[Tj00072]

This 7x was the first one in India.. owned by Ranbaxy. There is one more in India owned by Oswals and operated by jindal group. There is a 8x also coming soon.

[drift2race]

Originally Posted by duke

All 3 wonderful gentlemen. Mohit has since moved to an airline. JKL now is in the books of Air car ... She looked beautiful but I recall was a nightmare to maintain.

As far as my knowledge , Mohit is still the commander for JKL & yes it is under Air Car for the last 4 years or so . This aircraft has had many issues & is a nightmare to maintain . These included twin engine changes in the last 7 years .

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by D33-PAC

Remember, you're talking about ....parking fees just for landing and letting it sit on the tarmac.

And then don't forget maintenance. Replacing hydraulics etcetera, all this is a costly affair especially with import tax on parts and all that.

For the interest of our readers parking fees at Mumbai is amongst the highest in the world at between Rs 50k to Rs 100k per day. In most European cities , other than hubs like Frankfurt or Heathrow the fees is in the Rs 25k to 50k range per day.

Originally Posted by D33-PAC

Can these be financed like a car with a loan ?

Yes they can. Typical lease tenures are for 6 years though up to 10 years is possible. The implicit interest rate could be between 3% to 7% p.a. Advantage of a lease is that it remains off your balance sheet. There are several specialist lessors - GE Capital, ORIX, CIT, Jetlease etc and some like Guggenheim who only do business jets. At the end of the lease the aircraft most often reverts to the lessor who would either sell it or re-lease it.

Lessors need to be able to repossess their assets by grounding it at a friendly airport. Most Indian airports and the DGCA have usually not co-operated with lessors in contravention with the Cape Town convention to which India is a signatory. That and the Mallaya fiasco has led to Indian lessees typically paying higher rates to compensate for the risk.

[AdiSinghV12]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

For the interest of our readers parking fees at Mumbai is amongst the highest in the world at between Rs 50k to Rs 100k per day. In most European cities , other than hubs like Frankfurt or Heathrow the fees is in the Rs 25k to 50k range per day.

Thats hectic!!! Must say you have an extensive knowledge!!! Is it the same for helicopters? Also, just out of curiosity other than airports what are the places one can park a chopper? and what all does average maintenance consists off? Hope I'm not asking too many questions haha

[agspins]

Here is an example of where a Group bought a Jet too soon, went NPA (Almost 12K crores). The jet was auctioned by IDBI bank in 2015. Nagpur based Abhijeet Groups Bombardier Challenger 605, once a pride of the group. It was grounded for a long time for want of repairs.

[sandeepmdas]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

For the interest of our readers parking fees at Mumbai is amongst the highest in the world at between Rs 50k to Rs 100k per day. In most European cities , other than hubs like Frankfurt or Heathrow the fees is in the Rs 25k to 50k range per day.

The AAI landing and other charges are here, and these are calculated against weight in tons, a standard practice:

http://www.aai.aero/igi/airport_charges.jsp

[TheARUN]

Originally Posted by AdiSinghV12

Also, just out of curiosity other than airports what are the places one can park a chopper? and what all does average maintenance consists off? Hope I'm not asking too many questions haha

I don't want to sound stupid, but guess you can park a chopper at one of them helipads you have at swanky high-rises

In Bangalore I think most of the jets and helicopters are parked in the old airport. Most cities have these old airports that are almost crumbling but kept alive by a small yet steady stream of rich patrons

There was news of Taneja Aerospace, a Coimbatore based engineering firm who had a turbo-prop personal aircraft in series production. Haven't heard much from them since

[Samir Taheer]

Originally Posted by TheARUN

There was news of Taneja Aerospace, a Coimbatore based engineering firm who had a turbo-prop personal aircraft in series production. Haven't heard much from them since

Taneja Aviation is based out of Hosur (Tamil Nadu). They were manufacturing a P68 under licence from Partenavia up until approximately 1999-2000. I think they may have manufactured approximately 8-10 planes of which maybe 2-3 are still in service.

The company had built up an airport at the site and are running a host of activities from there. One of them being a charter business with their Cessna Citation - http://www.taalent.co.in/ and the other aerodrome facilities - http://www.taalaerodrome.com/

Landing Fees are calculated, based on the weight of the aircraft. Government owned and operated airports have substantially lower fees. Not sure if this was posted before but here is a PDF with charges as per AAI - http://www.aai.aero/misc/Airport-Charges-2015-16.pdf

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by AdiSinghV12

Also, just out of curiosity other than airports what are the places one can park a chopper? and what all does average maintenance consists off?

