Showing posts with label Airbus. Show all posts

Tuesday, 4 December 2012

Emirates A380 Hub | Flying with Emirates | Emirates India

Monday, 3 December 2012

The A350XWB Static Test Specimen transferred to Lagardère site!

Airbus

Click to read:
http://www.linkedin.com/company/3211?goback=%2Enmp_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1&trk=NUS_CMPY_TWIT

Saturday, 17 November 2012

Turning Concepts into Reality by Beejal Parmar

Wednesday, 14 November 2012

Airbus looks past supplier woes to future output hike By Tim Hepher and Alison Leung | Reuters

A People's Liberation Army (PLA) officer takes a photo of a model of the Airbus A380 …

Click to read:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/airbus-looks-past-supplier-woes-future-output-hike-012353514--finance.html

Monday, 10 September 2012

Photos: First wing for Airbus A350 XWB arrives at Toulouse assembly line Monday, September 10, 2012 by Devesh Agarwal

Click to see
http://www.bangaloreaviation.com/2012/09/photos-first-wing-for-airbus-a350-xwb.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BangaloreAviation+%28Bangalore+Aviation%29

Thursday, 2 August 2012

Photos: Airbus powers up cockpit of first A350 XWB MSN1 Thursday, August 02, 2012 by Devesh Agarwal

Click to read:
http://www.bangaloreaviation.com/2012/08/photos-airbus-powers-up-cockpit-of.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BangaloreAviation+%28Bangalore+Aviation%29

Monday, 30 July 2012

Cut and make your own Airbus A320neo, in paper Monday, July 30, 2012 by Devesh Agarwal

Airbus has a simple way for you to make your own Airbus A320neo

Click to do more and for the video:
http://www.bangaloreaviation.com/2012/07/cut-and-make-your-own-airbus-a320neo-in.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BangaloreAviation+%28Bangalore+Aviation%29

Sunday, 29 July 2012

A tale of 2 jumbos and the Indian regulator ASHWINI PHADNIS

Click to read on

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/article3700023.ece

The Greatest Competition in Business

Book Review – Boeing versus Airbus by John Newhouse

John Newhouse

Price: USD 26.95 CAD 34.95

Pages: 254

Reviewed by Archie D’Souza

Books on Aviation, especially the aerospace industry, are a rarity and ones written in an exciting Robert Ludlum or Dan Brown style are even scarcer. John Newhouse in Boeing versus Airbus provides the reader with just that kind of un-put-down-able excitement, from cover-to-cover.

John Newhouse covered foreign policy for the New Yorker through the 1980s and early 1990s. Among his assignments are:

Assistant Director, US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
Senior Policy Advisor for European Affairs in the US State Department

Both these were under President Clinton.

Before Airbus came into existence, Boeing was by far the largest supplier of large commercial aircraft (LCAs). For long it’s been USA’s most successful and admired corporation. It is also its largest exporter. Up to the early eighties, “four companies divided the turbulent business of making and selling passenger airplanes. One of them, the Boeing Company was dominant.” In a short span of time the two other big American players, Lockheed Aircraft Corporation and the McDonnell Douglas Corporation, merged and the merged entity was later bought by the Chicago headquartered Boeing. Then its headquarters was at Seattle, where Boeing’s aircraft plant – the largest aircraft factory in the World – is situated, is in the US eastern state of Washington.

By the 1990s, Airbus became the number one player only to lose its place to Boeing in 2006. John Newhouse’s Boeing versus Airbus – the inside story of the greatest international competition in business – traces the history and politics of rivalries between these two players. Accusations and counter accusations, disputes taken to the WTO, government intervention and the political strategies that go into aircraft purchases are all put together in a plot that makes it look like a Geoffrey Archer or Sydney Sheldon thriller.

Airbus’s unique style of ownership and management together with Boeing’s initial arrogance, the main cause for it losing its numero uno position, are very vividly dealt with. How did Airbus lose its first place and Boeing regain it? Read the book to know.

There is a chapter that deals with the follies and hypocrisies (Chapter III – Folly and Hypocrisy) which actually shows the extent of government involvement in the “free market economy” business. The two companies often entered agreements that would make OPEC ashamed. Reneging on these was a very regular practice though.

