Aviation Management

Aviation Management We are the leading Aviation Mamagenet Consultant located in New Delhi, India. Welcome to Our official page.

Aviation Management includes Airport Managememt, Aircraft Navigation System Management, Aviation Training Program etc.

Welcome home 'Golden Arrows'. Blue skies always.The Arrow formation (Rafales) was given ceremonial welcome by SU-30s.   ...
29/07/2020

Welcome home 'Golden Arrows'.
Blue skies always.

The Arrow formation (Rafales) was given ceremonial welcome by SU-30s.



Airbus vs Boeing: a tale of two rivals:Boeing, the world’s oldest aircraft manufacturer, enjoyed a monopoly in aviation ...
10/05/2020

Airbus vs Boeing: a tale of two rivals:

Boeing, the world’s oldest aircraft manufacturer, enjoyed a monopoly in aviation for 54 years until its major competitor Airbus was born in 1970. Aerospace Technology compares the two aerospace behemoths and tries to envisage what the future holds for them.

The beginnings:

Boeing forayed into commercial aviation by launching its first aircraft, the B&W Seaplane, in 1916. The company went on to develop several small passenger and military aircraft in the two decades that followed, becoming a frontrunner in all-metal aircraft construction.
Boeing introduced its first commercial jetliner, the 707, in 1958. The launch of 747 long-range airliner with much larger seating capacity than other commercial aircraft in 1970 further strengthened Boeing’s position in commercial aviation.
Rival Airbus had a modest beginning with the launch of the A300B, which is based on the A300 wide-body jetliner. Airbus received its first order for the A300B from Air France in 1970.
Airbus didn’t become a significant competitor to Boeing until the 1990s when it started launching several competing products such as the A330 and the A340.
Market share – Airbus’ gain, Boeing’s loss
The commercial aircraft market, which is a major revenue driver for aerospace companies, is fully dominated by Boeing and Airbus, which together hold 99% market share.
Airbus has, however, slowly eaten into Boeing’s pie of the large commercial aircraft market by scaling-up quickly in a booming aviation market.
Boeing has delivered more than 10,000 of its bestselling 737 family since its launch in 1968, while the Airbus A320, which hit the market two decades later in 1988, saw more than 8,000 units sold by 2018.
Boeing sold its 8,000th 737 aircraft in 2014, 46 years after its launch – a feat that Airbus achieved in just 30 years.
“Although Airbus didn’t become a significant competitor until the 1990s, it has slowly eaten into Boeing’s pie of the large commercial aircraft market.”
Airbus also dominates the civilian helicopter segment with a market share of 54%. While Boeing has no offerings in the civilian helicopter segment, it’s a market leader in the military attack and transport helicopter segments.
Airbus vs Boeing: which has a better geographic diversification?
Airbus’ revenues are better diversified and are from markets that have high growth potential such as the Asia Pacific, especially China. The company earns more revenue from Asia Pacific (36.6%) than Europe (27.9%) and the two regions together contribute approximately 65% to its gross revenue.
Although Boeing too earns a similar chunk of its revenues (70%) from just two geographic areas namely the US (44.2%) and the Asia Pacific (25.6%), its revenues are more concentrated in the US, unlike Airbus, which has a better diversification. Airbus also earns higher revenue from the Asia Pacific, which Boeing too recognises to be a crucial market for its future growth.
Leveraging state benefits – reflection in the geographic concentration of revenues
While the quick growth of Airbus can be attributed partly to the boom in commercial aviation, the feat wouldn’t have been possible without state benefits, which the US claims are unfair.
The geographical distribution of revenues of the two companies is evidence of just how much Airbus benefits from state support.
Boeing’s revenues are concentrated in North America, whereas Airbus is benefitted by European state support.
North America has been dominated by Boeing for a long time, with the majority of its revenues coming from the US (44.2%) alone, whereas its counterpart earns just 17.5% of revenues from North America.
Europe to Airbus is what the US is to Boeing. European revenue contribution for Airbus (27.9%) is more than double compared to Boeing (12.8%).
Financial performance: Airbus vs Boeing
Airbus has been struggling to grow its revenues in the last five years, having registered a CAGR of 0.97% since 2014 compared to its rival Boeing, whose revenues grew almost three times faster, at 2.74%, over the same period.
future holds for them.
The beginnings
Boeing forayed into commercial aviation by launching its first aircraft, the B&W Seaplane, in 1916. The company went on to develop several small passenger and military aircraft in the two decades that followed, becoming a frontrunner in all-metal aircraft construction.
Boeing introduced its first commercial jetliner, the 707, in 1958. The launch of 747 long-range airliner with much larger seating capacity than other commercial aircraft in 1970 further strengthened Boeing’s position in commercial aviation.
