Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Alan B.

'KLIA East @ Labu’

Recommended Posts

Melaka Govt support LCCT plan in Labu

 

What's the use of expanding the airport in Melaka? No brainer :angry:

Edited by Simon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Melaka Govt support LCCT plan in Labu

 

What's the use of expanding the airport in Melaka? No brainer :angry:

 

Aaa...can't u see, it's a case of me supporting you, you supporting me, for those 2 MBs..

and all in the name of 'tourism'...yeah rite.. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KK Lee...absolutely agree with you. In Malaysia - u need to pay for everything. MAHB should be proud of both MTB/Satellite and the LCCT - not treat it like some rubbish pile.

 

However, AK was the one that wanted to pay less and moved out of the MTB. As I said before, Tony doesn't care about the country despite what he says - for him what's more important is money.

 

 

I hope, as Alan B says, that it remains a ploy by AK rather than concrete plans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A new air terminal meant to last, please

 

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 29 — If things go according to plan — Sime Darby and AirAsia's, that is — a new low-cost carrier terminal (LCCT) will soon be constructed in Labu, Negri Sembilan.

 

Although it seems only yesterday that the new LCCT in Sepang was launched, it appears the facility and an extension being built there won't suffice to cater for AirAsia's rapid expansion.

 

Launched towards the end of March 2006, the original LCCT — which could handle 10 million passengers annually (15 million, if expanded) — is already close to bursting at its seams.

 

The question that the Cabinet now has to deliberate is whether to proceed to build KLIA-East@Labu, which sits on the border of Selangor and Negri Sembilan, or to go with the one planned by Malaysia Airports Holdings.

 

The latter option by the listed government-linked airport operator will also see a bigger, better LCCT — but in Sepang, and to be ready only some time in 2014, according to press reports.

 

The option proffered by Sime will be built on land owned by Sime and constructed using its own funds. Perhaps more to AirAsia's point, the LCCT is to be delivered in 2011 — a crucial difference to the airline, given it is already flying some 18 million passengers annually, and will be filling even more seats now that its long-range sister unit AirAsia X has been adding new routes in quick succession. The latest is the popular KL-London route, which starts in March.

 

Although details are still sketchy, Sime has estimated that — excluding land cost — it would take some RM1.6 billion to build KLIA- East@Labu. It is prepared to do it as soon as possible because building material costs have fallen dramatically. Upon completion, the plan is to transfer the operations to AirAsia, the carrier possibly leasing the facilities.

 

Sime is interested in the LCCT project mainly because it would tie in nicely with the conglomerate's own ambitious multi-billion-ringgit development plan for the Negri Sembilan Vision Valley — a township centre of sorts which it intends to develop with a focus on entertainment, education, technology, recreation and sports. A successful LCCT facility that could support some 30 million passengers annually would undoubtedly be a handy anchor for Vision Valley and also boost jobs and infrastructure development in the sleepy state.

 

On its part, AirAsia would revel in running its own airport. Decision making could be expedited, and it would likely extract more revenue from the outlets in the facility. Moreover, it maintains that operating the airport could also result in a lower levy for users.

 

In truth, AirAsia's passenger numbers had lent respectability to the Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) Sepang hub numbers, without which KLIA would have had little hope of competing with Bangkok or Changi in the regional aviation stakes.

 

The contrast between the two airports — KLIA's lack of passenger traffic and underusage and the LCCT's bustle, noise and cramped conditions — is not lost on travellers who have experienced both facilities. Although costing RM9 billion and launched in June 1998 with a planned capacity of 25 million annually and the ability to be upgraded to cater to 100 million, KLIA's passenger growth has been far more sedate because of its lack of regional and global connections compared to Bangkok and Singapore.

 

Whether AirAsia's increasing passenger volume will boost numbers through KLIA in the future — and as well as its ambitions of being the regional aviation hub of choice — remains to be seen.

 

Indeed, what a new LCCT in Labu would do to KLIA's previously stated aviation ambitions remain unclear. However, those looking for positives point to KLIA-East being located slightly closer to KL. Constructing a 7km express rail link to connect it to the KLIA would effectively make it an extension of KLIA, its backers maintain.

 

Labu is also feasible in that it proposes the use of private funds and, perhaps more importantly, will channel commercial activities to other states rather than concentrating the bulk of it in Selangor and the already overdeveloped Klang Valley. Whichever site is chosen, one can only hope it will result in an LCCT that is comfortable and efficient — and certainly one that will last for the long term. — Business Times Singapore

 

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.p...-to-last-please

 

 

Knowing existing LCCT will exceed its design capacity within the next 2 years, why MAHB still planning to build the new LCCT in 2014? :( :pardon:

 

:drinks:

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The extended completion date for the new LCCT at KLIA is due to the enormous groundworks at its proposed location, opposite the MTB. Seeing that the present MTB and satellite will never reach their maximum capacity anytime soon, the satellite reserve land is the best option if MAHB really wants to thwart Sime's Labu plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You know...