There came a series of incidents that include the 11/9/2001 (9/11 to the Americans) bombings, the SARS epidemic and rising oil prices that saw a decline in air travel and increase in airfreight rates. A great deal of space has been devoted to these factors as well as how airlines adjusted or collapsed once deregulation came into being? Deregulation also saw changes in the way aircraft were purchased and configured.

There is also a lesson in finance and accounting where he talks about the advantages of leasing an aircraft as opposed to owning one. This practice, viz. leasing, which gained tremendous importance in devoted to the Aircraft Leasing Industry. Two companies dominate here, the International Lease Finance Corporation (ILFC) and GE Commercial Aviation Services. Newhouse dwells at length on the genesis of these companies and their contrasting styles of management and doing business. Again lessons in management for all.

From reports one has been reading in newspapers & periodicals and the audiovisual media one would think that the only story of aircraft rivalries was between the A380 and B787, the Dream-liner – both different types of aircraft catering to different segments. However, long before this rivalry came into being there were rivalries between the B737 & A320, the A350 & B777, and many more. The A380 should actually be compared to the B747 and not the B787, which still has no peer. But such was the intensity of competition at that time, as it is now, that in every announcement made one tried to outdo the other.

No review is complete without an excerpt from the book. This is from Chapter IV Market Share – the Airlines’ Enemy. This is about BA’s aborted attempt to buy a stake in USAir, following a veto by President George HW Bush after intense lobbying by the Fat Four – the Big Three, consisting of American, United and Delta plus Fedex, the fourth.

“Their case, a political potent one as it turned out, was that allowing BA to absorb USAir would lead to the creation of a preeminent domestic carrier, one whose global reach would give it heavy and unique advantages. The issue for the administration of President George HW Bush was whether USAir might have to join the lengthening list of airline fatalities or be allowed to merge with BA and thereby threaten the wellbeing of the bid three, the backbone of America’s airline industry. Where did the consumer’s interest lie? Where did national interest lie?”

Boeing versus Airbus is a must-read for every aviation buff. For students and connoisseurs of economics and management this is a great case study in monopolistic competition and oligopoly. I’ve written elsewhere that the Airbus experience can be a great learning for the BRICS aerospace industry. I do wish someone with the capacity to invest is reading and will act on the same.

Monday, 9 July 2012

Farnborough Orders on Day One Tuesday, July 10, 2012 by Vinay Bhaskara

Here's a list of orders on the first day at Farnborough
Click here for details
http://www.bangaloreaviation.com/2012/07/farnborough-orders-on-day-one.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BangaloreAviation+%28Bangalore+Aviation%29
Thanks Bangalore Aviation

Sunday, 15 April 2012

The Greatest Competition in Business Book Review – Boeing versus Airbus by John Newhouse Reviewed by Archie D’Souza

- John Newhouse

- Price: USD 26.95/CAD 34.95

- Pages: 254

John Newhouse covered foreign policy for the New Yorker through the 1980s and early 1990s. Among his assignments are:

• Assistant Director, US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency

• Senior Policy Advisor for European Affairs in the US State Department

Both these were under President Clinton.

By the 1990s, Airbus became the number one player only to lose its place to Boeing in 2006. John Newhouse’s Boeing versus Airbus – the inside story of the greatest international competition in business – traces the history and politics of rivalries between these two players. Accusations and counter accusations, disputes taken to the WTO, government intervention and the political strategies that go into aircraft purchases are all put together in a plot that makes it look like a Geoffrey Archer or Sydney Sheldon thriller.

No review is complete without an excerpt from the book. This is from Chapter IV Market Share – the Airlines’ Enemy. This is about BA’s aborted attempt to buy a stake in USAir, following a veto by President George HW Bush after intense lobbying by the Fat Four – the Big Three, consisting of American, United and Delta plus Fedex, the fourth.

Six Things You Need to Know About Boeing vs. Airbus

http://www.businessweek.com/videos/2013-01-16/boeing-versus-airbus-by-the-numbers

Monday, 9 April 2012

BRICS - Possible Benefits to Civil Aviation Archie D’Souza

BRICS - Possible Benefits to Civil Aviation

Archie D’Souza

BRICS is a group of acronyms that refers to the countries of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. The group held its fourth summit on MAR 29, 2012. Here are some interesting facts about BRICS:
BRICS countries account for:

25% of global GDP based on the purchasing power parity of national currencies
30% of land area
45% of the world's population.

