A new fledgling airline in Bangladesh (GMG) has been allowed to fly international routes after flying domestically for five years now (In most subcontinental countries flying int’l routes is reserved for the state airline only — in this case Biman).
The stipulations are that GMG Air will be allowed to operate flights from Chittagong (CGP) only to destinations other than the middle east which is seen as the ‘cash-cow’ routes. [CGP is 200 n-miles from DAC (the primary int’l airport with two 12,000 ft. runways). CGP has a 10,000 ft. [B-744 capable] runway. GMG currently operates DASH-8-300’s on domestic routes.
GMG plans to operate flights to Madras (Chennai)in India, to Kathmandu (Nepal) and to Bangkok. CGP to Bangkok is a three hour flight by DC-10 (terminal to terminal). Can’t say about CGP-Chennai but probably about two hours in this manner. CGP-Kathmandu will probably be served by their domestic Dash-8-300’s [45 min.]. Obviously the longer routes necessitate jets but these will be thin routes so maybe a hundred seater is needed. The aircraft will also need to be fairly robust.
What is your best choice for equipment in a situation like this? The A-319 and the smaller B-737 jets come to mind but what other options are there and what are the relative benefits/drawbacks? I’ve heard that you just can’t go wrong with a B-737-500. Your opinions are kindly solicited…
Website for GMG
http://www.gmgairlines.com/index2.html
Website for Biman
By: wysiwyg - 7th September 2002 at 20:06
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
They don’t veto the manufacturer completely, it’s just a significant issue when it comes to making commercial decisions, which is why I mentioned it.
By: wysiwyg - 7th September 2002 at 20:04
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
My wife worked on a BA contract post Gulf war where several TriStars and a DC10 were used to recreate Kuwait Airlines but the DC10 was withdrawn early due to being unpopular for the reasons previously mentioned.
By: KabirT - 7th September 2002 at 15:48
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
Maybe thats why the Saudis use the MD-11 as there executive transport? I am not sure that Saudis not taking MD because it has Jewish connections.
By: wysiwyg - 7th September 2002 at 06:37
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
Interesting how all the types being mentioned here have type ratings that allow pilots to fly different sizes of aircraft on a day to day basis (A319/320/321, B737-200 to 900, EMB170/190). There is often a political element in the decision process, eg in the Middle East (certainly in Saudi) there is a distinct aversion towards McDonnell Douglas products as they had heavy Jewish connections. This was why the TriStar sold well in the region when it was arguably slightly inferior to the DC10.
By: manbil7 - 6th September 2002 at 17:31
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
Funny thing is that after the ERJ 170, EMBRAER is going ahead with the ERJ 195 first (108~110 seats). Their site says that they cut metal for it last month.
By: manbil7 - 6th September 2002 at 17:20
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
When Bhoy mentioned the CRJ or the ERJ 190, I remembered my chance encounter last year riding on an Embraer 120 Brasilia turboprop (Seattle to Portland). The thing was shaking like a leaf when taxiing down the runway. Is that a ‘high-cycle’ abuse after-effect common of these birds, of Embraer or of all little commuter turboprops?
By: manbil7 - 6th September 2002 at 17:14
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
I recall a visit to the Seattle Aviation Museum (Boeing Field south of downtown) about a year ago where the chief B737-100 test pilot was speaking to a small audience (the name escapes me but naturally he’s in his 80’s now). The museum arranges these seminars from time to time.
He had a small slide and movie show wherein he demonstrated the B737 taking off from a dirt field and several other insane ‘you can’t do that with a passenger jet’ tricks !!
By: manbil7 - 6th September 2002 at 17:09
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
Well I’ve talked to pilots about the A319/320/321 vis-a-vis the B73X and they say that although the Airbus is a newer design, the B73X is a much more robust airplane. Little things in the cockpit tend to breakdown in an Airbus, like instrumentations, electric stuff etc.
Don’t know if there’s any truth to these allegations…
By: Bhoy - 6th September 2002 at 09:55
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
oh well… that’s sealed his choice of plane then…
By: KabirT - 6th September 2002 at 09:17
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
[updated:LAST EDITED ON 06-09-02 AT 09:40 AM (GMT)]Indian Airlines oldest B732 is well over 23 years old. The oldest before was around 24 years old which unfortunately crashed.
By: manbil7 - 6th September 2002 at 00:55
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
I agree Kabir. 737 it is. Just looking at how long Indian Airlines B737-200’s have survived is testimony enough.
By: KabirT - 5th September 2002 at 12:36
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
As its is a startup the B737 will be a choice being more economical than Airbus.
By: mongu - 5th September 2002 at 11:22
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
I bet Boeing would enthusiastically allow good terms on the 717?
By: Bhoy - 5th September 2002 at 00:58
RE: Suitable equipment for new airline
As a passenger, I generally prefer the Airbus over the 737, as it’s that bit wider.
However, the 319 I don’t think is particularly economical on it’s own, unless you can get economies of scale by also operating the 320/321 (Certainly the 318 is prohibitively expensive used outside the family). The 737-600 would be the NG version of the -500’s size.
You could also look at the ERJ190, or the CRJ900. Ok, the last two haven’t yet had the chance to prove their durability, and probably aren’t the best idea if you’re looking to expand later (in which case, Airbus’ cockpit commonality could be invaluable, for upgrading to 320/321 or even 330/340) The 737 fleet could also be increased to other, bigger, NG a/c should you want to expand.
Either way, best of luck!
Sign In
September 5, 2002 at 12:38 am