Rival Airbus had a modest beginning with the launch of the A300B, which is based on the A300 wide-body jetliner. Airbus received its first order for the A300B from Air France in 1970.
Airbus didn’t become a significant competitor to Boeing until the 1990s when it started launching several competing products such as the A330 and the A340.
Market share – Airbus’ gain, Boeing’s loss
The commercial aircraft market, which is a major revenue driver for aerospace companies, is fully dominated by Boeing and Airbus, which together hold 99% market share.
Airbus has, however, slowly eaten into Boeing’s pie of the large commercial aircraft market by scaling-up quickly in a booming aviation market.
Boeing has delivered more than 10,000 of its bestselling 737 family since its launch in 1968, while the Airbus A320, which hit the market two decades later in 1988, saw more than 8,000 units sold by 2018.
Will the airline survivors of COVID-19 extend the life of older models, or invest in newer designs?
Extend
Invest
A mix
View Results
Boeing sold its 8,000th 737 aircraft in 2014, 46 years after its launch – a feat that Airbus achieved in just 30 years.
“Although Airbus didn’t become a significant competitor until the 1990s, it has slowly eaten into Boeing’s pie of the large commercial aircraft market.”
Airbus also dominates the civilian helicopter segment with a market share of 54%. While Boeing has no offerings in the civilian helicopter segment, it’s a market leader in the military attack and transport helicopter segments.
MUST READ
787 Dreamliner vs A380: cockpit comparisons
787 Dreamliner vs A380: cockpit comparisons
Airbus vs Boeing: which has a better geographic diversification?
Airbus’ revenues are better diversified and are from markets that have high growth potential such as the Asia Pacific, especially China. The company earns more revenue from Asia Pacific (36.6%) than Europe (27.9%) and the two regions together contribute approximately 65% to its gross revenue.
Although Boeing too earns a similar chunk of its revenues (70%) from just two geographic areas namely the US (44.2%) and the Asia Pacific (25.6%), its revenues are more concentrated in the US, unlike Airbus, which has a better diversification. Airbus also earns higher revenue from the Asia Pacific, which Boeing too recognises to be a crucial market for its future growth.
Leveraging state benefits – reflection in the geographic concentration of revenues
While the quick growth of Airbus can be attributed partly to the boom in commercial aviation, the feat wouldn’t have been possible without state benefits, which the US claims are unfair.
The geographical distribution of revenues of the two companies is evidence of just how much Airbus benefits from state support.
Boeing’s revenues are concentrated in North America, whereas Airbus is benefitted by European state support.
North America has been dominated by Boeing for a long time, with the majority of its revenues coming from the US (44.2%) alone, whereas its counterpart earns just 17.5% of revenues from North America.
Europe to Airbus is what the US is to Boeing. European revenue contribution for Airbus (27.9%) is more than double compared to Boeing (12.8%).
Financial performance: Airbus vs Boeing
Airbus has been struggling to grow its revenues in the last five years, having registered a CAGR of 0.97% since 2014 compared to its rival Boeing, whose revenues grew almost three times faster, at 2.74%, over the same period.
Boeing’s growth was also not at the cost of margins, as witnessed by its 50% higher operating margins (11.85% in 2018) compared to Airbus (7.92%).
Revenue diversification – Boeing has lesser risk
Airbus is more dependent on civilian aircraft for its revenues, with its commercial and helicopters (majorly civilian) segments together contributing a majority share of more than 80% of its revenues, whereas Boeing earns just 60% from the commercial aircraft category. In addition, Boeing doesn’t offer civilian helicopters.
This partly explains why Boeing is better placed to absorb any potential financial shocks of multiple grounding incidents that may affect sales.
Reliability – is Boeing losing out to Airbus in its biggest segment?
Incidents such as grounding due to serious technical issues could mar the reputation and sales of commercial aircraft manufacturers.
Airbus planes have suffered no major grounding issues apart from a temporary grounding of 14 Airbus A320 Neo aircraft in India due to P&W engine woes in 2018.
Boeing has had to deal with two major groundings. Its entire global fleet of 737 Max aircraft was grounded in March 2019, following two fatal aircraft crashes. The company had an order book of 4,636 units worth $600bn of the 737 Max family at the time of the grounding and continues to face order cancellations from several airlines.
Earlier in January 2013, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner fleet was also grounded due to issues in onboard lithium-ion batteries. The grounding, however, didn’t cause a significant impact on the 787 orders and deliveries as the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) allowed US carriers to operate Dreamliners after making the required changes to battery systems in April 2013.
State support leading to trade wars – who plays fairer?
A look at Boeing’s legacy indicates clear benefits from a strong state, while Airbus is no different.
