KLIA2 - New Mega Low Cost Carriers Terminal

[Mike P 0]

Remember the havoc when KLIA just opened back in 1997 or 1998? Cant remember? Thing like this bounds to happen. Not only just Malaysia, but it happened also to Singapore Changi Airport new terminal, London Heathrow new terminal, Bangkok airport, and the list go on. The only way is to minimise the problem and shorten the lead time to solve it, a so called backup plan.

[BC Tam 2]

If I remember correctly, the worst amongst that handful of 'mega' airports to come online during those couple of years back then was Chep Lap Kok

Wonder if lessons learned (if any) from those disasters have been used to fortify the testing and commissioning processes nowadays

[Mohd Azizul Ramli 2]

Interested with the new ATC tower being constructed at KLIA2. I assume the design will not be identical to the existing Lumpur Tower. Will it be higher than BKK's tower to enable KUL to clinch back 'the world's tallest ATC tower' title lost in 2007?

[Chan Wai Jun 0]

Interested with the new ATC tower being constructed at KLIA2. I assume the design will not be identical to the existing Lumpur Tower. Will it be higher than BKK's tower to enable KUL to clinch back 'the world's tallest ATC tower' title lost in 2007?

 

From the web,it stated the height will be 93M tall for second control tower..

[michgyver 0]

 

[Syukri 0]

No runway in sight....yet.. Delivery scheduled within next six month..

[alberttky 0]

No runway in sight....yet.. Delivery scheduled within next six month..

 

Malaysia boleh brudder!

[flee 5]

Actually, MAHB has gone on record to say that the third runway will only be ready 6 months after the KLIA2 opened. As such, all aircraft departing KLIA2 will still need to use existing runways. That may mean that aircraft will have to taxi further.

 

That is probably why Airasia is now studying the costs very carefully:

http://www.btimes.com.my/Current_News/BTIMES/articles/20121008000543/Article/index_html

[Syukri 0]

Is the extra ditance for taxi really significant? IMHO the current dispersal is not very close either.. Say they land at 32L, they need to taxi pass the cargo terminal, go around the lcct ,near to 32R runway already.. I think its just the matter of turning left or right.. But if landing at 15L would be disastrous hehe..

[Kee Hooi Yen 0]

Will AK charge for taxi fee ?

 

Btw, there is a light grey line leads to the MTB direction presumably ERL extension ?

Edited October 8, 2012 by Kee Hooi Yen

[V Wong 0]

I am not sure where to place these, but it makes interesting insight into TF :

 

http://www.relax.com...ge_AirAsia.html and http://www.relax.com...ut_a_hitch.html

 

how he struggled to fight MAHB re: passenger service charge back home.. then praising its low charges in Bangkok...

Edited October 9, 2012 by V Wong

[alberttky 0]

Is the extra ditance for taxi really significant?

 

It may not be that significant on a per flight basis, but when you consider the number of flights they operate per day, those figures can add up to exorbitant figures.

[Amirul Mazlan 0]

Curent landing and take off at KUL have benefited AK mostly. Most of the times, in 12 months, i'd say 8 months the landing would be on 32L and 32R and departure is 32R. Departing from 32R only required short taxi to A11 or A10, MH have been taxying to A11 or A9 from MTB which is quite a distance and never complaint. Now that MAHB is building a new runway next to his KLIA2 terminal that might get completed few months from initial operating date of KLIA2 and they already trying to make a big fuss about it.

 

Landing 32L and taxying to LCCT is much shorter than landing on 32R before going off on A5 then back to LCCT.

 

The most economical for AK would be take off 32R and land 14L.

 

But TF can't have all things come into play the way he always want it. Why not build his own airport and a terminal parallel to the runway so after pushback they can roll straight into take off position and off they go. He has to accept things for now and charge passenger for extra taxi if he wants it. Dont remind me of their Labu plan. Everyone knows it's conceived to pile pressure on Gov and MAHB for speedier completion date of KLIA2 and not to put aerodbridge there so that his competitor wont have a choice (Tiger, Cebu Pacific, Airphil, Lion, Malindo).

[flee 5]

You cannot compare LCC operating model with that of a legacy carrier.

 

LCCs are like supermarkets - pile them high, sell them at low margins, but sell a LOT of them. So every element of cost has to be managed because it does not have fat margins to play with.

