Talk:Hindon Airport

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I made some IATA code changes that were mistakenly reverted. As per IATA website the IATA code is HDO. GAH is for Gayndah Airport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB1E:71:E0FD:C421:4FFF:FE5C:28EC (talk) 14:05, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merger Discussion[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Not merged. The proposal was to merge the Air Force Station into the civil airport, and while I see support for a merge, I don't see consensus on the direction of the merge. There is strong precedent for civil enclave airports having standalone articles, per the examples given: Jodhpur Airport, Jaisalmer Airport, Bikaner Airport, Gwalior Airport, Jorhat Airport, Bagdogra Airport. There seems to be less call for the military airports to have independent articles, but Hindan Air Force Station is the biggest and largest air base in Asia, making this sort of a special case. Unlike in the other civil enclave airport articles, the military-related content dominates the civil-related content. Given the precedent for coverage of civil enclave airports it seems reasonable to keep a separate article at least until 2022 when expansion of Delhi Airport is completed and all UDAN operations revert to Delhi Airport, at which time a merge should be reconsidered. I find the original proposal to merge the Air Force Station article into the civil airport article to be a nonstarter. – wbm1058 (talk) 18:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request received to merge articles: Hindan Air Force Station into Hindan Airport; dated: {March/2019}. Proposer's Rationale: {not stated}. Discuss here. Jpsorts (talk) 20:33, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong Support: It's the same air side with the same ICAO code no sense of having separate articles for different parts of the same field. Bingobro (Chat) 13:26, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Just because they share the same airfield, doesn't mean that a shared article is required; the administration of the two entities is separate, with AAI running the civil airport and the IAF running the air force station. For a similar example, see RAF Gibraltar and Gibraltar Airport. --RaviC (talk) 16:44, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Even if the two entities are separately administered, I observe that shared articles are the norm rather than the exception, when it comes to articles about Civil Enclaves at military airfields in India. For example; Jodhpur Airport, Jaisalmer Airport, Bikaner Airport, Gwalior Airport, Jorhat Airport, Bagdogra Airport. Why should hindan be any different? Trinidade (talk) 16:40, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support: Both article contains same content. RaviC rightly said that [AAI operates civil part and the IAF running the airforce station], however same applies to Chandigarh but content of both IAF & Civil airfield is in one article. I strongly support that both article should merge as content of both articles can be set up in one Article. 649pardeep (talk) 01:04, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The two articles don't contain the same content. The Air Force station article talks about the aircraft and military history of the station. Furthermore, you haven't referenced the example of Gibraltar which I mentioned. --RaviC (talk) 10:12, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support: The Hindan 'civil enclave' is part of the military airfield, not the other way round. Hence, I think its proper to merge the Hindan Airport article into the Hindan Air Force Station article. From Satellite imagery, it is now becoming evident that the Civil enclave doesn't even have its own apron, unlike other Civil enclaves on military airfields in India. All airside operations are controlled by the IAF. I don't think the Civil Enclave warrants a separate article. All notable information about civil operations at Hindan can very well fit under a Section heading in the Military airfield article. Moreover, Hindan's civil enclave has been reported in the media as being a temporary arrangement, strengthening the argument for a unified article. Trinidade (talk) 16:40, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I suggest keeping them separate. RaviCs argument is convincing enough. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:44, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support: Agree with Trinidade and BingoBro. Both the articles are of the same airfield and I don't see why there is a need to have separate articles. — LeoFrank  Talk 18:10, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@RaviC: I note that you've just reversed the merge, which I carried out a couple of months ago on the basis of the above discussion, where I interpreted a consensus view to merge, including support from at least 3 experienced editors supporting the case. Your edit history on the rollback includes a suggestion of the use of multiple accounts. Could you make the case for the rollback more fully here? And, if you believe there is consensus against the merge, is there a reason for keeping the merge templates up? Klbrain (talk) 17:20, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The initiator of the merge, Jpsorts, was banned for sockpuppetry. The discussion was stale for months by the time you initiated a merge. If a merge is to happen, it should be on the basis of a new discussion. I don't mind whether the templates remain or are removed, but a new discussion is the key matter. --RaviC (talk) 17:32, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Klbrain and RaviC: I'm closing this per my closing statement above. I'm discounting the finding of sock-puppetry as I don't immediately see how the sock's participation impacted the discussion and I don't see evidence of any other participants acting in bad faith. wbm1058 (talk) 18:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Source for IATA code?[edit]

Doesn't seem to be any information about an HDX anywhere... Shpilenok2001 (talk) 07:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did a search and came up with nothing to back up HDX. Bingobro (Chat) 13:52, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The airport apparently does not have an IATA code as, ch-aviation[1], CAPA[2], airportsbase.org[3], world-airport-codes.com[4], allairportsworld.net[5], Great Circle mapper (original?)[6] and Great Circle mapper (new?) [7], Financial Express [8] all leave out the IATA code. As for HDX it does not show up on the official IATA listings. [9]. Codes like VDX and IDX used by Star Air and Air Heritage do not show up on the IATA listings either.[10][11]. Bingobro (Chat) 14:22, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/airports/VIDX
  2. ^ https://centreforaviation.com/data/profiles/airports/hindon-airport-vidx
  3. ^ http://airportsbase.org/India/all/Hindon/HINDON
  4. ^ https://www.world-airport-codes.com/india/hindon-air-force-station-83876.html
  5. ^ https://allairportsworld.net/ap/india/hindon/
  6. ^ http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=VIDX
  7. ^ https://www.greatcirclemapper.net/en/airport/VIDX-hindon-air-force-station.html
  8. ^ https://www.financialexpress.com/infrastructure/airlines-aviation/hindon-airport-begins-operation-check-location-flight-schedule-key-details-of-delhi-ncrs-2nd-airport/1732661/
  9. ^ https://www.iata.org/en/publications/directories/code-search/?airport.search=HDX
  10. ^ https://www.iata.org/en/publications/directories/code-search/?airport.search=VDX
  11. ^ https://www.iata.org/en/publications/directories/code-search/?airport.search=IDX
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hindon_Airport&oldid=1204137374"