our lives , we have families and responsibilities that may seem trivial to those at the top but not to the rest.
In my opinion it’s workable for Indigo airlines, because there aircraft’s engines are stop working in mid air and they are savings the ATF and is carrying surplus fuel. It only worries for other airlines.
I think there is no logic in saving fuel at the cost of passengers life while they are paying for safe journey. Plane must carry extra fuel to meet emergency due to climating or other reason. Why we are so concious for saving if we can’t effort fuel we should switch over to old bullcart age
Had flying without extra fuel been an option it would not have been put there in the first place. Some analyst suggested that flights going for this should fly with less full cabin and payload. I doubt airlines would do that. So first come up with some solid solutions to mitigate the risks and then talk about it.
Another hare brained idea at the cost of the lives of passengers and the aircraft itself. Enough of jugaad style management in the country. It shows the reigning flavour of management in the country – impulsive, high handed, arbitrary and self congratulatory without application of well rounded discussions and deliberation. It’s a dangerous trend and must not be allowed. Let experts also have a say in such decision making process for safety and overall managerial competence.
Firstly the entire article is flawed. I have read the entire Notice on this and it’s only applicable for flights into Hyderabad . They do carry extra fuel for unforseen circumstances. They don’t nominate an alternate airport because Hyderabad has two operational parallel runways at all times. But extra fuel is carried and moreover it’s only applicable if the weather at destination (Hyderabad) is more than 6 km visibility along with clear skies. It’s perfectly safe.
This practice is fine in summer where the destination aerodrome has 2 runways operational or one aerodrome nearby but should not be excercised in rainy and winter foggy conditions as at those time the aircraft will have to divert to alternate aerodrome DGCA should look and note this .
Really scary. Disappointed that human life is not a priority.
In other words, to save ~Rs.10k per flight or ~$140, they’re willing to risk the total loss of a ~$100M aircraft, with all crew and passengers aboard. That is the brilliancy of the new era of Monkey-Jugaad for India. Good luck to the kids!
This is not at all an option to savings. They can do a lot of savings other than risking passengers life. There has to be other way around. We know that it’s not six sigma when it comes to weather. Anything can happen to weather. Every flight should carry extra fuel for alternate landing.
Is this some kind of bizarre thought from the top? Where from the related parties got the audacity to play with the life risk of passengers? What if there are some unusual developments in the climate and at destination airport at the time of landing? Who will save the lives of the passengers then given there is no way to reach alternate airport and landing is impossible? For whom these less carbon emission and environmental hazards and blah blah are being doled out? Not for the dead I assume. This is NOT acceptable. We are not puppets that some illogical , whimsical decisions will snap out our lives , we have families and responsibilities that may seem trivial to those at the top but not to the rest.
Totally against the humanity to save money at the cost of life…DGCA SHOULDN’T ALLOW THIS.
In my opinion it’s workable for Indigo airlines, because there aircraft’s engines are stop working in mid air and they are savings the ATF and is carrying surplus fuel. It only worries for other airlines.
I think there is no logic in saving fuel at the cost of passengers life while they are paying for safe journey. Plane must carry extra fuel to meet emergency due to climating or other reason. Why we are so concious for saving if we can’t effort fuel we should switch over to old bullcart age
Pushing the envelope. The DGCA should not allow this. Human life cannot be priced in as a variable.