KLIA2 - New Mega Low Cost Carriers Terminal

[c.lee 0]

AirAsia sees aerobridges as an unnecessary cost. We see it as AirAsia trying to make more profits. Shareholders also see it from an investment point of view - it can improve shareholders' value.

Precisely.

 

Frankly I think this aerobridge issue is a non issue for passengers. Only fusspots like us discuss this to death in forums!

While I am ok with the usage of airstairs, aerobridges should be provided whenever it rains -- for pax comfort.

 

Also, TF says airstairs are used for faster turnarounds and whatnots.. I do not buy this -- I reckon it's just to make himself and the airline looks good.

 

[dean hizudy 0]

Frankly I think this aerobridge issue is a non issue for passengers. Only fusspots like us discuss this to death in forums! If it was such a big issue (like the non reclining seats on D7's A333), AirAsia would have made changes. AirAsia sees aerobridges as an unnecessary cost. We see it as AirAsia trying to make more profits. Shareholders also see it from an investment point of view - it can improve shareholders' value.

 

One of my relatives (and SQ Krisflyer regular) even makes it a point to fly AK so that his kids get to see what the outside of an aircraft is like close up and also the smell of kerosene! He did not want his kids to be always pampered by lounges and aerobridges!

 

Bottom line is that AirAsia will only make a u-turn if the vast majority of its pax complain about them not using aerobridges. Many are also prepared to put up with all of their inconveniences just to get a low fare. I have no complaints about the current LCCT arrangements cos it gives me a chance to photograph the planes in all its glory!

non-issue for passengers??? It is for passenger's convenient. Have you not ever heard that customer always right or customer is the boss? And you need to become a realistic person.Not every passengers are aviation enthusiast like you that would love to photograph the aeroplane. I think the best way is, Air Asia should make a survey asking public/passengers whether they want the aerobridges or not. And follow what is the majority's opinion.

 

 

 

Precisely.

 

 

While I am ok with the usage of airstairs, aerobridges should be provided whenever it rains -- for pax comfort.

 

Also, TF says airstairs are used for faster turnarounds and whatnots.. I do not buy this -- I reckon it's just to make himself and the airline looks good.

 

Indeed! Low cost carriers in the US such as Jetblue and Southwest using the aerobridges,still they managed to make a faster turnarounds and they have bigger operations and more flights operating daily than AK.

Edited August 1, 2011 by dean hizudy

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

AK has proven to be VERY profitable, immensely successful and still growing at phenomenal level since its inception a decade ago.

 

Why do we want to change the winning formula (i.e. not using aerobridge)?

 

Consumers in Malaysia now have a choice - want to use aerobridge, just fly MH or FY. Habis cerita.

 

If the majority of the public disagrees with the no aerobridge policy, we could have seen a decline in AK's passengers load, but it is not the case at all. Passengers load and numbers are growing exponentially year on year.

[dean hizudy 0]

AK has proven to be VERY profitable, immensely successful and still growing at phenomenal level since its inception a decade ago.

 

Why do we want to change the winning formula (i.e. not using aerobridge)?

 

Consumers in Malaysia now have a choice - want to use aerobridge, just fly MH or FY. Habis cerita.

 

If the majority of the public disagrees with the no aerobridge policy, we could have seen a decline in AK's passengers load, but it is not the case at all. Passengers load and numbers are growing exponentially year on year.

Its not very easy to "habis cerita".... because some destinations from KUL only served by AK and its subsidiaries

[flee 5]

non-issue for passengers??? It is for passenger's convenient. Have you not ever heard that customer always right or customer is the boss? And you need to become a realistic person.Not every passengers are aviation enthusiast like you that would love to photograph the aeroplane. I think the best way is, Air Asia should make a survey asking public/passengers whether they want the aerobridges or not. And follow what is the majority's opinion.

Perhaps you did not read my post closely.

 

It is a non-issue becuase:

 

1 There are insufficient numbers of pax complaining for AK to make this a BIG issue.

2 Compare and contrast the issue of D7's non reclining seats - lots of pax complained, so D7 changed the seats in less than 1 year. Must have cost them a lot of money. But if they did not change them, they will even lose more money as no one would want to fly on their planes.

3 Pax are still booking flights from LCCT. If aerobridge was such an issue, no one would want to fly from LCCT. Although pax may not like it, it is still a tolerable thing for them.

4 Customers are always right - that is why they are still rushing to buy tickets each time there is a big sale. AK will be very worried if their pax load declines.

5 I dare say that if there was a survey, there are other aspects of AK that needs to be improved more urgently. Their customer service centre sucks and it is more urgent that they fixed that.