The roots of Airbus, in fact, lie in state interests and the company continues to be backed by EU nations, with the governments of Germany, France, and Spain currently holding 11.04%, 11.06%, and 4.16% stakes, respectively.
Competition has, eventually, resulted in legal fights by the governments to safeguard their respective business interests.
The US Government filed a case with the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2006, against the EU subsidies worth $22bn to Airbus for new product development. The WTO’s verdict in 2010 confirmed that Airbus received $18bn of illegal subsidies, including $15bn of launch aid from the three governments that have interests in Airbus.
The EU filed a counter case against the US alleging $23bn indirect subsidies to Boeing. In March 2011, the WTO ruled out a major part of the allegation stating that 80% of the subsidies were found to be fair.
The EU filed another case in 2012, alleging that the US failed to abide by the findings against it. A compliance panel set up by the WTO to assess the appeal rejected 28 of the 29 claims made by the EU, in June 2017.
The US has retaliated by requesting the WTO to impose approximately $11bn in annual countermeasures to offset the damaging trade effects of the subsidies enjoyed by Airbus.
Product mix: Airbus vs Boeing
Boeing and Airbus offer products in many common categories, including commercial aircraft, unmanned aircraft, military aircraft, and space systems.
Most of the commercial aircraft models being manufactured by the two companies are close competitors, the most popular ones being the Boeing 737 family and the Airbus A320 family of aircraft.
Airbus’ product portfolio is differentiated by civilian helicopters that include models ranging from light single-engine to twin-turbine heavy-lift rotorcraft, where Boeing has no presence.
Innovation – Airbus vs Boeing
Airbus has been trying to match its research and development expenditure with that of Boeing, despite its relatively lower business scale. During four of the last five years, Airbus has spent more dollars on research and development compared to Boeing.
Both the companies are eying the potential mass markets in different applications.
Airbus is targeting the urban commutation business with its online helicopter booking platform Voom that connects travellers with air taxi companies, laying the foundation for urban air mobility powered by e-VTOL vehicles.
Boeing, on the other hand, aims to capture the on-demand air deliveries market and has already developed a demonstrator cargo air vehicle named HorizonX.
Airbus is counting more on start-ups, broad-basing its innovation efforts, by setting-up innovation centres housing start-ups and offering technical and funding support to start-ups in select areas such as autonomy, electrification, and security.
Both the companies have sensed the potential threat of competition emerging from countries like China and have established innovation centres in China. While the Airbus China Innovation Centre focuses largely on the company’s global factories, Boeing’s Chinese innovation centre is focused on innovating and improving exclusive access for the Asia Pacific market. China contributes more revenue than the rest of the Asia Pacific for Boeing.
Military aviation – who wins the game?
Boeing offers unique and advanced military rotorcraft products such as the AH-64 Apache, CH-47F, V-22 Osprey, and AH-6.
Although Airbus’ deck in this space is not empty, six of the eight military rotorcraft it offers are based on civilian helicopter platforms. The other two platforms Tiger attack helicopter and NH-90 multi-role helicopter are comparable to Boeing’s offerings in their respective categories but have lower sales than its rival. Tiger and NH-90 mainly serve the EU countries, where Boeing too competes, but have zero sales in North America.
Airbus also has just a single product in the fighter aircraft segment unlike Boeing, which has advanced fighter jets such as F-15 Strike Eagle and F/A-18 Hornet that are offered in multiple variants. The only fighter jet Airbus offers is the Eurofighter Typhoon, which has no variants to suit customer-specific mission requirements.
Boeing, thus, has a clear competitive edge in military products over Airbus, which misses out fully on missiles and partly on helicopters and fighter jet varieties.
What the future holds
The immediate future for Boeing and Airbus looks equally uncertain as both have their own set of challenges to overcome.
For Boeing, the immediate threat is further crashes or failures of the 737 Max, which can result in order cancellations and litigations that could affect revenue and market share in a crucial business segment.
For Airbus, the looming threat is the $11bn annual countermeasures proposed by the US for alleged unfair trading, which, if imposed, would cause severe financial pressure and greatly reduce its competitive position.
If both emerge from scandals safely, Airbus would continue to compete with Boeing’s commercial aircraft as well as Space businesses. Defence and Security businesses, where Airbus has been weaker, can partially offset the effect for Boeing, whereas Airbus will have no similar offset.
Further, the success or otherwise in highly scalable new businesses such as urban air commutation and local air cargo deliveries could flip their position either way.