The bloc's contribution to global economic growth has now reached almost 50%, making this group the principal driver of global economic development.
Last year, trade between the BRICS countries stood at around $230 billion
It should reach $500 billion by 2015.
BRICS countries have double digit growth, while many G8 countries are creating fewer businesses now than five years ago.
On an average, BRICS nations are creating 18 percent new businesses per annum compared to non-BRICS nations, which are on an average creating just 0.4 percent more new businesses per annum.

Here are some highlights of the BRICS’ summit of 2012:

The leaders at the summit pitched for reforms of international institutions like the UN, IMF and World Bank.
They support closer coordination for balanced and sustained global economic recovery
They signed a pact to set up an Exchange Alliance of all BRICS’ securities exchanges
They decided to explore the setting up of a BRICS-led South-South Development Bank. Its main objective will be to promote mutual investment and fund infrastructure projects in BRICS and developing countries
BRICS will pitch for greater representation of developing countries and emerging economies in the IMF by speeding up quota reforms
As part of the pressure for international institutions to reform BRICS backs a merit-based selection-process for the heads of the IMF and the World Bank. Currently, these posts are reserved for a European and an American respectively.
BRICS cautioned the West against allowing the Iranian situation to escalate into conflict. Backs dialogue to resolve the Iranian nuclear impasse
Backs a Syria-led democratic transition. BRICS voices 'deep concern' over Syria and calls for 'an immediate end to all violence and violations of human rights' and backs a Syrian-led political process
It backs speedier resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the creation of an independent Palestine co-existing with Israel
Step up joint efforts for successful conclusion of the Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations.
Jointly help in the development and resurgence of Africa
Backs green economy and agrees to closer coordination on global climate change negotiations
Adopts an all-encompassing action plan that includes, among other things, meetings of foreign ministers on sidelines of the UN and meetings of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors on sidelines of G20 meetings/other multilateral meetings
Identify new areas of cooperation that includes multilateral energy cooperation within BRICS framework, a general academic evaluation and future long-term strategy for BRICS; BRICS Youth Policy Dialogue; and Cooperation in Population related issues

BRICS also decided that intra-BRICS trade will henceforth be transacted in their own currencies rather than the US Dollar or Euro. Further, they would go in for maximum investments in each other’s countries. This will ensure that the days of the dominance of the dollar are over. It will also offer them a buffer from the effects of any economic crises in the developed world. This and the setting of a BRICS development bank are, in my opinion, the most important economic decisions taken and will have far-reaching impacts on the way trade is conducted and investments made.

Two areas, which I feel whose time has come don’t seem to be on BRICS agenda at the moment. Before I mention these areas, let me state a few facts. These five nations, in general, and India and China together in particular, will between them become the biggest civil aviation and shipping markets. So large a market will it be that its size will be more than what the rest of the world together will buy.

The market for large commercial aircraft (LCAs) is dominated by two players – Airbus and Boeing, with others almost invisible. There happens to be no serious competitor to the oligarchy of these two players. In shipbuilding, while China does have a prominent place, India’s potential has still to be unleashed. Surely these are areas that need to be looked at. Every one of these five countries contributes to these two areas in some way or the other. Let’s look at Civil Aviation first.

Russia has the knowhow to make LCAs
India and China between them will purchase more airplanes than North America and Western Europe put together
The five BRICS countries will be purchasing more aircraft than the rest of the world put together
Every one of the five countries has people with the entrepreneurial skills and financial capacity to run large companies

Airbus was started as a conglomerate with representatives from five EU nations. It still runs as a company with its top management from these countries. Why can’t industrialists from these countries get together and take a decision to form such a conglomerate. Getting investors for such a venture would not be that difficult. In course of time this company should be able to get a market share of at least 30%.

I have put in an idea for germination. Let’s see if there’s anyone who takes it.

When the idea of Airbus was conceived the aircraft market, especially LCAs, was dominated by three American companies with Boeing taking the dominant share of the market. So much did the Americans dominate that there was hardly a player outside the United States. LCAs were made in the erstwhile USSR but hardly any planes sold outside the Eastern Block. Airbus decided to set up its plant near the French city of Toulouse. The management of the company was multinational with representatives from Germany and Britain besides France on the board of directors. Components that go into the planes come from vendors all over the World.

