- Disproportionate impact of differential ATF hikes on non-scheduled aviation
By Sanjeev Choudhary
New Delhi. 06 April 2026. Non-scheduled aviation consumes only 1.82% of the fuel consumed by scheduled airlines, yet contributes 11.78% of the additional revenue generated by the ATF price hike. This disproportionate burden is difficult to justify on any consumption-based logic and warrants policy review.
The Misplaced Class Divide
The differential pricing of Aircraft Turbine Fuel between scheduled and non-scheduled operators appears to reflect a dated policy mindset. It seems to rest on the perception that non-scheduled aviation is merely an instrument of affluence rather than a legitimate productivity tool and public-service enabler. That perception no longer matches operational reality. Non-scheduled aviation supports time-sensitive business travel, remote connectivity, pilgrimage traffic, medevac missions, organ transport, and disaster-response operations.
A False Distinction
The regulatory framework recognises Scheduled and Non-Scheduled Operators. Both are commercial operators. Both serve the public. Neither operates as a charity. Yet, a class divide has been informally created: scheduled operations are seen as serving the common public, while non-scheduled operations are often portrayed as serving only the elite. This is misplaced. A non-scheduled helicopter ferrying pilgrims or undertaking rescue sorties is no less a public-facing service than a scheduled airline operating a trunk route.
Why the Price Differential Matters
ATF typically accounts for nearly 35–40% of hourly operating cost. Any steep and differential fuel hike will inevitably pass through to end users. Pilgrimage passengers, medevac families, and businesses travelling to remote points not served by airlines all bear the burden. In effect, punitive fuel pricing for non-scheduled operators raises the cost of socially useful mobility where alternative options are often limited or absent.
The Present Differential
Assuming a pre-hike ATF price of ₹100 per litre, the post-hike price becomes ₹115 for Scheduled Operators after a 15% increase, while Non-Scheduled Operators pay ₹210 after a 110% increase. Even in a deregulated pricing regime, such a divergence invites a legitimate policy question: on what objective basis is this differential being imposed? Let us try to understand it better. When a car owner goes to the petrol pump he buys the petrol at the same per litre rate which every buys. Irrespective of the fact whether he is a private user, a taxi owner or a government office MTO department. This simile might help in understanding the situation.
Assumptions Used for Broad Calculation
| Parameter | Assumption |
| Base ATF price | ₹100/litre |
| Scheduled price after hike | ₹115/litre (15% increase) |
| Non-Scheduled price after hike | ₹210/litre (110% increase) |
| Scheduled fleet | 850 aircraft; 10% down daily; active fleet 765 |
| Non-Scheduled jets | 160 aircraft; 10% down daily; active fleet 144 |
| Helicopters | 180 aircraft; 10% down daily; active fleet 162 |
| Scheduled utilisation | 11 hours/day for 30 days |
| Non-Scheduled utilisation | 20 days/month at 3.5 hours/day |
| Fuel burn benchmark | Scheduled aircraft = X litres/hour |
| Relative fuel burn | Non-Scheduled jet = 0.4X; helicopter = 0.05X |
| Broad reference assumption | Comparable order-of-magnitude benchmark using an Airbus A320, Challenger 650, and Bell 407 |
Fuel Consumption Calculation
- Scheduled monthly fuel consumption = 765 × 11 × 30 × X = 252,450X litres
- Non-Scheduled jets monthly fuel consumption = 144 × 20 × 3.5 × 0.4X = 4,032X litres
- Helicopter monthly fuel consumption = 162 × 20 × 3.5 × 0.05X = 567X litres
- Total Non-Scheduled monthly fuel consumption = 4,032X + 567X = 4,599X litres
- Fuel consumption share of Non-Scheduled aviation = 4,599 ÷ 252,450 = 1.82%
Additional Revenue Generated by ATF Hike
- Scheduled additional revenue = 252,450X × ₹15 = ₹37,86,750X
- Non-Scheduled additional revenue = 4,599X × ₹110 = ₹5,05,890X
- Total additional revenue = ₹37,86,750X + ₹5,05,890X = ₹42,92,640X
- Revenue share from Non-Scheduled aviation = 5,05,890 ÷ 42,92,640 = 11.78%
Comparative Snapshot
| Category | Monthly Fuel Consumption | Additional Revenue from Hike | Share |
| Scheduled | 252,450X litres | ₹37,86,750X | Fuel base benchmark |
| Non-Scheduled | 4,599X litres | ₹5,05,890X | 1.82% of fuel use; 11.78% of extra revenue |
Monthly Fuel Consumption Share : Share of Additional Revenue from ATF Hike
Conclusion
The numbers make the imbalance unmistakable. Non-scheduled aviation consumes only 1.82% of the fuel consumed by scheduled airlines, yet it contributes 11.78% of the additional revenue generated by the ATF hike. In other words, the sector is bearing a revenue burden several times higher than its share of fuel consumption. Such pricing is difficult to defend as rational, consumption-based policy. It appears instead to be perception-led pricing imposed on a segment that provides remote connectivity, pilgrimage support, medevac capability, and disaster-response capacity. If policy is to be fair, modern, and data-driven, this differential pricing structure must be revisited.
( Sanjeev Choudhary is Vice President of Sales Jet HQ Asia . It is a US based Aircraft Dealing Company which has it’s International HQs in Dubai . Sanjeev brings more than 15 years’ experience in aviation sales, most recently as President of Business Development at Arrow Aircraft in New Delhi. The views in the article are solely the author’s. He can be contacted at editor.adu@gmail.com)