[dean hizudy 0]

well i know that no matter what, AK will still not using the aerobridges. I just voicing out my opinion as a customer/passenger. I know my opinion wont change anything/AK's decision.

I apologize if my previous comments towards you a bit harsh, Flee.

Edited August 2, 2011 by dean hizudy

[flee 5]

Don't stop voicing that opinion! Many have chosen not to fight them - and fly on other airlines. If there are enough complaints, they will respond. So don't give up!

 

Don't worry Dean - this is a forum and we should give allowance for everyone's opinion to be heard!

[Waiping 12]

My first FY flight last month was like my first AK flight on their old B737 about a decade ago - limited food choice, old and somewhat smelly cabin, noisy engines, and during the initial stage was plague by delays. Anyway, my opinion AK is so far definitely better than FY. Not going back to the old low cost traveling again.

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

Construction update as at 27 July 2011. Snapped onboard flight KL 809.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JuliusWong 0]

Is it me or the KLIA2 looks massiveeee!!!O.O

[Fairul 0]

MAR, Awesome photos!! The MTB is in full swing, all the foundations have been completed except the foundation for the skybridge. The apron has started as well. Judging from the 4th pics, the contractor will lay the asphalt anytime soon for the taxiway system.

[KK Lee 5]

Understand TF is unhappy with MAHB on KLIA2, changes is expected as a fall out from the AK/MH share swap deal.

[alberttky 0]

Extra cost justified for aerobridges

 

 

Letters to the edtor

 

I READ with amusement the news that appeared on page 4 of The Star's business section dated 15th July 2011.

 

I understand that KLIA2 is to be a world class airport which is bigger than the current KLIA1 terminal. How could Malaysia Airports or The Department of Civil Aviation or the Ministry of Transport, as the authority and regulatory body, allow AirAsia to dictate terms and conditions on how they want to use the services provided by Malaysia Airports at KLIA2?

 

I would think that busing passengers is only a solution where there isn't enough aerobridges or for aircraft parked at remote bays due to some air traffic congestion, not that AirAsia chooses to park at remote bays just because of the aerobridge charges, where the cost of it need not necessarily be borne by AirAsia in the first place.

 

As stated in the news, it cost less than 25 sen per passenger! While the ongoing tussle is between Malaysia Airports and AirAsia on the use of aerobridges at KLIA2, the unfortunate passengers will be the ones who suffer if aerobridges are not available. I am a frequent traveller and my comments are:

 

I am sure AirAsia or Malaysia Airports will pass on the extra 25 sen to the passengers, which makes little difference to a passenger anyway. When one purchases the lowest price air fare at RM3 or RM3.25, or pay the airport tax at RM25 or RM25.25, it makes little difference to the passenger. Hence, the extra cost here is not the issue.

 

The difference in turnaround time taken to dock or de-dock the aerobridges to/from the aircraft, as compared with using passenger steps (hand push) is negligible. One is motor-driven, while the other is human (hand-push motion). When the operation method is fine tuned between the two, there's little time difference to turn around an airplane.

 

Having used the LCCT many times:

 

l I have seen children running/breaking loose and running around which pose great danger to themselves and to the many ground equipment moving about. Unfortunate accidents are bound to happen, if nothing is done to control this

 

l Passengers walking to the aircraft too are subject to the dangers posed by the many ground equipment moving about

 

l Very often, for the first timer, the old and illiterate passengers are confused as to where and which aircraft they are supposed to board, causing unnecessary delays to flight departure.

 

lInconveniences caused to mobility-impaired passengers, as compared with the conveniences of aerobridges

 

With the aerobridges, passengers will not be subject to a long walk, be exposed to adverse weather conditions to/from the aircraft, endure the pollution, the noise from aircraft and ground equipment engines, and air quality from the CO2 emitted by the various engines.

 

Why should we passengers, who have contributed to both AirAsia's success story be subject to such danger and pollution abuses? With the aerobridges installed, the concerns mentioned above will be eliminated. Is it not contradictory that AirAsia is using the aerobridges at Terminal 1 in Singapore when there is a budget terminal in Singapore where AirAsia's competitors are using? Are there not any cost and turnaround time issues there? I applaud and admire Tan Sri Tony Fernandes who has made AirAsia to what it is today.

 

But let us not forget that without the passengers' continuous support, there is no AirAsia and henceforth, would not have enabled what Fernandes has achieved today.

 

It has always been Fernandes' vision to make AirAsia the world's best low cost carrier, and the airline has achieved it three years in a row.

 

With continuous passengers' support, both AirAsia and Fernandes will continue to achieve more. I guess it is time for Fernandes to try a little kindness and gives a little more comfort back to passengers, and a more secured and greener environment. Please think of airport safety, security and the comfort of the passengers. Please install the aerobridges.

