Top News

Chennai’s second airport plan at Parandur has been scrapped, and the government will now look for an alternative site, while planning to expand the existing Meenambakkam airport to handle up to 55 million passengers annually.

The decision has brought the focus back on a larger question facing India’s growing metros: why do second airports take so long to become operational? Navi Mumbai took nearly two decades from conception to commercial operations, Pune’s proposed Purandar airport has remained stuck for more than 20 years, while Jewar in Noida missed several deadlines before finally opening.

Also read: Why Harohalli is a frontrunner for Bengaluru’s second airport

Now, Parandur has joined the list after years of planning, partial land acquisition and Central approval. But according to aviation analyst K Giriprakash, who has covered the industry for more than three decades, the delays cannot be explained by land and politics alone. He also points to a less visible problem: the regulatory and financial model itself makes second airports difficult to sustain.

Why second airports struggle

“The regulatory model is structurally hostile to second airports in India,” Giriprakash told The Federal. According to him, a greenfield airport begins with a large capital investment but a relatively small passenger base. This creates a difficult cycle. The airport has to recover its investment from limited traffic, while the cost-plus tariff model pushes up per-passenger charges. Higher charges can discourage airlines and passengers, which in turn keeps traffic low. “The airport needs to be financially viable to attract enough passengers.”

Giriprakash believes this is particularly important as several major Indian cities are already approaching the need for another airport. “Major metros like Bangalore, Chennai and Kolkata definitely need a second airport,” he said, pointing to London, which has Heathrow and Gatwick.

Also read: Parandur shelved: Why Vijay govt is betting on expanding Chennai airport instead

However, he believes the second airports may need a different operating model. One possibility, he said, is to reserve them primarily for low-cost airlines, helping keep fares lower and encouraging passengers to use the new airports. “But that will need some hard bargaining with the owners of the principal airport,” he said.

‘Land availability is not land acquisition’

While the financial and regulatory model creates one set of problems, land remains the most visible hurdle for second-airport projects.

The difficulty, Giriprakash said, is that governments often assess whether land is available, but do not adequately assess whether it can actually be acquired. “The honest answer is that land availability carries enormous weight while land acquirability carries almost none,” he said.

Also read: Parandur airport: Environmentalist explains why Ekanapuram was excluded from talks

An airport requires thousands of acres of contiguous land, usually close enough to a major city to make the project commercially viable. But by the time a second airport is planned, cities have expanded, villages have grown around potential sites and large stretches of land are already being cultivated or inhabited.

Giriprakash cited the Parandur case to explain the problem. The Airports Authority of India (AAI) had examined four sites in Tamil Nadu and found two feasible. The state was then left to choose between Parandur and Pannur based on factors including habitation, industry and land cost. “While these clearances are being sought, nobody in that chain actually addresses whether people will part with the land,” he said.

Once a site is identified, villages begin negotiating compensation, often after the project has already gathered considerable political and administrative momentum. “Villages start bargaining, and compensation is negotiated under duress,” Giriprakash said.

Why first airports were easier

This is also where the difference between first and second airports becomes important.

Many of India’s original airports were developed when cities were much smaller and large stretches of land around them were less densely populated. Expanding an airport or building a new one was therefore comparatively easier.

Also read: India’s second airports: Distance, deals and the real debate

The situation has changed dramatically. A second airport now has to be located around an already expanded city, where land comes with farmers, villages, homes, environmental concerns and competing claims.

Parandur is a clear example. The proposed airport site covered nearly 13 villages, with farmers and residents protesting over agricultural land, water bodies and displacement. Despite the government moving ahead with land acquisition and securing in-principle approval from the Centre, people resisted.

Navi Mumbai faced its own prolonged land and rehabilitation challenges. Pune’s Purandar project has repeatedly moved between sites and acquisition processes, while even Jewar, which progressed faster than the others, missed multiple deadlines.

Politics makes land acquisition riskier

The land question, however, cannot be separated from politics. “Unacquired land is a political issue in itself, which makes the speed of acquisition a high-risk factor,” Giriprakash said.

Once a government announces a major airport project, land acquisition can quickly become political. Opposition parties can mobilise affected residents, while governments face pressure to show progress without alienating local communities.

Also read: Guwahati, Navi Mumbai airports among world’s most beautiful in 2026

“Assuming the ruling party decides to start a second airport, the opposition starts holding protests even before the project has received clearances,” he said. “This itself leads to more delays,” Giriprakash noted.

This poses another challenge. Building a second airport does not automatically mean airlines and passengers will move there. The airport has to be commercially attractive, well connected and capable of drawing sufficient traffic away from the primary airport.