An excerpt from official documents dealing with Chennai Airport dating from Captain A. Ranganathan.
The heart and soul of the airport is the track. Unfortunately, there seems to be a drift far from safety and more political bombasts. The recent video I received shows cracks of corrosion on the underside of the secondary track bridge at Chennai Airport and Rhetoric about pushing forward with the environmental disaster, called the Parandur Airport Project, something to worry about Chennai people. During the 2012 Inspection Inspection, as a member of the Civil Aviation Safety Advisory Board (CASAC), I documented several parts of the underside of the bridge showing corrosion and cracks. I warned that the poor construction would result in a disaster over time. Chennai Airport was flooded 27 October 2005 due to heavy rain, but the main track was above the water and flight operations were not affected. The terrain bent down to Adyar and no obstacles on the way of the river provided free flow of water into the sea. Only low -lying areas on both sides of Adyar have been affected
Provisions violated
Tamil Nadu PWD informed the India (AAI) airport that the maximum level of flood was 10.5 meters and a free plate of 0.5 meters would be 11 meters. When AAI applied for an environmental permit for the construction of the runway through Adyar, it was allowed to build over 12.4 meters. This would mean that the pier cap would be 1.65 m above the 1 mA of the concrete of the track surface with a thickness of 1 m. This would cause the surface of the track to be increased on the top of the bridge of 15.5 m, which will be 50.5 feet. The threshold value of the secondary track, before the position of the bridge, was 36 feet.
The Ministry of the Environment and Forests allowed the 200 MX 415 m bridge, but AAI built a 200m x 462.5 MV bridge contradictory to the provisions. Worse, columns with a diameter of 1.2 m were only 0.86 m. The height of the track surface on the upper part of the bridge was only 42 feet according to the AAI graph, released in 2010, 4m short and 47 meters wider than the allowed level. He also built a waterfront wall with a height of 12 feet. The destruction caused by floods in 2015 deteriorated. The main altitude of the track at the intersection was 46 feet and the bridge was 42 feet and the middle section was only 33 feet, the area with which the flood water rushed and destroyed everything on the way. The flood level of December 2015 was 13.4 m, significantly above the secondary bridge of the runway.
Flood waters were not only from Lake Chembarambakkam (which contributed only 30%), but also from all watercourses west of Chennai: Mudichur, Sriper and Parandur. We survived the floods in 2015, but if the water points are in a parander full of concrete, it is unlikely that the bridge will survive serious floods. The fact is that even after 13 years, very few flights from the secondary track work and no aircraft will not use it because it does not have a tool of tools (ILS). AAI introduces the government of Tamil Nadu to assign the land to build access to the lighting system for both ends. Without ILS, the runway will only be an unpredictable track and everything you need is a simple access to the light system and the soil that AAI requires is not necessary at all. It must be more for commercial reasons than for operational reasons.
How to increase capacity
The capacity of Chennai airport can be increased by building a parallel track with a department of 200 m, north of the main track. AAI could negotiate with the Ministry of Defense for the army and coastline. The areas that are occupied around the airport will meet the requirement for infrastructure. We have the metro and GST and central roads and state governments should consider this possibility. Take Gatwick as an example of London Airport. The parallel track can be used for aircraft such as the A320 and B737 family to take off and can also be used for landing from PALLAVARAM-End, as it is done in port Blair, Leh and Bagdography.
Later, it seems that AAI is based on the belief of the state government to assign the land to use a secondary pathway with a wide -body aircraft. No aircraft of the wide body will use an unpredictable path, especially at night. The ILS localizer requires a clear space behind the antenna field; Must be placed in an area without vibration. Due to the metro railway and heavy traffic on the GST road, the vibration levels are too high for the ILS locator. The movement of the aircraft on the main landing lanes and travel tracks will also cause the localization rays to deflect and can never install ILS for track 12. Similarly, the location of the track 30 may not be able to divert the beam from the Coast Guard and other structures.
Late touchdown
If someone passes through the airport charts issued by AAI since the secondary bridge of the secondary track was built, the numbers would be visible from 32 feet to 46 feet because the track value for track 12. This could result in late landing and late landing. We should also consider crossing the landing if the aircraft lands late on track 12. One should remember that behind the folded wall is the roof of the metro that holds 25,000 V cables and overcrowded road traffic. We also have two petrol stations across the road. Is it worth the risk of promoting operations from a dangerously dangerous pathway? If Chennai must regain lost traffic, this is the best solution. Before other floods, demolish the bridge over the river. The old secondary track worked perfectly well for a smaller aircraft and one does not need more than 8,000 feet of the track. Build a parallel track and use it for a smaller aircraft and aircraft of a wide body from the main track. The government would save Crores of taxpayers’ money – and also lives in the case of a disaster.
(Captain A. (Mohan) Ranganathan is a former pilot and aviation advisor for air security. He is also a former member of the Civil Aviation Safety Council in India)
Published – March 30, 2025 22:50 is