 

Mrs Hooi

 

Selangor

 

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/8/12/business/9283464&sec=business

[alberttky 0]

Disabled group insists on aerobridge at new KLIA2 terminal

 

KUALA LUMPUR: A group of disabled individuals has voiced its strong disagreement with Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd's (MAHB) decision not to install aerobridges at the new KLIA2 terminal.

 

At a gathering held at Bangsar LRT station, they insisted that aerobridges were essential for safe boarding and disembarkation of passengers from all needs groups.

 

Group spokesperson Christine Lee, who is wheelchair-bound, said this held true especially for disabled passengers, those with walking difficulties, senior citizens, children and pregnant women.

 

“MAHB must ensure these facilities are provided and should not compromise at any cost,” said Lee, who is president of the pro-tem non-governmental organisation Barrier-free Environment and Accessible Transport (BEAT).

 

She said they had written a letter dated July 18 to seek an appointment with MAHB managing director Tan Sri Bashir Ahmad to discuss the issue but had received no response.

 

However, Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ) OKU technical committee chairman Anthony Thanasayan said the protest gathering was “premature”.

 

He said MAHB had met the committee and other disabled groups on Aug 15 to discuss the issue and promised to consider their views.

 

He added that he personally did not think it was necessary for the aerobridges as ambulifts could better cater for the disabled.

 

“What's wrong with using ambulifts? Able-bodied passengers don't need the aerobridges,” he said, adding that he was more concerned with the toilet and ramp designs at the new low-cost carrier terminal.

 

Anthony, who also heads the Malaysian Animal-Assisted Therapy for the Disabled and Elderly Association (Petpositive), said the OKU technical committee would be involved in ensuring proper access for disabled passengers at the new terminal.

 

http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/8/20/nation/20110820151632&sec=nation

[BC Tam 2]

To all able bodied people nowadays voicing support for an aerobridgeless KLIA2, bear in mind that advancing years in vast majority of cases come hand in hand with diminishing mobility

[alberttky 0]

Would this be a good compromise between the two??

 

[Rob 0]

Or this?

[Ikman Ikreza 0]

Would this be a good compromise between the two??

 

 

Perhaps MAHB can consider this ramp if no aerobrigde install at KLIA2. MAHB should consider disable people and not only consider AirAsia.

[alberttky 0]

Perhaps MAHB can consider this ramp if no aerobrigde install at KLIA2. MAHB should consider disable people and not only consider AirAsia.

 

The ramp is a ground equipment, therefore it is the ground handling company's responsibility to buy.

[alberttky 0]

KLIA2 takes off

 

SEPANG: Passengers using the KLIA2, when it is completed next year, will walk across a 300m pedestrian bridge to get to the satellite building to catch their low-cost flights.

 

The skybridge, the first of its kind in Asia, is among the unique features of the country's new main low-cost airport that is being built at a cost of RM2.8bil.

 

Expected to be completed in about 13 months, KLIA2 will also have one of the country's largest shopping centres. With 70,000 sq m of shopping space, it may well be the biggest shopping area for an airport in the region.

 

KLIA2 is just 1.5km away from the main KLIA compared to the more than 11km distance between the main terminal and the present LCCT.

 

http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/9/9/nation/9452689&sec=nation

[Rob 0]

I take it that the skybridge is akin to Gatwick's, no? What about connectivity between main terminal and the LCC terminal?

[Mike P 0]

About this skybridge, I bet not even every premium airlines will use the skybridge. I've been to Kunming on MH, and they are not using skybridge, compared to MI and TG.

 

JQ is also not using skybridge when I took my flight from MEL to SIN early this week. I wonder if there was any problem since they use skybridge for flight CHC to MEL.

[dean hizudy 0]

About this skybridge, I bet not even every premium airlines will use the skybridge. I've been to Kunming on MH, and they are not using skybridge, compared to MI and TG.

 

JQ is also not using skybridge when I took my flight from MEL to SIN early this week. I wonder if there was any problem since they use skybridge for flight CHC to MEL.

i guess you already confused the skybridge with aerobridge

[Rob 0]

About this skybridge, I bet not even every premium airlines will use the skybridge. I've been to Kunming on MH, and they are not using skybridge, compared to MI and TG.

 

JQ is also not using skybridge when I took my flight from MEL to SIN early this week. I wonder if there was any problem since they use skybridge for flight CHC to MEL.

 

The skybridge is a physical structure connecting terminals/buildings, the one you mention is an aerobridge/jetway/passenger loading bridge.

[alberttky 0]

Why not aerobridges?

 

 

I ADMIRE Tan Sri Tony Fernandes. Honest, I do. Not for everything he does of course but what he has done to make air travel so wonderfully affordable to such a large cross section of people. No one can ever take that away from him.

