KLIA Topics - Master thread needed?

[JuliusWong 0]

Possible twist to MAHB’s KLIA aerotrain award saga

https://theedgemalaysia.com/node/684526

THERE could be surprises in the award of the RM742.95 million Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) aerotrain contract by Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB), sources familiar with the matter tell The Edge.

In a nutshell, while market talk has it that three out of the four companies that failed to secure the contract at end-2021 had placed their bids last Monday, there is a possibility of the project reverting to the original winners — Pestech International Bhd and France’s Alstom. IJM Corp Bhd is now in the picture, as it is in the midst of taking control of Pestech.

MMC Corp Bhd in a consortium with CRRC-MRT and Mobilus Sdn Bhd; Malaysian Resources Corp Bhd (MRCB) in a joint venture (JV) with South Korean rolling stock outfit Woojin Industrial Systems Co Ltd; and SMH Rail Sdn Bhd in a standalone proposal, are understood to have put in bids to MAHB to complete the aerotrain project. Another shortlisted candidate — Hartasuma Sdn Bhd in partnership with Austrian company Doppelmayr Seilbahnen GmbH — is said to have opted out.

It is worth noting that MMC initially partnered Japan’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, and MRCB was tied to Leitner-Poma of the US. While MMC’s reason for ditching Mitsubishi Heavy Industries is not known, MRCB and Leitner-Poma had parted ways as MAHB was not keen on their pulley system.

Hahahahha......Malaysia Boleh yo!

[flee 5]

I can foresee that this aerotrain issue is going to go on forever as there will be improper or non existent maintenance after the new system is installed and commissioned.

KLIA lacks strategic planning. Does anyone know what MAHB's long term plans for KLIA are for the next 10 years? 

[kandiah k 0]

I wonder if Malaysians can or cannot manage big projects 😁

[KK Lee 5]

Aerotrain is a scaled down lrt or mrt train set. Technology and suppliers are well established. Noise in airside is almost irrelevant to environment.

[Craig 0]

Seems like quite a few interesting diversion to KUL (from SIN) this evening due to weather. 

NZ 284 from AKL (B789), CZ 3039 from CAN (A320), LH 790 from MUC (A359), SQ 319 from LHR (A380), 6E 1013 from DEL (A320), LX 176 from ZRH (B77W), 5J 805 from MNL (A321), and AK 717 returned to base. MH 605 flew for 1:52 to SIN!! I am curious what happens if crew timed out at KUL. LX, LH, NZ are still on the ground as we speak.

[Craig 0]

All except NZ has left for SIN. NZ canceled their SIN-AKL tonight (along with the planned KUL-SIN). I guess they are spending the night in KL tonight.

[KK Lee 5]

2 hours ago, Craig said:

Seems like quite a few interesting diversion to KUL (from SIN) this evening due to weather. 

NZ 284 from AKL (B789), CZ 3039 from CAN (A320), LH 790 from MUC (A359), SQ 319 from LHR (A380), 6E 1013 from DEL (A320), LX 176 from ZRH (B77W), 5J 805 from MNL (A321), and AK 717 returned to base. MH 605 flew for 1:52 to SIN!! I am curious what happens if crew timed out at KUL. LX, LH, NZ are still on the ground as we speak.

No wonder LH 350 was at satellite remote bay at about 20:20hr just now.

[Craig 0]

2 minutes ago, KK Lee said:

No wonder LH 350 was at satellite remote bay at about 20:20hr just now.

Google said it was gate A11 for LH and A10 for LX 😬 but I doubt that's right because A11 can't fit an A350.

[JuliusWong 0]

1 hour ago, Craig said:

Google said it was gate A11 for LH and A10 for LX 😬 but I doubt that's right because A11 can't fit an A350.

Aren't A10 and A11 domestic gates? LX 176 was a B77W HB-JNG 320pax and LH 790 was A359 D-AIXN 293 pax assuming both were full flights. That's 613 pax in total. I am not sure if they are allowed to disembark if they did, that departure lounge would have been full.

FR24 is showing LX 176 landed at KUL at 6:00 PM and departed for SIN at 9:42 PM; LH 790 landed at 5:05 PM and departed at 9:19 PM. Someone caught D-AIXN being pulled to the terminal but not sure which one.