In the 1970s & 80s four companies catered to the LCA market. Boeing was the dominant of these with a market share of over 60%. Lockheed Aircraft Corporation and Mc Donnell Douglas Corporation were the other two American players and Airbus the fourth. Between 1985 and 2005, thanks to a merger and take-over, we were left with just two players. The fall of the Soviet Bloc resulted in the market for Russian aircraft disappearing.

Unlike most business ventures in the free world “Airbus wasn’t launched because some person or persons, had an original idea. Instead, its origins reflect the deep anxiety of Britain, France, and Germany. Each of which wanted to preserve its aircraft industry. No one of these industries was any longer strong enough to compete with American companies, and the Europeans saw their multiparty approach – the still nascent European idea – as the only way.” – John Newhouse in Boeing versus Airbus.
It began as a consortium of four European national aircraft corporations – France, Germany, Britain and Spain. Each of these countries was represented in the board. Today, the four partners are a unified commercial enterprise, with holdings by EADS, the French State, Lagardere Aircraft Group (Also French), Spain and BAE Systems. Its shares are traded in European bourses. EADS is, by the way, 22.5% held by Daimler Chrysler. The company in its current form, as an integrated corporation, came into existence only in 2000. This makes Airbus a very young company.

The A300, in 1974, was the first aircraft to come out of the Airbus stable. Till the birth of the A380 decades later, this was their signature aircraft. If there’s one example of a truly international product – and this happened long before the AMPs (now Tyco) and GEs started outsourcing their production – it is the A300. This, with some modifications, can be a model for BRICS to follow for its own assembly. Let’s see how:

Aérospatiale builds:

The nose section, and
The engine pylons

Deutsche Airbus of Germany, made up of MBB & VFW-Fokker makes:

The forward fuselage from the flight deck to the wings
The upper centre fuselage, and
The vertical tail

VFW-Fokker of the Netherlands makes the moving wing surfaces
CASA of Spain makes:

Horizontal tail surfaces
Landing gear, and
Main doors

SNECMA & MTU make turbo-fans under license from GE

All this prove the extent of international manufacture.

If BRICS has to replicate this it will need to work on a different model. For one, the BRICS nations may not be able to spend on subsidies of the kind that Airbus received. Secondly, they may not be able to get defence contracts from their respective governments that Boeing received. Remember, Boeing generates most of its profits from defence deals. The relationship between the governments of China & India as well as Russia & China isn’t as amicable as the EU countries. However, as this will be more of a private sector initiative, this too shouldn’t pose a problem. The cultural differences between the five countries too can be overcome. So, how will this work?

There is a certain amount of learning from Airbus and this new conglomerate can avoid repeating those mistakes. Also, there are cultural and political factors, as we have seen, that need to be taken into consideration. It will be impossible to operate from a single plant because the three biggest nations in the group – China, India or Russia – will not like it to be in another country. Hence, assembly plants will need to be set up in at least the three big nations, if not in all five. There will be a positive fallout from this of course. It will lead to excellent savings with each plant catering to a different geographic market.
China and India will be huge markets for aircraft of every size – from the mega Jumbos (B747 & A380) to the smaller one (B737 & A320). The Brazilian company Embraer already has a sizeable share of the market outside the sales made by the top two. Indian companies do have expertise in Avionics, which will be of great help. The basic frames of the aircraft made by such a consortium will come from Russia of course. The knowhow exists from the Soviet days. In fact, the largest and second largest freighter aircraft the AN 225 & AN 124, manufactured by the Russian company Antonov, already exist as a base.
The group of five has already taken a decision to set up a joint development bank and devise a mechanism to trade in their own currencies. The formal announcement on this was made at the fourth BRICS summit in New Delhi on MAR 29, 2002. Such an institution will take on the IMF and World Bank. So, why not become an aircraft manufacturer to take on Airbus and Boeing?

When the idea of Airbus was conceived the aircraft market, especially LCAs, was dominated by three American companies with Boeing taking the dominant share of the market. So much did the Americans dominate that there was hardly a player outside the United States. LCAs were made in the erstwhile USSR but hardly any planes sold outside the Eastern Block. Airbus decided to set up its plant near the French city of Toulouse. The management of the company was multinational with representatives from Germany and Britain besides France on the board of directors. Components that go into the planes come from vendors all over the World.

