THISDAYonline

The times are indeed tough for the nation's aviation industry. The vicissitudes are enormous for an industry, which, until now, was described by watchers as fledgling. It is indeed undergoing a kind of flux which might seem positive to some but negative to others depending on the divide one is clinging to.

Analysts had (and some still) claim(ed) that the nation's aviation history is witnessing its most glorious moments under the current civilian administration where President Olusegun Obasanjo calls the shots. They point to the proliferation of airlines, among other factors as major indicators, to buttress their claim.

Indeed. one aviation player gleefully told his audience at a recent public forum that while the September 11, 2002 terrorist attacks on the United States paved the way for the extinction of many airlines in Western economies, the tragedy rather opened more vistas of growth in the Nigerian aviation scene.

He was to paint the picture of more and more airlines jostling for the Nigerian airspace. Such reasoning was not out of place considering the number of airline operators, who, within the three and half years in the life of this administration, registered and began commercial civil aviation business.

From last year, at least, five airlines began operations. Sosoliso Airlines, Trans Sahara, IRS Airlines, Savannah Air, and Freedom Air came on board.

ADC Airlines and the national career, Nigeria Airways which had hitherto suspended operations bounced back to life like the proverbial phoenix..

While the business of commercial aviation flourished (or so it seemed), the regulatory agency, Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority, NCAA thumped its chest in exhilaration that its oversight functions were paying enormous dividends.

As is usually the practice with human enterprise where competition holds sway, while the business of commercial aviation flourished, a price war engulfed operators.

Albarka Air run by the former Lagos State Military Administrator, Brigadier-General Mohammed Buba Marwa led the pack when it announced a slash in air fare.

The fare cut which led to a fall from N7,000 to N5,500 for a one-way trip from Lagos to Abuja and vice versa did not gladden the hearts of many operators. Maiduguri and some other routes also witnessed fare cuts by Albarka.

Muffled grumblings later translated into loud protestations as competitors engaged the Albarka Air Chairman in name-calling for their perceived effrontery of the retired Army officer to see them out of business through reduced fare.

But Marwa could not be swayed by such vituperations and emotions as he adduced economic reasons why the reduction in fare was expedient for his airline.

Chanchagi Airlines, one of the most profound carriers was to join the fray in air fare reduction following the success of the Albarka example, having been cowed into submission by other airlines spearheaded by the Airline Operators of Nigeria (AON) when it made an earlier move to cut fares.

But the reduction in air fare is a means to an end and not an end itself.

Some airlines would not be bought on the air fare reduction bug. Operational costs, they argued, would make such reduction uneconomical. They may also be right in their reasoning.

For instance, IRS Airlines, one of the newest entrants argued rather convincingly that fare cuts would be counter-productive.

The company's Chairman, Alhaji Rabiu Isyaku Rabiu, had cautioned on the dangers of fare reduction, arguing that it would be highly dangerous if safety and security of air travelers are sacrificed on the altar of fare cuts.

According to him, while affordable fares are necessary, they should not be reduced to the point that airline operators would be hard put in the maintenance of their aircraft, among other running costs.

The argument of the IRS chairman, from all intents and purposes, cannot be faulted and so the airline was not swayed into joining the fare cut proponents having come at the heat of the phenomenon. It was confident of the type of service it intends to provide and the quality of aircraft in its fleet and therefore decided to remain from the outset at N7,000 from Abuja to Lagos and vice versa.

Coming into the industry at that particular time with three Boeing 727 aircraft from the stable of American Airlines, IRS was indeed making a statement: to render efficient, safe and reliable service predicated on promptness and comfort.

While the price war which raged for most part of the first quarter of this year, the NCAA said it was not least bothered on how much an airline charged once standards are not compromised.

The then regulatory body's Director-General, Engr. Zakari Haruna, said airlines were at liberty to charge whatever amount they chose but must not do so at the expense of safety.

He cited Aero Contractors which charges N15,000 for a one-way trip from Lagos to Abuja and vice versa, arguing that passengers were at liberty to patronise such airlines or otherwise.

He disclosed that an economic audit was being carried out to ascertain the capability or otherwise of airlines to maintain their aircraft.

It is uncertain whether the economic audit rolled off at all before the May 4 EAS air tragedy in Kano that consumed enormous human lives and property.

With the tragedy, the Federal Government has wielded the big stick. All BAC 1-11 aircraft type in the fleet of the nation's airline operators have been suspended pending the conclusion of investigations into the air mishap.

The Federal Government has also issued a six months phase out programme for such aircraft type.

There are at least 10 BAC 1-11 aircraft in the fleet of the nation's airlines.

Albarka accounts for two, Chanchangi (1), Savannah (10, Trans Sahara (1), Chrome Air Service (2), EAS (2).

With the ban suspension and subsequent phasing out plan, operators of that aircraft type will certainly not be miming the hallelujah chorus. It is indeed not a salutory development.

Before the BAC 1-11 came under this fate, the Federal Government had banned aircraft that are above 22 years old from the nation's airspace.

The ban on such geriatric aircraft was considered a safety measure. The thinking of the Federal Government, which acted on the proposal presented to it by the Aviation Ministry, was that banning aircraft over 200 years would be a safety measure against air tragedies.