You can, as an owner, create your own landing cum parking area in your factory or other private property. The height of construction in the surrounding areas and the possible approach and descent routes will need DGCA clearance and meet certain norms. A mid-upper 7-seater like at Bell 429 would cost you around Rs 5L/month of routine AMC like maintenance which will cover all take-offs and landings and early stage routine checks. Heavier checks that will come at later stages would cost between Rs 30 to 60L each. Jobs like engine overhaul will put you back by Rs 100 to 200L but these events typically occur once every so many years. You biggest bill each month will be employing the pilots!

[maddy42]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

You can, as an owner, create your own landing cum parking area in your factory or other private property. The height of construction in the surrounding areas and the possible approach and descent routes will need DGCA clearance and meet certain norms. A mid-upper 7-seater like at Bell 429 would cost you around Rs 5L/month of routine AMC like maintenance which will cover all take-offs and landings and early stage routine checks. Heavier checks that will come at later stages would cost between Rs 30 to 60L each. Jobs like engine overhaul will put you back by Rs 100 to 200L but these events typically occur once every so many years. You biggest bill each month will be employing the pilots!

Sir Narayan,

Thanks for the info and I call you sir due to the extensive knowledge base you do have!

Don't a lot of smaller industrialists and host of political players have a lot more helicopters in their arsenal than jets?

I took a flying lesson once and surprising aspect was the course to fly a plane was cheaper than one to fly a chopper. The reason given by my tutor was that helis are more expensive to run per hour than planes from a maintenance aspect or something on those lines. This was an American market I am talking about and my 30 min flight plus 30 minute instruction cost me 150$ on a Cessna.

Coming to the team-bhp aspect, if as a bhpian, you would have to place an order for a plane, or a heli, or both, which make and model would it be? Does any Italian make one?

Asking as out here we love vehicles which the market just doesn't get, but there is some charm in it somewhere(fiat), or the feel of the door shutting with a thud(VW hello!), or just the speed it goes at even though its diesel, and the dealers charge a bomb for transmission failures which is common(yes skoda, that's you). So for a newbie who becomes rich suddenly, as a consultant what would you recommend?

Some pics attached, chopper from vaishnodevi and the Cessna I got to fly on.




Attachment 1617568




Maddy

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by maddy42

Sir Narayan,

Thanks for the info and I call you sir due to the extensive knowledge base you do have!

Don't a lot of smaller industrialists and host of political players have a lot more helicopters in their arsenal than jets?
This was an American market I am talking about and my 30 min flight plus 30 minute instruction cost me 150$ on a Cessna.

Coming to the team-bhp aspect, if as a bhpian, you would have to place an order for a plane, or a heli, or both, which make and model would it be? Does any Italian make one?

So for a newbie who becomes rich suddenly, as a consultant what would you recommend?

Dear Maddy, congratulations on taking your flying experience. If you are serious about purchasing an aircraft for your own use ie leisure travel and you are not an industrialist with an annual 9 figure income then I would say go for the Cessna 172. It is the world's Maruti 800 - a three seater, utterly reliable and easy to fly. It is used as a primary trainer, leisure aircraft, personal commuter all over the world and several dozen fly in India. You could get one second hand for ~Rs 100 lakhs in India. In the U.S. prices would be lower at say $50k due to the vast numbers available. PS: You don't have to call me Sir especially if you have an income of 9 figures

BTW the aircraft you did your 60 minute flight in seems like a 172 to me.

Cessna 172 photo below. Powered by IC engines rated at 160 shp to 200 shp. Cruise speeds of 225 kmph for the 160 hp version. Endurance to putter around for about 3 hours plus with reserves. In 2009 a Turkish student studying flying in Canada decided to commit suicide in a most unique way ie by being shot down by fighters. So he flew into U.S. airspace illegally in a Cessna 172 and got intercepted by US military who forced him to land. Got arrested and jailed. Botched suicide! The 172 also has the distinction of being landed by the passenger, under instructions from the control tower, after the pilot died of a heart failure in mid-air! - UK, 2013. The passenger had no prior flying experience. in 1987 Mathias Rust a German teenager flew a 172 over 1500 kms into the Soviet Union from Helsinki and to top it all landed in the Red Square!! While he was tracked by the Soviets they decided not to shoot him down.

[Jeroen]

Most pilots will start their flying career on the Cessna 172. Its easily the most used trainer the world all over. It's a very easy and very forgiving little plane. Still holds four persons. They can be fully IFR certified and come with glass cockpits these days too!

[sandeepmdas]

I am in no way connected with aviation but I follow the professional and technical forums of this industry with a keen interest.

AFAIK, one of the most popular general aviation aircraft is the Cirrus SR-22 yet I often see an incredible level of hostility towards this type and those who fly them.

What make them so hostile? Because it features a parachute?

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by sandeepmdas

AFAIK, one of the most popular general aviation aircraft is the Cirrus SR-22 yet I often see an incredible level of hostility towards this type and those who fly them.
What make them so hostile? Because it features a parachute?