Flying Drone to be Legal from December :The aviation ministry on Monday issued the drone policy which allows commercial ...
28/08/2018

Flying Drone to be Legal from December :

The aviation ministry on Monday issued the drone policy which allows commercial use of this technology from December subject to the condition that the drone remains in line of sight of the person using it. However, the government say this condition may possibly be relaxed at a future date.

Drones have been categorised into five categories, depending on their weight. The smallest is nano category which includes drones weighing up to 250 grams and going up to large that can be as heavy as 150 kg. Apart from the first two categories of nano and micro (over 250 grams to 2 kg) which are mostly used by children as toys, all other drone users need to be registered and have a unique identification People seeking such drone licences will need to be over 18 years of age and be at least tenth pass with knowledge of English.

Thank you ministry of Civil Aviation for this very awaiting official announcement since a long time.

Happy Independence Day India !!!
15/08/2018

Happy Independence Day India !!!

06/06/2018

Environmental impact of aviation:

The environmental impact of aviation occurs because aircraft engines emit heat, noise, particulates, and gases which contribute to climate change and global dimming. Airplanes emit particles and gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), water v***r, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, lead, and black carbon which interact among themselves and with the atmosphere.

Despite emission reductions from automobiles and more fuel-efficient and less polluting turbofan and turboprop engines, the rapid growth of air travel in the past years contributes to an increase in total pollution attributable to aviation. From 1992 to 2005, passenger kilometers increased 5.2% per year. And in the European Union, greenhouse gas emissions from aviation increased by 87% between 1990 and 2006.

Comprehensive research shows that despite anticipated efficiency innovations to airframes, engines, aerodynamics and flight operations, there is no end in sight, even many decades out, to rapid growth in CO2 emissions from air travel and air freight, due to projected continual growth in air travel. This is because international aviation emissions have escaped international regulation up to the ICAO triennial conference in October 2016 agreed on the CORSIA offset scheme,[citation needed] and because of the lack of taxes on aviation fuel worldwide, lower fares become more frequent than otherwise, which gives a competitive advantage over other transportation modes.[citation needed] Unless market constraints are put in place, this growth in aviation's emissions will result in the sector's emissions amounting to all or nearly all of the annual global CO2 emissions budget by mid-century, if climate change is to be held to a temperature increase of 2 °C or less.

There is an ongoing debate about possible taxation of air travel and the inclusion of aviation in an emissions trading scheme, with a view to ensuring that the total external costs of aviation are taken into account.

Best wishes for the Auspicious and Colorful Festival of Holi.....!!!!!!
01/03/2018

Best wishes for the Auspicious and Colorful Festival of Holi.....!!!!!!

Armed forces wants over 400 drones, next-generation weapons-* The Armed forces currently have over 200 drones, the bulk ...
25/02/2018

Armed forces wants over 400 drones, next-generation weapons-

* The Armed forces currently have over 200 drones, the bulk of them imported from Israel for long-range surveillance and precision-targeting.