But experts, including government functionaries have not been equivocal on the fact that the age of Metuselah has not wisdom of young Solomon. In ordinary simple translation, the age of an aircraft does not play any role in its performance once necessary maintenance routines are adhered to.

However, this globally acknowledged fact has not deterred the government from the ban.

In placing the ban, the same government did not take into cognisance, the fact that it was privy to the approval given to some airline operators to import aircraft that may not meet the age requirement prior to the ban.

With the ban, such airlines as Sosoliso, Chanchagi, IRS, Albarka and ADC, among others have been put into serious disadvantage.

They had ordered for certain number of aircraft based on approval from both the NCAA and the ministry. Such aircraft, from all intents and purposes, may not be below 22 years.

But the point being made here is that they had the approval of the authorities, having furnished them with vital statistics of the aircraft, including age before approval was given.

Although the Federal Government has said it was giving the airlines a five-year phase out window, the point remains that such airlines would be subjected to economic losses.

A disturbing fallout of the ban on old aircraft is the selective application. The government said it was excluding private aircraft owners from the ban on old aircraft.

The question is: Why this selective justice, considering that both private and commercial aircraft ply the same airspace? Is the government saying that it can monitor private airline owners better than their commercial counterparts?

In other words, is the government saying that the lives of such private airline owners is less valued that those in commercial aircraft considering that safety is the basis for banning gerriatric aircraft.

Addressing journalists in Lagos Tuesday, the Acting Director-General of NCAA, Engr. Ephraim Oyudo said: "The question has arisen as to whether commercial aircraft of over 22 years pose any threat to safety and security. Ordinarily, the age of an aircraft ought not to be a determinant of its airworthiness and efficiency. However, it is also incontrovertible that older aircraft attract more stringent and expensive maintenance regime."

Oyudo argued that since more stringent maintenance would result in more huge financial maintenance costs to operators, it is not impossible that some operators who may find the huge financial commitment too great to bear, may be tempted to evade otherwise unwholesome tendencies. Good argument!

But the point being made remains that air safety should not be relative. Private aircraft such as those on the presidential fleet should be subjected to the same ban if they don't meet the age criterion.

Otherwise if the argument is that the presidential jets, irrespective of their age, undergo regular and routine checks, what stops the appropriate agencies to ensure commercial operators adhere to the same checks religiously?

While the ban on geriatric aircraft cannot be predicated on any scientific proof, one must not lose sight of the fact that the bottomline is that the government is doing this to safeguard air travelers.

This safety is only assured, when the NCAA and its appropriate organs, including the Directorate of Airworthiness and Standards (DAS) live to their duty calls. A new aircraft without proper maintenance might pose more danger to air travelers than a very old aircraft with regular maintenance.

One other policy which the Federal Government dished out during the week was the ban on single aircraft operators.

The ban was informed by the thinking that one-aircraft operators are usually under enormous pressure to meet their contractual obligations with air travelers thereby undermining airworthiness of their aircraft.

In announcing the ban on single aircraft operators Tuesday, the Acting Director General of NCAA, Engr. Oyudo also exempted private airline owners.

"Henceforth, one-plane commercial air operators are advised to increase the number of operating aircraft in their fleet or, in line with the emerging global trend in aviation, form merger with other air operators to improve safety, security and efficiency.

"One-plane commercial air operators i.e. operators who possess only one commercial aircraft in their fleet, will henceforth be disallowed from flying the Nigerian airspace because of the threat they pose to air safety and security...,", he argued.

While one may not fault the reasons adduced for the ban on single aircraft operators, the fact remains that the depletion of operators would ensue.

But who cares whether operators are depleted or not once the objective is achieved.

What is important is that the law must catch up with all those that operate one aircraft commercial flights.

In this case, the national carrier has been boxed in. It has just a Boeing 737 in its domestic operations.

Even if it has any other aircraft either on dry or wet lease that is not designated for domestic routes, the ban on single aircraft operators is applicable to it.

Other airlines with one aircraft are Freedom Air (B727), ADC (B737), Trans Sahara (B727), Savannah Airlines (BAC 1-11). the last airline (although its lone aircraft has been grounded before the new policies) has been caught up by both laws -ban on BAC 1-11 and one-aircraft operators.

What is uncertain is what the fate of airlines with one aircraft but ordered for yet-to-be delivered aircraft would be.

What is however important to note is that the new policy drive on civil aviation has began to take its toll on operators.

One of the most promising airlines, Albarka with eight aircraft, two of which are BAC 1-11 is already reeling under the weight of the ban.

The third BAC 1-11 was in March destroyed by rainstorm at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja.

The Public Affairs Manager of the airline, Duro Meseko, lamented Tuesday that the company was losing several millions of naira following the ban.

Similar fate is being the lot of other airlines. But one must not lose sight of the fact that government says the tough measures are induced by safety consciousness. This is acceptable. But if the measures are not based on national interest, then the country and the aviation industry are doomed.

Some critics have posited that the recent measures were aimed at stifling local operators to pave way for some foreign operators to take over the domestic scene with their local collaborators as beneficiaries. Nigerians are waiting to see how these scenarios will play in the long run.