I am no expert at this end of aviation but I'll share what little I know. In the U.S. flying single engined propeller aircraft as a hobby or as a personal transport is very common. Most of these machines are relatively basic in instrumentation and you enjoy a some what natural seat of the pants flying. Other than improvements in navigation and radios these machines have remained relatively unchanged for 60 years. The SR-22 brought in a host of modern technology into the cockpit that actually makes it easier to fly by taking away some of the mystique and black art of flying. That brought one round of hostility from the traditionalists. The other I believe is that with more advanced instrumentation SR-22 private pilots take greater risks with flying in poor weather, at night, across mountains that they would not have with a basic Cessna 172 with a steam gauge cockpit. Most private pilots have lesser flying experience and ability reserves than the commercial & military ones and the sophistication of the SR-22 encourages them to take risks they otherwise might not have. Further in recent years the American FAA made tail spin recovery no longer mandatory for a private single engine license (please correct me if this has changed). So we have pilots without training for one of the most frightening situations they could find themselves in. All this I suppose has added up.

The parachute is actually a safety device to recover from a tail spin or engine failure - it has saved quite a few lives. For light aircraft it is a good idea.The SR-22 is a beautiful modern 4 seater. These are just my views.

Video showing how the chute deploys to protect the aircraft and its passengers in a spin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_8qCTAjsDg

The Cirrus SR-22

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by sandeepmdas

:
AFAIK, one of the most popular general aviation aircraft is the Cirrus SR-22 yet I often see an incredible level of hostility towards this type and those who fly them.

What make them so hostile? Because it features a parachute?

I’m a huge fan of the Cirrus and I have flown them extensively. I’m actually one of those few pilots who did not train on the Cessna 172. I trained and got my PPL on the Cessna 150/152, then did IFR on mostly Cessna 178 Cardinal. Then I flew on Diamonds and Cirrus.

Here some video’s:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRjUASwNz0g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQQkAYZvWHc

In sheer numbers the Cirrus is actually still very small compared to say Cessna. I think there are some 6-7000 Cirrus SR20/22 around. There are more than 100K Cessna flying around!

There is a misconception around the parachute. One of the myth is that it needed a parachute because it could not recover from spins. However, the truth is that Cirrus was exempt from performing spin recoveries during its certification program. Partly due to its wing design and the fact that is has a parachute makes it safe enough for the FAA to waive the spin requirements!

During it's first years Cirrus did suffer from a relatively high accident rate. That has been completely reversed. In terms of fatalities this is now one, if not the safest single engine 4/5 seater around.

But it is a relatively big and complex plane. So the idea was that people were lulled into safety and did stupid things, such as fly into clouds, when they were only used to and certified to fly visual. A plane is only so good as it’s pilot. These planes are very capable, fully IFT, you can even take them into areas with known icing!

Cirrus, over the year has invested heavily in its training program. They were one of the first to introduce scenario based training. It all paid of in a dramatic drop in accident rates.

Their are some people that loathe the Cirrus. Some of them claim that real pilots don’t need parachutes. The fact is that looking at the statistics, the survival rate of single pilots having to make an emergency landing is not impressive at all.

Furthermore, the most common cause for accidents is loss of control. Which means that the pilot enter a stall/spin from which he/she can’t recover. When this happens close to the ground (e.g. during landing or take off) under 900 ft the parachute is of no use. But above 900feet it is going to safe your life!

These days spin recovery isn’t even taught anymore. Basically, the FAA found out that more pilots died during spin training than pilots got saved. So the emphasis during flight training is to recognise and train for good stall recovery. Planes like the Cirrus, due to their wing design are difficult to stall and have very docile stall characteristics. So a pilot will recognise the stall easily and you can recover easily.

So these people that loathe Cirrus consider (I assume) real hot shot pilots who would be able to recover from a spin at low or high altitude with no problems. Accidents statistics shows this is simply not the case. So the parachute makes a lot of sense.

There are also some people who don’t like the way the controls are set up. Cirrus has a side stick which automatically centres due to springs. I really like the set up and I felt comfortable with it within 10-15 minutes of flying.

If you want to be very sceptical you will just say that Cirrus sceptics are pilots who, at least from a statistical point of view, overrate themselves by a very large margin. Or/and they are probably jealous like hell. These planes cost considerably more then a Cessna!

And of course, the Cirrus has a very advanced glass cockpit. In some ways more advanced than some commercial jet airliners, certainly the older ones, such as for example a 747-400. It packs a lot of automation and with high automation comes additional requirements on training, hand flying currency etc.

I once met a pilot and Cirrus scepticus who did not like any automation in the cockpit, let alone the level of automation in the Cirrus. He would never use and autopilot he claimed. Takes all kind, but I do like the automation, whilst I’ll ensure to maintain all my hand flying currency as well.

Jeroen