From reading the news, it feels like AirAsia is going too fast too soon.

Yeah they have the growth numbers, but still i feel that instead of jumping at the first opportunity of building their own, why not just make MAHB work faster?

I mean if we follow the KLIA masterplan, we will have MORE than enough space for LCCs and full airlines.

The plan calls for a LCCT the size of KLIA's MTB, and at least 4 dozen places for planes.

 

MAHB is also to blame for being a sloth here, but this (Sime Darby & AA) plan feels like they are just going to build for the sake of need - without proper planning.

Which is what the bigger part of malaysia is.

 

I want KUL to be as busy and as big as Schipol is.

I dont want KUL to be Kampung Baharu.

Air Asia is not growing too fast too soon. They are presently riding a wave as more travellers (especially the ones in Malaysia) get more disillusioned by the services offered by full serviced carriers. If there was a time for AK and gang to grow, it would be now, lose momentum and all will be gone. Don't forget that AK is not MH, where the latter would deliberate for donkey years before coming to a decision (which most likely others would have gone ahead years ago) AK as far as I see is a commercially driven go-getter. Good on AK, good on the economy.

 

I just hope and pray that this is nothing more than a ploy by TF to get MAHB to wake-up and speed up it's plans for the LCCT.

Whatever it is, AK will end up the winner because if MAHB wakes up, they get a proper LCCT. If MAHB decides to drag their feet some more, they will still get KLIA East LCCT. Like I have mentioned earlier, this is a slap to the government. Very embarassing. If I were the peeps in Putrajaya, I would be tripping over myself to try and consolidate KLIA rather than let a good resource go to waste.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The extended completion date for the new LCCT at KLIA is due to the enormous groundworks at its proposed location, opposite the MTB. Seeing that the present MTB and satellite will never reach their maximum capacity anytime soon, the satellite reserve land is the best option if MAHB really wants to thwart Sime's Labu plan.

 

KUL is not on a swampy or seaside area, earth work or design is not an obstacle to construction industry e.g. TGG airport.

 

Everyone who uses LCCT knows the car park problem at LCCT. Revenue at RM24 per car per day, return of investment on multi level car park is less than 4 years. If MAHB intended to move to the new LCCT in 2014 but is doing little to improve car park facility.

 

Although MAHB added 400 car park to the LCCT extension. But the ratio of car park to pax has actually reduced from 110 to 100 car park per 1 million pax. Which means, worsen car park situation is expected in the near future.

 

MAHB don’t seem to have intention to provide better service or facility to LCCT.

 

:drinks:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

soon...

 

"I want bigger terminal, u cannot give. I want Labu using someone else's money, u dont allow. So, let me operate in Subang where i dont mind using own money.."

Edited by Fahiruz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Letter to the Editor, New Straits Times a few days ago.

 

"Low-cost carrier terminal: Another airport is not the answer

By : CHAI MING HOCK, Bangi

 

 

 

 

PLEASE, let's not build another airport at KLIA East@Labu regardless of whether it is a privately funded project or otherwise. National interest is at stake.

 

The location of the Low-Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) away from the Kuala Lumpur International Airport's main terminal building is bad enough, given the less than reliable transport between them.

 

Imagine the chaos and confusion if passengers arriving at KLIA have to catch a connecting flight at KLIA East in the future.

 

All stakeholders should strive to make KLIA the air travel hub of Southeast Asia. KLIA's competitors are Singapore's Changi Airport and Hong Kong International Airport, not another low-cost carrier terminal. KLIA's master plan includes land for two main terminal buildings, four satellite buildings and four runways.

 

KLIA consists of a main terminal building, a satellite building and two runways. There is plenty of land for expansion.

 

KLIA should consider building another main building for low-cost carrier operations. Two main terminal buildings -- one for legacy carriers and another for low-cost carriers -- with the control tower in between would be a logical progression of the KLIA master plan.

 

As the future of aviation is a mix of legacy and low-cost carriers, each terminal building will have ample land to expand its satellite building.

 

It is time to put aside business interests. National interest should come first. "

 

:clapping:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

good letter......i hope this will open people's eyes to the blasted money making schemes milling around. think of other get rich quick schemes please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They have already - think IJN :p

 

 

OT : The pure reason for privatisation of IJN is money making, due to its excellent services and world class treatment offered. On the contrary, would anyone considerprivatisation of Hospital Kuala Lumpur and other general hospitals? The spin about IJN maintaining its ability to treat the poor and needy after privatisation is a whole load of bollock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(1) The pure reason for privatisation of IJN is money making

(2) On the contrary, would anyone considerprivatisation of Hospital Kuala Lumpur and other general hospitals?