 

With AirAsia, costs are always monitored closely and not allowed to escalate. Costs can add up if you overlook it - so don't underestimate the impact of taxiing costs on LCCs like Airasia.

 

Aircraft manufacturers are looking at fitting electric motors to aircraft so that the engines need not be powered up while aircraft is taxiing. Airports are also looking at towing systems that can tow aircraft right to the runways. Efficiencies are there to be gained if one looks hard enough at the problem.

 

Over the course of a financial year, the additional costs can come up to millions of RM. So, please don't pooh pooh the additional costs of having to taxi further.

 

As for MAHB helping Airasia - here we go again. People can't seem to accept that it is not a case of MAHB or Airasia benefitting from MAHB or vice versa. Why can't both of them benefit from each other's activities? That is what we call synergy, isn't it? 1+1= >2.

 

The fact is Airasia will benefit from a good main hub. Another fact is that had Airasia not been successful, KLIA will more or less be a white elephant, a ghost airport as it carries about 50% of pax in and out of KLIA.

 

The two largest airlines that operate out of KLIA are Airasia and MAS. It is therefore in MAHB's interests that these two airlines are offered every assistance to become successful. If they are successful, then MAHB stands to profit. MAHB must always remember that they are the anchor tenants.

[Cheng Long 0]

The low cost model says prime airport location, short taxiing distance, dedicated runway, etc etc, all for dirt cheap fee if not no fee at all, as the airport costs can be covered by tenants' rental.

 

Air Asia is ruthless when it comes to controlling cost, which is good thing. I feel MAHB and Air Asia can cooperate a bit more, but MAHB must be fair to their other customers as well.

[flee 5]

I think MAHB must definitely pay attention to what Airasia Thailand and Airasia Indonesia is doing at DMK and CGK. Airasia Malaysia can always move its main hub to DMK and CGK and turn KUL into a virtual hub, if costs are not to their expectations. We can see that they are managing rather well in SIN, another high cost airport.

[Isaac 0]

We can see that they are managing rather well in SIN, another high cost airport.

It's way better in SIN because it uses aerobridge there

[Mike P 0]

It's way better in SIN because it uses aerobridge there

 

I bet to differ, I think passengers are too used of SIN's luxurious fare and taxes and that's why it works.

[flee 5]

So there you go - Airasia can make do with running its major hubs in DMK, SIN and CGK - if things do not work to their favour in KUL. They will only need to night stop a few of their planes in KUL for some of the early morning departures.

[Isaac 0]

I bet to differ, I think passengers are too used of SIN's luxurious fare and taxes and that's why it works.

Air fare ex-Malaysia were very expensive too. And Tiger Airways wasn't using any aerobridge in SIN until they moved to T2 just very recently. Besides, Air Asia Group of airlines were using aerobridge in BKK too. Now that they have moved to DMK, not sure if this is still the case.

[dean hizudy 0]

doesnt matter..thats why we need another low cost player in this country..then we will see how

[flee 5]

Yes, then we can see if the new LCC player can thrive using the new KLIA2. We will get an answer one way or another. Competition is usually good for the consumer.

 

So MAHB must bear that in mind. It is also competing with the megahubs of the region, CGK, BKK and SIN.

[flee 5]

Check out Tony Fernandes' thoughts about competition in the aviation industry:

http://www.malaysianwings.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=12631&st=460&do=findComment&comment=314390

[Waiping 12]

Maybe a few small victory here and there has made TF a difficult person to handle. Maybe he feels that he can get what he wants at a fraction of what he needs to pay overseas. Aerobridge for example.

[flee 5]

Maybe a few small victory here and there has made TF a difficult person to handle. Maybe he feels that he can get what he wants at a fraction of what he needs to pay overseas. Aerobridge for example.

Well he has to start with his home country first before he pushes for those things elsewhere. His argument is stronger if he can prove that his business model is already working well at home.

 

Do note that he is getting good response from the Japanese airport authorities. So maybe his "carrot" of bringing in more passengers to boost tourism in those countries is working.

 

Airasia Japan seems to be doing well. Launching flights to Korea:

 

TF Tweet:

Arriving in seoul now to launch airasia japan flights to korea tomorrow and day after. Amazing how fast we are growing