* They also have some Israeli Harop "killer” or Kamikaze drones, which act as cruise missiles by exploding into enemy targets and radars.

The Indian armed forces over the next decade want over 400 drones, including combat and submarine-launched remotely piloted aircraft, as well as directed energy weapons (DEWs) like high-energy lasers and high-powered microwaves capable of destroying enemy targets and even satellites.
Several such military capabilities have been identified in the defence ministry's new "Technology Perspective and Capability Roadmap-2018" to provide the industry with an overview of the country's offensive and defensive military requirements up to the late 2020s.

"This roadmap may guide the industry in planning or initiating technology development, partnerships and production arrangements. While pursuing any development or collaboration, the Indian industry should accord due importance to the government's thrust towards 'Make in India'," says the 82-page document.

Apart from obvious necessities ranging from next-generation submarines, destroyers and frigates to missiles, infantry weapons, specialized ammunition and CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear) defence systems, the document focuses on a wide variety of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) or drones needed by the armed forces.

Drones are major force-multipliers in modern-day warfare for real-time surveillance as well as hitting high-value enemy targets. The armed forces currently have over 200 drones, the bulk of them imported from Israel for long-range surveillance and precision-targeting. They also have some Israeli Harop "killer" or Kamikaze drones, which act as cruise missiles by exploding into enemy targets and radars.

Even as DRDO works on developing the Ghatak stealth UCAVs (combat drones) under a Rs 2,650 crore project, the roadmap says the Army and Navy will need "more than 30" combat remotely-piloted aircraft (RPA).

"The medium-altitude, long-endurance (MALE) combat RPA should have the capability to fly up to 30,000-feet altitude, with extended satellite communication ranges and endurance of more than 24 hours," says the document. The drones should be capable of firing missiles at land and maritime targets from over 20-km away.

Sharkskin design improves aircraft aerodynamics-Researchers from Harvard University and the University of South Carolina...
16/02/2018

Sharkskin design improves aircraft aerodynamics-

Researchers from Harvard University and the University of South Carolina have discovered that incorporating structures modelled on elements of sharks’ skin into the design of aerofoils can improve their performance by up to 323%.

The scientists focused on ‘denticles’, thousands of small scales of a variety of sizes and shapes found across the skin of many sharks in their study, ‘Sharkskin-inspired designs that improve aerodynamic performance’, published in the Journal of the Royal Society Interface.

To date there has been considerable study into the effects of denticles on drag. For example, ‘Drag Reduction by Riblets & Sharkskin Denticles: A Numerical Study’, published by the University of Minnesota in 2015, concluded that denticles can increase drag by between 44% and 50%.

However, in this latest study the team of evolutionary biologists and engineers led by August G. Domel investigated the effects of denticles on lift, the force responsible for elevating aircraft off the ground.

The team imaged the denticles of the shortfin mako, the world’s fastest shark, using micro-CT scanning. Then they 3D-printed denticle shapes on the suction side of an aerofoil, the curved top side that causes passing air particles to spread out, lowering the air pressure above the wing, and generating lift to drive the wing upwards.

By testing 20 different combinations of denticle sizes, rows and row positions, the researchers found that the sharkskin features did not only reduce drag, but increased lift. Domel claimed the denticles created a form of ‘shark-inspired vortex generators’, devices which typically consist of a vane and are attached to an aerofoil to increase lift.

The study goes on to name ‘streamwise vortices that replenish momentum loss in the boundary layer’ as another key reason for the greater efficiency.

“Our findings not only open new avenues for improved aerodynamic design,” concludes the report, “but also provide new perspective on the role of the complex and potentially multifunctional morphology of shark denticles for increased swimming efficiency.”

NASA building supersonic X-plane that will be quieter than Concorde--NASA is developing an experimental supersonic aircr...
16/02/2018

NASA building supersonic X-plane that will be quieter than Concorde--

NASA is developing an experimental supersonic aircraft that will be able to reach speeds of up to 1,100mph and travel quietly enough to fly over land, making it almost as fast, and more direct, than Concorde.