(3) The spin about IJN maintaining its ability to treat the poor and needy after privatisation is a whole load of bollock.

Further OT :

(1) That is so blatantly obvious, I agree

(2) Would Sime Darby consider privatisation of our Queen Elizabeth Hospital here, it's in critical need of some urgent benevolence

(3) Yes, the poor and needy can still be looked after at IJN post privatisation, probably at some considerable cost premium compared to now I suspect and to be wholly paid for by KKM - cash cow ready to be milked dry !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep...sime darby is interested as they don't have to pay much money, don't have to build up its reputation etc etc. The poor and underpriviledged will get kicked out as the main aim would be to generate profits. this government is so fking stupid. how can they give away a national centre of excellence to the private sector. unthinkable in the UK.

 

also how can they spend billions to build a hub then waste it away on stupid labu labi airports around the country

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yep...sime darby is interested as they don't have to pay much money, don't have to build up its reputation etc etc. The poor and underpriviledged will get kicked out as the main aim would be to generate profits. this government is so fking stupid. how can they give away a national centre of excellence to the private sector. unthinkable in the UK.

 

also how can they spend billions to build a hub then waste it away on stupid labu labi airports around the country

 

Labu Labi :rofl:

 

Still OT. Izanee, don't just blame the government. Blame should go to those people who voted for the government. Not that they haven't been warned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Questions over proposed Labu LCCT

 

JAN 2 — When all the dust surrounding the proposed new low-cost terminal in Labu has settled down, some questions are going to be asked of the long-term planning in Malaysia.

 

Question No. 1: Does anyone in government do any strategic thinking?

 

Question No. 2: Is there a master plan to turn Malaysia into an aviation hub like Singapore and Bangkok?

 

Question No. 3: What has prompted a public-listed budget carrier to decide to operate from a new terminal when it would have been easier to stay at Kuala Lumpur International Airport?

 

The Malaysian Insider understands that several ministers and senior government officials were stumped recently when they were told that there were no viable sites within KLIA to develop a new low-cost carrier terminal.

 

Under the 1992 KLIA Master Plan, a piece of land near the existing LCCT was identified as a possible site of the new LCCT. But there is one major obstacle here: the ERL tracks. This site cannot be accessed by aircraft because the tracks were allowed to be built some five metres too high.

 

As a result, the ministers were told that it is not possible for aircraft to move between this proposed new site and the runway.

 

A second site proposed by Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad was vetoed because it is located in an area which the 1992 Master Plan said should not be used for building construction because of the soil condition. Independent soil experts confirmed that it was not wise to build on that site.

 

So the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, Transport Minister and officials from the Finance Ministry and Economic Planning Unit were told by AirAsia officials that an alternative site for a new LCCT to cater to the growth in passenger traffic had to be found. The question that must have run through their minds was this: Didn't anyone do any homework and plan the construction of KLIA better?

 

Surely the government must have anticipated growth in air traffic and sketched the possibility that KLIA would be a roaring success and would need to be expanded. Or were they hoping to handle the issue only when it landed on their lap?

 

The simple fact is that there has been little or no planning to turn Malaysia into an aviation hub. How else to explain why many major airlines continue to give KLIA a miss, preferring to base their operations in Changi or Bangkok.

 

How else to explain why there has been no sustained campaign by the government or MAHB to snare/tempt some major airlines away from Bangkok at a time when sustained political crisis is scaring tourists and investors away from Thailand.

 

The proposal by Sime Darby Berhad and AirAsia to build a new terminal at Labu, some 8km away from KLIA, is a reflection of the failure of the authorities to plan, and plan well. It is not surprising that the Cabinet endorsed the plan for to build a new terminal to cater to AirAsia and AirAsia X operations.

 

The government and MAHB did not seem to have an alternative game plan.

 

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.p...posed-labu-lcct

 

Does it mean KUL can’t be expanded? What soil condition? Underground caves? If ERL is an obstacle, how to add taxiway, apron and two more runway? Can't they relocate the tracks? :nea: :pardon:

 

This can only happen in bodoh land :angry: :finger:

 

:drinks:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But there is one major obstacle here: the ERL tracks. This site cannot be accessed by aircraft because the tracks were allowed to be built some five metres too high.

 

As if rail-tracks cannot be lowered/tunneled :nea:

 

Bodohland indeed :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If ERL is an obstacle, how to add taxiway, apron and two more runway? Can't they relocate the tracks? :nea: :pardon:

Huh?? When the ERL was built, didn't they think of this problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huh?? When the ERL was built, didn't they think of this problem?