In the 1970s & 80s four companies catered to the LCA market. Boeing was the dominant of these with a market share of over 60%. Lockheed Aircraft Corporation and Mc Donnell Douglas Corporation were the other two American players and Airbus the fourth. Between 1985 and 2005, thanks to a merger and take-over, we were left with just two players. The fall of the Soviet Bloc resulted in the market for Russian aircraft disappearing.

Unlike most business ventures in the free world “Airbus wasn’t launched because some person or persons, had an original idea. Instead, its origins reflect the deep anxiety of Britain, France, and Germany. Each of which wanted to preserve its aircraft industry. No one of these industries was any longer strong enough to compete with American companies, and the Europeans saw their multiparty approach – the still nascent European idea – as the only way.” – John Newhouse in Boeing versus Airbus.
It began as a consortium of four European national aircraft corporations – France, Germany, Britain and Spain. Each of these countries was represented in the board. Today, the four partners are a unified commercial enterprise, with holdings by EADS, the French State, Lagardere Aircraft Group (Also French), Spain and BAE Systems. Its shares are traded in European bourses. EADS is, by the way, 22.5% held by Daimler Chrysler. The company in its current form, as an integrated corporation, came into existence only in 2000. This makes Airbus a very young company.

If BRICS has to replicate this it will need to work on a different model. For one, the BRICS nations may not be able to spend on subsidies of the kind that Airbus received. Secondly, they may not be able to get defence contracts from their respective governments that Boeing received. Remember, Boeing generates most of its profits from defence deals. The relationship between the governments of China & India as well as Russia & China isn’t as amicable as the EU countries. However, as this will be more of a private sector initiative, this too shouldn’t pose a problem. The cultural differences between the five countries too can be overcome. So, how will this work?

There is a certain amount of learning from Airbus and this new conglomerate can avoid repeating those mistakes. Also, there are cultural and political factors, as we have seen, that need to be taken into consideration. It will be impossible to operate from a single plant because the three biggest nations in the group – China, India or Russia – will not like it to be in another country. Hence, assembly plants will need to be set up in at least the three big nations, if not in all five. There will be a positive fallout from this of course. It will lead to excellent savings with each plant catering to a different geographic market.
China and India will be huge markets for aircraft of every size – from the mega Jumbos (B747 & A380) to the smaller one (B737 & A320). The Brazilian company Embraer already has a sizeable share of the market outside the sales made by the top two. Indian companies do have expertise in Avionics, which will be of great help. The basic frames of the aircraft made by such a consortium will come from Russia of course. The knowhow exists from the Soviet days. In fact, the largest and second largest freighter aircraft the AN 225 & AN 124, manufactured by the Russian company Antonov, already exist as a base.
The group of five has already taken a decision to set up a joint development bank and devise a mechanism to trade in their own currencies. The formal announcement on this was made at the fourth BRICS summit in New Delhi on MAR 29, 2002. Such an institution will take on the IMF and World Bank. So, why not become an aircraft manufacturer to take on Airbus and Boeing?

Added on JUN 13, 2012
Who is Standard & Poor to decide the composition of BRICS? and, has anyone rated that company? At 6% growth an alarm is being raised. Can't these stupid rating agencies do better?
Click on the link below:
http://www.siliconindia.com/news/business/India-The-Shaky-Eye-in-The-BRIC-nid-119509-cid-3.html?utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=r1

Friday, 30 March 2012

The Air Cargo Industry & its specialty – a personal experience

The Air Cargo Industry & its specialty – a personal experience by Archie D'Souza

The air cargo industry is quite obviously different from the passenger airline industry. Beyond both offering services that mostly focus on transportation via air the two industries share little else. Let's get into it.

The main focus for a passenger airline is to service passengers. Cargo is only a bi-product though its revenue earning capacity is sizeable. Services rendered to passengers are mainly confined to the time s/he is on board. On the ground, it’s negligible and almost entirely contained within the airport. Passenger airlines offer airport to airport services for passengers as well as cargo. Any onward travel and accommodation at the destination is ultimately the passenger’s prerogative.

I started my career with the cargo division of Air India. Like every passenger airline, it offered an airport-to-airport service. This meant that an exporter had to get the cargo moved to the airport of departure, get the cargo customs cleared there and hand it over to the airline. At the airport of destination, once the cargo arrived and was checked, the carrier would send a cargo arrival notice to the consignee, who in turn, either directly or with the help of a customs broker (CHA in India). Cargo and traffic (dealing with passenger services) were two of the divisions of what is Air India’s Commercial Department. Both these divisions had their similarities and differences.