Dubbed the Quiet Supersonic Technology experimental aircraft, or QueSST X-plane, the craft will be designed with a long nose and highly swept wings to reduce the noise it generates.

“This piloted X-plane will look to prove that sonic booms can be turned into sonic thumps, and eventually help make the case for updating the rule against supersonic flight over land,” said Jimi Russell of NASA in April 2017.

A US law came into force in 1973 that outlawed overland supersonic flights, for fear that the 100 decibel sonic booms produced would be too disruptive to people living below flight paths. Since the 1970s, groups have campaigned to have the law reversed, arguing that modern supersonic planes would generate a far less disruptive boom of 80 decibels, one hundred times quieter than those made by Concorde, and that the use of supersonic aircraft would reduce a 40-year stagnation in the speed of commercial flights.

NASA’s plans won approval in the latest US budget, which read: “The Budget fully funds the Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator, an experimental supersonic (faster than the speed of sound) airplane that would make its first flight in 2021.

“This ‘X-plane’ would open a new market for US companies to build faster commercial airliners, creating jobs and cutting cross-country flight times in half.”

Despite its top speed of over 1,353mph, Concorde was plagued by fuel inefficiencies and high economic costs towards the end of its career. The plane burned over 100 tons of fuel flying from London to New York, compared to 44 tons used by today’s Boeing 777, and cost British and French taxpayers over $1.5 billion before operation costs. The X-plans may have to overcome similar issues before its proposed launch date in 2021.

The world’s most powerful rocket, SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy, blasted off Tuesday on its highly anticipated maiden test fligh...
08/02/2018

The world’s most powerful rocket, SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy, blasted off Tuesday on its highly anticipated maiden test flight -

The world's most powerful rocket, SpaceX's Falcon Heavy , roared into space through clear blue skies in its debut test flight on Tuesday from a Florida launch site where moon missions once began, in another milestone for billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk's private rocket company."

The 23-story-tall jumbo rocket, carrying a cherry red Tesla Roadster automobile into space as a mock payload, thundered off its launchpad in billowing clouds of steam and rocket exhaust at 3:45pm (2045 GMT) at the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral.
Boisterous cheering could be heard from SpaceX workers at the company's headquarters in Hawthorne, California, where a livestream feed of the event originated. Several hundred spectators packed a campground near Cocoa Beach, 5 miles (8 km) from the space center, to watch the blastoff.

The launch, so powerful that it shook the walls+ of the press trailer at the complex, was conducted from the same site used by NASA's towering Saturn 5 rockets to carry Apollo missions to the moon more than 40 years ago. SpaceX has said it aspires to send missions to Mars in the coming years.

The successful liftoff was a key turning point for Musk's privately owned Space Exploration Technologies, which stands to gain a new edge over the handful of rivals vying for lucrative contracts with NASA, satellite companies and the US military.
Falcon Heavy is designed to place up to 70 tons into standard low-Earth orbit at a cost of $90 million per launch. That is twice the lift capacity of the biggest existing rocket in America's space fleet - the Delta 4 Heavy of rival United Launch Alliance (ULA), a partnership of Lockheed Martin Corp and Boeing Co - for about a fourth the cost.

The demonstration flight put the Falcon Heavy into the annals of spaceflight as the world's most powerful rocket in operation, with more lift capacity than any space vehicle to fly since NASA's Saturn 5, which was retired in 1973, or the Soviet-era Energia, which flew its last mission in 1988.

Propelled by 27 rocket engines, the Falcon Heavy packs more than 5 million pounds of thrust at launch, roughly three times the force of the Falcon 9 booster rocket that until now has been the workhorse of the SpaceX fleet. The new heavy-lift rocket is essentially constructed from three Falcon 9s harnessed together side by side.

Going along for the ride in a bit of playful cross-promotional space theater was the sleek red, electric-powered sports car from the assembly line of Musk's other transportation enterprise, Tesla Inc.

The Tesla Roadster is supposed to be sent into a virtually indefinite solar orbit, on a path taking it as far from Earth as Mars. Adding to the whimsy, SpaceX has planted a space-suited mannequin in the driver's seat of the convertible.

Address

Noida
201301

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Aviation Management posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to Aviation Management:

Share