4460 charts, 4380 live

Network length grows partly by building new roads and partly by re-designating existing state highways as national highways. The two are not distinguished in the headline figure, so this series overstates new construction.

The honest read: construction peaked at 13,327 km in FY2020-21 and has since plateaued around 10,000-12,000 km a year. The 'record pace' framing does not survive contact with this series.

This is the most genuinely impressive infrastructure series on the site: a 55-fold increase off a near-zero base in a decade.

Lane-width upgrades matter more for freight throughput than raw network length. This series has grown faster than total network length, which is the right direction.

Counts drift between releases (157, 159, 160, 163) because 'operational' sometimes includes heliports, water aerodromes and seasonally-served strips. Treat the trend as solid and any single year as ±5.

Cumulative inaugurations, not currently-flying routes. A material share of UDAN routes have been discontinued after their three-year viability-gap subsidy expired — the scheme's central unresolved weakness.

India passed 1,000 km in October 2025 to become the third-largest metro network in the world, behind China and the United States.

Ridership grew 4x while network length grew 4.1x — meaning average passengers per kilometre has been flat. New lines are not, on average, as well used as the old ones.

Non-major ports have grown faster than major ports over the period, driven largely by private terminals on the west coast.

Capacity (2,817 MTPA) runs well ahead of throughput (1,668 MT) — utilisation near 59%. Headroom is healthy; it also means further capacity spending has weak near-term returns.

Genuine operational gain, and one of the few Indian logistics metrics that now beats several developed-economy averages.

Passengers handled at domestic terminals. The sheet also lists April-to-October part-years for FY24 and FY25; both are excluded, and the FY24 part-year in particular would otherwise contradict the full FY24 row directly above it.

Service areas are not states. Some cover two states, some split one, and Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkata are their own areas — so this is labelled by service area and is deliberately not drawn on the state map, which would assert a correspondence that does not exist. One TRAI report covers one quarter, so this is a snapshot rather than a series over time. The half of the gap that matters: rural tele-density runs far below urban in every service area, and the national figure hides the distance between them.

Service areas are not states. Some cover two states, some split one, and Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkata are their own areas — so this is labelled by service area and is deliberately not drawn on the state map, which would assert a correspondence that does not exist. One TRAI report covers one quarter, so this is a snapshot rather than a series over time. Above 100 everywhere, and above 190 in some areas. Read as SIMs per hundred residents, not as people connected.

Service areas are not states. Some cover two states, some split one, and Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkata are their own areas — so this is labelled by service area and is deliberately not drawn on the state map, which would assert a correspondence that does not exist. One TRAI report covers one quarter, so this is a snapshot rather than a series over time. Tele-density counts connections, not people, so it exceeds 100 per cent wherever people hold more than one SIM — which in urban areas is most of them.

Service areas are not states. Some cover two states, some split one, and Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkata are their own areas — so this is labelled by service area and is deliberately not drawn on the state map, which would assert a correspondence that does not exist. One TRAI report covers one quarter, so this is a snapshot rather than a series over time. Connections rather than people, and undirected on purpose: more SIMs in a service area is not straightforwardly better.