LX 176 from ZRH (B77W) HB-JNG

LH 790 from MUC (A359) D-AIXN

NZ 284 from AKL (B789) ZK-NZM 

SQ 319 from LHR (A380) 9V-SKQ

Edited November 20, 2023 by JuliusWong

[Craig 0]

8 hours ago, JuliusWong said:

Aren't A10 and A11 domestic gates? LX 176 was a B77W HB-JNG 320pax and LH 790 was A359 D-AIXN 293 pax assuming both were full flights. That's 613 pax in total. I am not sure if they are allowed to disembark if they did, that departure lounge would have been full.

FR24 is showing LX 176 landed at KUL at 6:00 PM and departed for SIN at 9:42 PM; LH 790 landed at 5:05 PM and departed at 9:19 PM. Someone caught D-AIXN being pulled to the terminal but not sure which one.

Passengers at a diverted airport aren't usually allowed to disembark and will remain on board. I think Google got it wrong. I've seen a few diversions at KUL before and they are usually at the C remote gates (or if A/B piers are used, then it'll be a remote stand there too). 

It looks like NZ will spend some time at KUL. Scheduled departure is now 02:55 22 November. Seems like crew timed out or they encountered a mechanical issue. Parked at gate C35 when pax were allowed to disembark. Today's NZ283/284 (AKL-SIN-AKL) is canceled due to aircraft in KUL.

[JuliusWong 0]

1 hour ago, Craig said:

Passengers at a diverted airport aren't usually allowed to disembark and will remain on board. I think Google got it wrong. I've seen a few diversions at KUL before and they are usually at the C remote gates (or if A/B piers are used, then it'll be a remote stand there too). 

It looks like NZ will spend some time at KUL. Scheduled departure is now 02:55 22 November. Seems like crew timed out or they encountered a mechanical issue. Parked at gate C35 when pax were allowed to disembark. Today's NZ283/284 (AKL-SIN-AKL) is canceled due to aircraft in KUL.

That is my understanding as well for diverted flight they are usually not allowed to disembark, mainly due to immigration restriction. If that was indeed the case for LH 790 and LX 176, those three to four hours at remote stands must be the longest three-four hours in their life. As for NZ, this diversion would have a wide spread knock on effect on their entire operation since NZ is running very short of capacity. Some B787 flight may be swapped to their recently-added ex-CX B77W ZK-OKU. ZK-NZM is now filed to depart from KUL to AKL tomorrow. Those pax could have been rebooked to travel to SIN via MH or SQ today early morning.

[Izanee 0]

Doesn’t make any sense to me, they can come out at least into the gate area or even a atellite building as they don’t need to cross immigration. At least let them stretch their legs and get walk around or even buy some food at the satellite building. 
 

 

[JuliusWong 0]

2 minutes ago, Izanee said:

Doesn’t make any sense to me, they can come out at least into the gate area or even a atellite building as they don’t need to cross immigration. At least let them stretch their legs and get walk around or even buy some food at the satellite building. 

It depends on the airline policy and the airport protocol. Satellite Terminal yes, they can since they are enclosed holding room but domestic gates are not allowed since it is not an enclosed sterile area. And the need to recheck security prior to boarding again will be a nightmare.......0.0

[KK Lee 5]

It seems mahb still couldn't understand ergonomic. Security check at boarding gate remains inefficient.

[Craig 0]

21 hours ago, KK Lee said:

It seems mahb still couldn't understand ergonomic. Security check at boarding gate remains inefficient.

They can never change this now. At least without major modifications, like building another level for arriving pax or bussing all arriving pax to a centralized area for processing. 

[Pall 0]

38 minutes ago, Craig said:

They can never change this now. At least without major modifications, like building another level for arriving pax or bussing all arriving pax to a centralized area for processing. 

Or move security to current customs check point after immigration. Just like other major airports. 

[Robert 0]

On 12/13/2023 at 3:25 PM, KK Lee said:

It seems mahb still couldn't understand ergonomic. Security check at boarding gate remains inefficient.

Changi T1-T3 has a similar issue which is compounded by lack of staffing from time to time. Having queued for extended time at LHR security and many time at KLIA immigration for between 1 and 3 hours Im not confident that KLIA would manage it correctly.  

 To install a central security check you need to separate in and outbound passengers which isn't possible without rebuilding the terminal

Personally I would leave the system as it is and enhance the staffing and efficiency of the gate checks. New tech is available which allows you to leave laptops in bags as well as liquids. Having to take off belts is also a PITA.