Let me look at the similarities first. Both are important revenue earners for an international airline. A passenger needs a confirmed seat; cargo needs confirmed space in the cargo hold. A passenger needs to carry a document called a ticket; cargo is carried by an airline after, among other things, the issuance of an air waybill. A passenger cannot leave the country without a passport; the shipper requires to file a customs declaration, called a shipping bill in India. Passengers need to pass through immigration; cargo needs to be customs cleared. Passengers wait at a passenger terminal prior to boarding; cargo is stored in a cargo terminal. On disembarkation passengers need to pass through immigration and customs; cargo shipments need to be customs cleared.

While these are the similarities, the differences are far more pronounced. The facilities required to store and transport goods are far less than those required for waiting passengers on terminals and those travelling on board. In an aircraft, the passenger needs aisle space, leg, head & elbow room and comfortable seating; cargo on the other hand can be stacked one on top of the other with no space in between. Cargo doesn’t require refreshments and entertainment as passengers do. Further, packages do not complain whereas passengers can be very vocal in their complaints. The list could go on and on.

One of the biggest advantages or air transportation, compared with other modes, is the fact that there is hardly any limit to the number of places where airports – nodes for air transport – can be set up. Due to this air routes are practically unlimited. Thanks to greater movements of passengers and freight the density of air routes over the North Atlantic, inside North America and Europe and over the North Pacific is definitely greater. Constraints with regard to air transportation are multidimensional. Let’s take some examples. A commercial plane needs about 3,300 meters of runway for landing and takeoff. In addition, several other facilities need to be set up at airports. Therefore, the site chosen must take these into consideration. Also, airports cannot, for obvious reasons, be set up in densely populated places. Climate, fog and aerial currents are other constraints that need to be taken into consideration with regard to air transportation.

Air activities are linked to the tertiary and quaternary sectors. What exactly does this mean? The World economy and that of any nation is divided into various sectors – primary, secondary, tertiary, and quaternary. These terms are used to define the proportion of the population engaged in particular activities. Let us briefly look at each of these.

Extracts and harvests - viz. what is mined or farmed is what the primary sector of the economy deals with; in other words, products from the earth. It includes the production of raw material and basic foods. Activities associated with it include agriculture (both subsistence and commercial), mining, forestry, farming, grazing, hunting and gathering, fishing, and quarrying. The packaging and processing of the raw material associated with this sector is also considered to be part of this sector. In developed and developing countries, a relatively low proportion of workers are involved in the primary sector; the figure in the US is 3%. That is the percentage of the labour force engaged in primary sector activity today. In the mid-nineteenth century, it was more than two-thirds.

The secondary sector of the economy deals with, among other things, the manufacture of finished goods. This includes all of manufacturing, processing, and construction. Thus, activities associated with it include metal working & smelting, automobile production, textile production, chemical & engineering industries, aerospace manufacturing, energy utilities, engineering, breweries and bottlers, construction, and shipbuilding. The tertiary sector of the economy is nothing but all the service industries, providing services to individuals and business & other organisations. Retail & wholesale trade, transportation & distribution, entertainment (movies, television, radio, music, theatre, etc.), restaurants, clerical services, media, tourism, insurance, banking, healthcare, and law are some of the activities associated with this sector. In most developed and developing countries, a sizeable proportion of workers are devoted to this sector – more than 80% in the USA. Finally, the quaternary sector of the economy consists of intellectual activities. Activities associated with this sector include government, culture, libraries, scientific research, education, and information technology.

Principal among the tertiary and quaternary sector activities that the airline industry is dependent upon are finance and tourism. However, if one looks at air cargo in particular, it is the secondary sector that it mainly services. However, air cargo brings in a lot of ancillary and support services which are part of the tertiary and quaternary sectors. Passenger services benefit from finance and tourism as they lean a great deal on the long distance mobility of people. However, cargo services provide the distance mobility of goods. Since the introduction of the Boeing 747 and other wide-bodied aircraft air transportation services have been accommodating growing quantities of freight. Airlines are today playing a huge and fast-growing role in global logistics, most often with the help of global service providers.

