/ciol/media/agency_attachments/c0E28gS06GM3VmrXNw5G.png)
Follow UsUnremarkable? Well, this was actually flight CO83 from May 20. It was two days late. It had tried twice, earlier, to depart, along with 300 passengers. Third time lucky.
On May 20, Continental CO83, scheduled to leave DEL for EWR 2250, was finally canceled three hours later due to a malfunction in the fire suppressant system in the Boeing 777-200ER. Passengers were offloaded, booked into Vasant Kunj's Grand Hotel (and later, another hotel), and told to stay there to receive update — they were not allowed to go home, and their luggage was retained by the airline.
On May 21, technicians reportedly came from the US to replace the part (this has not been confirmed by the airline). Working at breakneck speed, they fixed the problem, and caused another one — an electrical fault.
On May 22, after fixing the second fault, running test flights, and putting 300 passengers up in expensive five-star hotels two nights in a row, the flight finally took off.
Also read: Why the bribe is easier
High technology is a lot of fun and has the power to sharply boost an emerging economy like India. But in this rush to become world-beaters in high technology, is India slipping up on the mundane, day-to-day activities that the economy depends, on to succeed in high-tech? The basic infrastructure, the basic support?
Modern jetliners are exceptionally complex, and far from low-tech. But flying them is something that is done by thousands of crews every day, all over the world.
So how does this delayed flight concern India? And why do I think we are losing an opportunity to let technology transform our lives?
With Continental CO83, the mechanical failure occurred in Delhi on a Boeing 777-200ER aircraft costing upward of US$230 million. Boeing India is headquartered in Delhi, and many hundreds of aircraft take off and land here every day. Why then, did Continental need to fly technicians and parts from the US? Did they not contact Boeing for support? Or did they call Boeing, which did not have the technical staff or parts in Delhi and other major cities in India (or even Asia, for that matter)?
A managerial error
Bringing technicians from halfway around the world and expecting them to fix a problem while fighting jet-lag is absurd. The mistake was not a technical error but a managerial one, related to the support ecosystem and the infrastructure that could have been utilized in India.
The reason this flight delay is important is not just because it made the news, but because it is typical of major technology purchases made by large entities like the Government of India. The airport authorities and the aviation ministry allow planes to land day in and day out without insisting that the aircraft vendors or the airlines also station support personnel and spares locally. It is far easier — and cheaper — to fly a technician from Bangalore to Delhi than from New York to Delhi. In this case, Continental absorbed only its own, direct losses: not the considerable economic and human impact on 300 passengers; delaying them is also very significant. All in all, a lose-lose situation for everyone concerned.
On a larger scale, the Indian government insists on transfers of technology during their major military purchases, the so-called “offset” is de rigueur. This is good for India but is often a deal-breaker and a no-win situation in many cases. Witness how the recent US$11 billion military proposal by Lockheed and Boeing was unceremoniously disposed of by a faxed letter of rejection.
The US proposal was the only one that delivered technology today that France and others promise several years from now (and may or may not be delivered to spec, a la Admiral Gorhkov). It was dumped, amongst other reasons, because the US refused to include technology transfers. On the other hand, the French were thrilled to share the technology because India is paying them to develop it!
In looking for full-scale technology transfers, the government of India sometimes loses sight of the low-hanging fruit: the technician/operator opportunities, the employment potential and the reality of working with live technology rather than paying an external entity to develop a technology and sell to other countries as well. (Full disclosure: I am a US citizen and an overseas citizen of India, who believes that win-win scenarios are the best way to have longer-term strategic and technological partnerships. And my wife was on that delayed flight.)
This is where the support ecosystem matters more than the technology and more, indeed, than insisting on a full-scale technology transfer. Some of these ecosystem components are: a guarantee from the US political leadership (given that President Obama lobbied for the deal) that parts and support would not be embargoed in the event of a war; that technology be transferred if possible; if technology is not transferred, advisers be available in India at all times; and enhanced, not reduced, support in the event of war.
India has come a long way in technology. Now, it needs to go back to the basic principles of management and planning and ensure that the technology is also supported by good contract infrastructure.
This is crucial because the next plane that is stranded could well be a military one; because the next location could well be Tawang; because the next 300 people could well be Indian soldiers risking their lives for the nation. The least the government and people can do is support them, not only in acquiring the best technology but also in planning and managing around it.
(Srikanth Rajagopalan runs an SAP consultancy out of Gurgaon and the US. You can find him at twitter.com/rgopalan or raja@onlinegbc.com. The views expressed are his own.)