 

Not many people gave him much chance of success 10 years ago when he set up AirAsia but when he tweaked the low-cost model with some help from people who had worked with Ryanair, the runaway low-cost airline success in UK, I felt he had a sound model.

 

The focus was obviously costs and advance bookings and payments with next to no flexibility to change flights. The advance bookings brought in cash even before the flight flew up to six months ahead. Rapid expansion ensured the cash rolled in.

 

And the rest was history. AirAsia became and continues to be one of the most successful low-cost airlines in the world and without a doubt the most successful in Asia.

 

But sometimes Tony I shall call him that in this column rather than the cumbersome Fernandes because everybody does can be quite exasperating and his logic, well, stretched a bit. Such may just be the case with aerobridges and AirAsia.

 

Malaysia Airports had announced two years ago that it was building a RM2bil, since increased to RM2.8bil, low-cost carrier terminal (LCCT). The price tag raised many eyebrows, considering that the main KL International Airport was built from total scratch for under RM10bil and the current terminal built for a mere RM108mil.

 

There have been delays (that's a story for another day) but what raised more eyebrows was that this new LCCT would not even have aerobridges, although provisions will be made for their future use. Why, especially since it will cost to make provisions for aerobridges?

 

According to Malaysia Airports, it deferred to the operations of the low-cost carriers, in this case AirAsia and AirAsia X which did not want to use aerobridges so as to more quickly turn around the aircraft and therefore fly more and reduce costs.

 

This is despite the fact acknowledged by Malaysia Airports that many airport operators around the world require the use of aerobridges for the sake of convenience and importantly safety.

 

One thing though is clear cost is not the direct issue with the use of aerobridges. Use of the aerobridge costs just RM85 per time. If you unload 180 passengers and load a like amount, that amounts to less than 25 sen a passenger, Malaysia Airports pointed out. But still it did not require that aerobridges be used. Why?

 

Malaysia Airports answers: “In the case of AirAsia, they had explained that their business model requires a quick turnaround time in order to increase aircraft utilisation. This would then allow them to operate additional sectors in a day and enable them to reduce cost and therefore offer lower fares.”

 

Fine. But could they still not have short turnaround times by using the aerobridges? Can't the operations be tweaked and the airport designed so that they can? And how does AirAsia manage to turn around its aircraft so quickly in places and there are quite a few where they are required to use aerobridges?

 

And isn't Malaysia Airports required to look at the safety and convenience of the passengers using its facilities? Does it not have an immense responsibility to the general public to ensure that where safety and convenience can be improved at reasonable cost, then it should?

 

I have had the pleasure of flying to many wonderful destinations via AirAsia and AirAsia X. I don't mind their seats and their service at all, and even their food is not bad for an airline though Pak Nasser's nasi lemak may have declined in quality over the years and does not look quite the same as on the menu card (I wonder whether there really is a Pak Nasser but that's okay too).

 

But what I do not relish is the long walk (often) to and from the aircraft. Sometimes aircraft taxi deafeningly quite close by. At other times, service vehicles are moving directly across your path, occasionally with little supervision.

 

And try walking down from the aircraft in pouring rain with umbrella in hand, luggage in the other and a driving wind threatening to take you off with your umbrella. That's a pretty hazardous, tricky operation requiring all your aerobatic skills.

 

It is not only inconvenient but dangerous if you are not careful at all times and if you have children with you. Nobody not AirAsia, not Malaysia Airports, not the Cabinet and the Government and not the flying public want an accident. We should act before that happens.

 

Aerobridges will remove totally the chances of any accident caused by passengers being on the tarmac besides the considerable amount of convenience and comfort that it will provide.

 

And here's a suggestion to reduce any financial burden to AirAsia. I think I speak for a lot of customers when I say we do not mind paying RM2 for the aerobridge. AirAsia can build this into its fares without anyone so much as murmuring anything about it.

 

What difference would it make? Considerable to AirAsia. If it and its sister airline AirAsia X fly 20 million passengers into and out of the LCCT, the difference to the bottom line is RM35mil (subtract 25 sen in costs to get RM1.75 net per passenger and multiply by the number of passengers) in pure incremental profit.

 

That should easily offset any setback AirAsia will face from an increase in the turnaround time.

 

Common Tony, sit down with Malaysia Airports and work it out such that your turnaround time will be little affected. I am sure you can do it! In fact even as the Cabinet is deciding on the question of using the aerobridges, upstage them by announcing a deal with Malaysia Airports that you are going to.

 

Surely the Cabinet has better things to do than to intervene in such matters. And think of how much happier your customers will be and how many more of them will fly with you after you give them aerobridges.

 

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/9/10/business/9461291&sec=business