Air cargo, in many ways, is a unique service. There are many segments involved in it. Among those we can list out are airport-to-airport, door-to-door, door-to-airport and airport-to-door. Most of the World’s carriers (airlines) offer an airport-to-airport service. The shipper (exporter) needs to hand cargo over to the carrier ready for carriage at the airport of origin. This means, among other things, cargo has to be customs cleared. The carrier, either on its own or using the services of other airlines, ensures that the cargo reaches the airport of destination. The consignee is informed by the carrier about the arrival of the cargo. Physical delivery of the cargo only will happen after customs clearance. We have seen here that customs clearance takes at two points – the airports of origin and destination, the former prior to carriage and the latter prior to final delivery. This service is not usually provided for by the carrier and the exporter/importer may not have the necessary expertise to carry it out. So, they appoint customs brokers to do this job. So, we see here an additional service provider. I shall, in a future blog, talk about the role of intermediaries.

There exists a kind of carrier called an integrator who offers door-to-door, airport-to-door and door-to-airport services. They also offer airport-to-airport services. What distinguishes an integrator from the others is that they have their own fleet of aircraft and offer services which go beyond airport-to-airport. Passenger airlines mainly focus on carrying people. Air cargo is a bi-product albeit one that earns a huge amount of revenue. They carry cargo in bellies of the aircraft. They may also own a fleet of combi & freighter aircraft. These terms will be defined in another blog. Cargo airlines have fleets of only freighters, no passenger aircraft. All integrators are cargo airlines.

Another type of service provider exists, the express-cargo or courier company. These companies offer door-to-door plus the other services. In other words, their representative will come to the exporter’s premises to pick the cargo up. The cargo will be customs cleared by a customs broker called a custom-house agent (CHA) in India. There are other service providers like IATA agents, freight forwarders, etc. These service providers will be dealt with in a later blog. Here, we have confined our focus on the role of carriers. These will include passenger and cargo airlines, including integrators.

Wednesday, 28 March 2012

Aircraft & theirs uses

Aircraft and their Uses

- Archie D’Souza

[This constitutes an extract of a book I'm writing]

Do check this link [http://www.atlantisquest.com/Samar.html]

The aeroplane is the fastest means of transport, whether of passengers or cargo. Only spacecraft travel faster than aeroplanes. We shall be looking at the exiting world of air transportation with an emphasis on carriage of cargo. From the tiny bi-planes, which carry one or two passengers, to the gigantic jumbo jets and transportation aircraft which can carry huge machinery and battle tanks, air transportation has transformed the way humans think and live. We shall be tracing the development of aircraft and looking at aeroplanes in use today and most important how freight is carried in them. We shall also look at advantages and limitations of airfreight as a mode of goods transportation.

1. History and Development

From the time mankind evolved on planet Earth, people have dreamed of flying. Ancient Indian texts, like the Ramayana and Mahabharata and Greek one too had their legends about flying people and objects. Kites were perhaps the first heavier than air objects which flew. In 200 BC the Greek mathematician Archimedes discovered the principal of floatation. This was used in the making of balloons. Kites were possible the predecessors of gliders. Balloons and gliders are not powered and therefore cannot be controlled.

Airships were the first powered objects to fly. An airship is a lighter-than–air aircraft. Its huge body contains a light gas like helium. Like a balloon, the gas lifts the airship so it floats in the air. However airships, unlike balloons, have engines that move them and can be steered in the required direction. Balloons move wherever the wind takes them. Airships also differ from aeroplanes and helicopters which are heavier-than-air and use their engines to lift them from the ground.

Although it was the Wright brothers who invented the aeroplane as we know it today, the idea of a modern flying machine was first conceived in 1500 by Leonardo de Vinci, an Italian painter. He made a drawing of a flying machine with wings which would flap like a bird. Between 1800 and 1903, several people tried to experiment with flying machines but were all unsuccessful. It was only on December 17, 1903 that the Wright brothers flew their first aeroplane successfully. The flight took place near Kitty Hawk in California.

The Wright brothers demonstrated that it was possible that it was possible to fly a manual machine that was heavier-than-air. But, in 1895, eight years earlier, a Sanskrit scholar from the princely state of Baroda had designed a basic aircraft called Maruthsakthi, meaning air power. The scholar by the name of Shivkar Bapuji Talpade based his design on texts in the Vedas. His unmanned aircraft took off in 1895 before a large gathering at the Chowpati beach in Bombay, now Mumbai. While the Wright brother flew a manned flight, Talpade’s was unmanned. However, while the flight piloted by Orville Wright crashed after covering a distance of 120 feet, Talpade’s unmanned flight reached a height of 1500 feet and covered a much larger distance. A British historian, Evan Koshtka has described Talpade as the first creator of an aircraft.

