Explained: Why does an hour long flight to Dhangadhi cost more than a flight to New Delhi?

The Kathmandu–Dhangadhi route connects Nepal’s capital with Dhangadhi in Sudurpashchim province, in the country’s far west. The Kathmandu–New Delhi route connects Kathmandu with India’s capital. One is domestic and the other international, but passengers compare them because their prices can seem to defy the difference in travel time.

The article gives a striking example. A ticket to Dhangadhi was listed at Rs22,180 for about 50 minutes. A ticket to New Delhi cost Rs15,367 for about 1 hour and 50 minutes. Prem Singh Saud and Padam Subedi publicly questioned why the shorter domestic journey cost more.

The comparison exposes the pressure on domestic travellers. Nepal regulates domestic fares, while international fares are largely shaped by market demand and supply. Festival demand, road disruptions, fuel costs and taxes can push domestic prices higher, making travel to the far west costly despite the shorter distance.

The maximum one-way fare from Kathmandu to Dhangadhi has roughly doubled in 12 years. It increased from around Rs11,000 in 2014 to more than Rs22,000 in 2026. That rise makes the far-western domestic route a visible example of Nepal’s growing air-travel costs.

The article records a specific comparison. A Kathmandu–Dhangadhi ticket for about 50 minutes was priced at Rs22,180. A Kathmandu–New Delhi ticket for about 1 hour and 50 minutes cost Rs15,367. Thus, the domestic ticket was Rs6,813 more expensive in that example, despite the shorter journey.

These figures explain why the issue has repeatedly reached Parliament. Rastriya Swatantra Party lawmaker Aakriti Awasthi urged the government to reduce fares to Dhangadhi. The comparison does not mean every ticket always has these prices, but it shows why passengers question Nepal’s domestic fare structure.

A short flight is not priced by distance alone. Airlines must cover the costs of operating aircraft, including fuel and other operating expenses, while taxes also add to the ticket. The article identifies rising fuel costs, taxes and seasonal demand as major pressures on domestic fares.

Demand becomes especially powerful on the Dhangadhi route. During major festivals, more people travel. Floods and landslides can also damage or disrupt roads, leaving passengers dependent on aircraft. When available seats face unusually strong demand and travellers cannot easily switch to buses or roads, fares rise within the government’s permitted limits.

The result is a costly essential service for many passengers. Air travel has moved from being a luxury to a necessity for millions of Nepalis, yet prices remain difficult for many to afford. The government therefore faces pressure to make far-western flights more accessible without undermining airline viability.

Domestic airfares rise when many more passengers need seats at the same time. Major festivals create this seasonal surge. Airlines may adjust prices through demand-and-supply dynamics, especially when available capacity cannot meet the number of people trying to travel.

Road disruption creates a second pressure. Floods and landslides can block or damage routes, leaving travellers with no option other than air services. On the Kathmandu–Dhangadhi connection, this matters because road travel is an alternative people may normally consider. When it disappears, demand for seats becomes more urgent.

Passengers bear the impact because they have little bargaining power in these moments. The article notes that airlines may justify higher fares through demand and supply, but travellers must pay when alternatives are unavailable. This is why fares often become particularly burdensome during festivals and disasters.

Nepal’s government regulates domestic airfares by setting minimum and maximum limits. International fares are largely determined by market demand and supply, but domestic airlines operate within government-approved fare boundaries. Nepal is described as perhaps the only country where the government also regulates the minimum fare.

The lower limit was introduced after the aviation market opened to private operators in 1992. Airlines competed intensely, and some offered tickets at prices considered unsustainably low. The government introduced fare controls in 1993 because oversupply, intense competition and deep discounts threatened the stability of the sector.

Both limits aim to prevent damaging extremes. A maximum protects passengers from unlimited increases, while a minimum discourages price wars that can weaken airlines. More than 75 airlines have been registered over the years, although many later folded and only a fraction remain in operation. The policy reflects that difficult history.

Aggressive competition created very cheap tickets after Nepal opened aviation to private operators. Airlines had more seats than passengers on some major hubs and tourist routes, so they cut prices sharply. Those fares could make flying accessible, but they also threatened the money needed to run an airline.

Necon Air offered Everest mountain flights on an ATR aircraft for as little as $32 per person, nearly 60 percent below government-approved rates. It suspended operations in 2003 and was delisted in 2006. Cosmic Air later used 105-seat jets and rock-bottom fares, then added a motorcycle lucky draw in 2005. The promotion still could not cover daily expenses.

Cosmic eventually folded, showing the danger of selling below sustainable levels. Former Civil Aviation Authority director general Tri Ratna Manandhar said Cosmic helped make air travel cheaper and less luxurious for Nepalis. Yet attracting passengers is not enough when revenue cannot meet operating costs.

Flight prices reflect more than kilometres or minutes in the air. Airlines must recover costs connected with operating an aircraft, while fuel, taxes and other expenses affect the price of every service. These costs do not fall in direct proportion to a route’s distance, so a shorter flight is not automatically cheaper.

Supply and demand then shape the fare within Nepal’s regulated limits. If many passengers seek seats during a festival, or roads are blocked by floods and landslides, demand rises while practical alternatives shrink. A limited number of seats can therefore command a higher price, particularly on routes such as Kathmandu–Dhangadhi.

The history of Necon Air and Cosmic Air shows the opposite danger. Excess seats and aggressive discounts produced fares too low to sustain operations. Nepal’s minimum and maximum fare rules attempt to balance passenger affordability with airline survival, but high costs and limited alternatives still trouble travellers.