 

malaysian mentality lah - build first, think later. :finger:

 

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?f...mp;sec=business

 

Friday January 2, 2009

 

A closer look at the proposed KLIA East@Labu

COMMENT

By WONG CHUN WAI

 

 

THERE are some reservations over the proposed new terminal at KLIA East@Labu.

 

After all, there is already the KLIA and the LCCT.

 

But let’s look at the bigger picture.

 

The new terminal will allow AirAsia and AirAsia X to grow and strengthen Malaysia’s position as a global air transport hub.

 

It’s actually going to be an exciting project.

 

Let’s look at it with the full statistics.

 

Latest figures show that in 2008, KLIA attracted 27.4 million travellers, far lower than the 37.8 million at Changi Airport and the 41.7 million at Bangkok International Airport.

 

 

The present LCCT is overcrowded and was never intended to be a permanent terminal.

But with a strong terminal, Malaysia will unseat Singapore by 2013 with 55 million air travellers compared with slightly over 51 million in Singapore. :nea:

 

Thailand will still hold the top position with an estimated 57 million travellers going through Bangkok.

 

This scenario will only happen if a new low cost terminal is built.

 

The present LCCT is overcrowded and was never intended to be a permanent terminal.

 

Repeat – a temporary structure.

 

It was built as a cargo terminal.

 

Even recent plans to expand the LCCT to accommodate 15 million passengers a year will not help AirAsia much.

 

Indeed, its expansion will not be able to sustain AirAsia’s passenger volume within a year.

 

The airline’s growth estimates show that AirAsia will carry 12.3 million passengers in 2009; 15.7 million in 2010; 19.4 million in 2011 and 30 million by 2013.

 

The current LCCT also has a severe shortage of aircraft parking bays and this could impede the growth of AirAsia.

 

There are 33 bays for A320s and three bays for A330/A340.

 

By next year, there will be a shortfall of six bays for the airline that has ordered a fleet of new aircraft.

 

By 2010, the shortfall will grow to 16 bays.

 

Malaysia Airports Bhd has said that it will be able to build a new LCCT by 2014.

 

By this time, the shortfall of parking bays will be 41 and there will be a 12 million shortfall at the present LCCT.

 

Little wonder then that the Cabinet, Finance Ministry and Economic Planning Unit officials endorsed the plan to build KLIA East@Labu last week.

 

The reality is that the current LCCT has outlived its usefulness and with the Government facing the reality of a worldwide economic slowdown, funds are tight to build a new facility.

 

The plan put forward by Sime Darby Bhd and AirAsia involves private sector financing.

 

Sime Darby will set aside a sliver of the huge tract of plantation land it owns in Labu and its property arm will build KLIA East@Labu by 2011 at a cost of RM1.6bil, minus land cost.

 

The multinational will then sell the terminal to either AirAsia or a consortium led by AirAsia.

 

It’s not difficult to understand why Sime Darby is involved in the venture.

 

It wants the terminal and its ancillary facilities to become a catalyst for its Vision Valley development.

 

This Vision Valley master plan of housing, recreational, wellness and health facilities is aimed at meeting the needs of the Klang Valley population which is set to grow to 10 million by 2025.

 

Two of the main supporters of the KLIA East@Labu have been the Negri Sembilan and Malacca state governments.

 

Both these states know that they will benefit from the economic activity generated by the terminal while Malacca is likely to get a stronger inflow of tourists.

 

Sources said several other sites for the new LCCT at the present KLIA site were proposed but were found to be unsuitable.

 

The site at KLIA North was not suitable because the height of the ERL track makes it impossible to develop it there while the swamp soil condition at KLIA West is too costly and time consuming to develop.

 

How will KLIA and KLIA East@Labu be connected?

 

·A 7km branch road will be built to link KLIA East@Labu to KLIA and the North South Expressway.

 

·A 7km ERL link is proposed from KLIA to KLIA East.

 

·A bus hub will be built at KLIA East

 

·A 3km KTM Komuter railway line is being proposed from the railway station in Labu.

 

All the costs for building the airport, road and rail links will be privately financed.

 

Where is KLIA East@Labu?

 

About 8.6km from the KLIA main terminal building.

 

By road, the distance from KL’s Golden Triangle to KLIA East is 50km, compared with a distance of 78km to KLIA.

 

With the new terminal, flying low cost carriers will never be the same again. It can only get much better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The present LCCT is overcrowded and was never intended to be a permanent terminal.

But with a strong terminal, Malaysia will unseat Singapore by 2013 with 55 million air travellers compared with slightly over 51 million in Singapore.

and how did they come up with that? fortune tellers ah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Parking bay problem is still not solved, i think. :huh:

I may be wrong.

 

still not. for now yes, but again, temporary measure only. it'll be back to square one come next month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...