The entire World has rightly recognised the achievements of the Wright brothers and celebrated its centenary on December 17, 2003. However, Talpade whose invention was reported by the newspapers of his day was never accorded his rightful place in history. India, it must be remembered, was ruled by the British, who were definitely not happy with his invention and made sure he got no help whatsoever to develop it.

Talpade was born in 1864 in the locality of Chira Bazar in Dukkarwadi which today, is an extremely congested part of Mumbai. What is most fascinating about his design is that it was based entirely on material available in the ancient Indian Vedas. A great Indian sage by the name of Maharishi Bharadwaja had in ancient times written a text called the Vaimanika Sastra (Aeronautical Science). According to Western Indologist Stephen Knapp, the Vaimanika Sastra describes in detail a design similar to the one being developed by NASA today. The design, in what is called the Mercury Vortex Engine, is the forerunner of the ion engines that NASA has developed. According to Knapp additional information on the same can be found in another ancient Vedic text called Samaranga Surtradhara. He says the text devotes 230 verses on how to use these machines in war and peace.

Another Indologist by the name of William Clarendon has translated the Samaranga Surtradhara. In his translation is a detailed description of the Mercury Vortex Engine. The following is a quotation from the same: “Inside the circular airframe, place the mercury engine with its solar mercury boiler at the aircraft centre. By means of the power latent in the heated mercury, which sets the driving whirlwind in motion, a man, sitting inside, may travel a great distance in a most marvellous manner. Four strong mercury containers must be built into the interior structure. When these have been heated through solar or other sources the vimana (aircraft) develops thunder power through the mercury.” Over a century and a decade ago Talpade was able to use his knowledge of the Vaimanika Sastra to produce sufficient thrust to life his aircraft 1500 feet into the air.

A great deal has been written on the subject in various Vedic texts. An even greater deal has been lost to posterity. Talpade’s invention finds mention in newspapers of the day. Our imperial rulers made sure that it never took off. He died un-honoured in 1916. Greek mythology did make a mention of humans flying but ancient Indian texts give practical and workable methods on flying machines. The Wright brothers rightly deserve their place in history. No one should deny them that. However, Talpade also deserves his rightful place and we should give it to him. Remember, it was he who utilised the ancient knowledge of Sanskrit texts, to fly an aircraft, eight years before the Wright brothers.

Between 1903, when the Wright brother flew the first aeroplane and the First World War planes were mainly used for races and circuses. The World War brought in the first military aircraft. The World's first commercial flights were operated by World War I vintage bombers.

Between the 1920s and 30s, aeroplanes started increasing in size, speed and capacity. Advanced navigational devices and pressurised cabins helped develop aircraft even further. These planes like the Douglas DC 3 were propeller-driven. The first passenger jet airliner was the Comet, a British plane which was put into service in 1952. In 1955, the French built the twin-engine Caravel and the Soviets built the TU 104. All these were small in size and had limited cargo capacity.

In 1958, Boeing, the company based in the US West Coast city of Seattle built a four-engine plane called the Boeing 707. This was not only large in size but also could cross the Atlantic without refuelling. In 1960, the US Company McDonnell Douglas put the DC 8 into service. The Boeing 707 and DC 8 had huge capacities in their bellies, more than their predecessors. Thus was born airfreight as a major commercial earner for airlines.

Till 1970, the Boeing 707 was the largest commercial aircraft. However, compared to today's aircraft, capacities were still limited. The introduction of the Boeing 747, the first jumbo jet, changed the way cargo was carried. Compared to a passenger capacity of 150 in the 707, the 747 could carry up to 500 passengers. With bigger bellies, the capacity to carry cargo increased from 6 to 8 tonnes to 16 to 20 tonnes. Till the 1970s, aircraft manufacture was dominated by the Americans. In the 70s the European consortium Airbus was formed and came out with the A 300 series of aircraft. Today, Airbus and Boeing, between them control 90% of the aircraft industry.

Tuesday, 2 April 2013

Tuesday, 8 January 2013

Tuesday, January 08, 2013 by Vinay Bhaskara