[BC Tam 2]

42 minutes ago, Robert said:

... Having to take off belts is also a PITA.

And on the off days when your unlucky stars are in perfect alignment with the sun and all planets, that part of one's anatomy would be revealed in all its naked glory - presumably one would also then risk apprehension for mooning the security personnel 😁

[Craig 0]

To be fair, this allows you to maximize your time outside the gate area (be it at the lounge or restaurant, or duty free shops). Just show up at the gate 5 minutes before scheduled closing time to clear security and you’ll be good. But of course if everyone does this, then our flights will all be delayed like MH 🌝

22 hours ago, Pall said:

Or move security to current customs check point after immigration. Just like other major airports. 

You are forgetting arriving international pax. The area at the current customs checkpoint (which is absolutely useless, all they do is chat with each other and not even look at the screens) is too small for a centralized security check. Queues during peak hour will go all the way beyond immigration. 

[Pall 0]

6 minutes ago, Craig said:

You are forgetting arriving international pax. The area at the current customs checkpoint (which is absolutely useless, all they do is chat with each other and not even look at the screens) is too small for a centralized security check. Queues during peak hour will go all the way beyond immigration. 

Have you seen how HKG, BKK, DEL, BOM, CGK and other major airports in this region manage this issue using same floor space area?  

Edited December 15, 2023 by Pall

[Craig 0]

39 minutes ago, Pall said:

Have you seen how HKG, BKK, DEL, BOM, CGK and other major airports in this region manage this issue using same floor space area?  

I have been to all 5. Mind is a little blurry on DEL, BOM, CGK as I haven’t been back in a while. 
 

For HKG and BKK, you arrive at the lower level. Head over to one of the security check points, clear security and theb head back up the departures level. It cannot be done at the C/H/G gates at KUL. Unless we decide that everyone who arrives at KUL is “clean” so they may all just enter the sterile (post-security) area. 
 

And we don’t have a large enough space at the customs checkpoint to do a central security. HKG BKK has at the very minimum 2 different security check points prior to entering the sterile area. Their 1 area is as large as, if not larger, than our current customs check point with lots of room behind for queues, if necessary. 

[Kee Hooi Yen 0]

1 hour ago, Craig said:

I have been to all 5. Mind is a little blurry on DEL, BOM, CGK as I haven’t been back in a while. 
 

For HKG and BKK, you arrive at the lower level. Head over to one of the security check points, clear security and theb head back up the departures level. It cannot be done at the C/H/G gates at KUL. Unless we decide that everyone who arrives at KUL is “clean” so they may all just enter the sterile (post-security) area. 
 

And we don’t have a large enough space at the customs checkpoint to do a central security. HKG BKK has at the very minimum 2 different security check points prior to entering the sterile area. Their 1 area is as large as, if not larger, than our current customs check point with lots of room behind for queues, if necessary. 

I did transit once at CGK Terminal 2 many years ago. From my vague memory the arrival at CGK was at lower level and back up to departure at upper level via something like a “back door” staircase (I don’t know how to describe it 😅), and it was barricaded. Upon checking our boarding pass and passport by a security there, we were free to go upstairs into departure level without any scanning. Not sure if this has changed since then.

KUL has the security screening at the gate area, similar to SIN. I always find this setup is very inefficient in terms of resources. However it may be convenient for transiting pax, especially those with very short layover time. Upon disembark from the plane, they can head straight to the gate for next flight without the need to walk to the centralised security and walk back to the gate area.

 

 

Edited December 15, 2023 by Kee Hooi Yen

[Craig 0]

On 12/15/2023 at 2:45 PM, Kee Hooi Yen said:

KUL has the security screening at the gate area, similar to SIN. I always find this setup is very inefficient in terms of resources. However it may be convenient for transiting pax, especially those with very short layover time.

Less cost to build (only 1 level is required, same train service etc.), but more cost to operate, X-ray machines, metal detector, staff manning gates. But you are right - it's very convenient for transit pax and for any pax who is doing a turnaround. 

[KK Lee 5]

19 hours ago, Craig said:

Less cost to build (only 1 level is required, same train service etc.), but more cost to operate, X-ray machines, metal detector, staff manning gates. But you are right - it's very convenient for transit pax and for any pax who is doing a turnaround. 

KUL T1 was designed and built more for aesthetic rather than operation efficiency.

[Sandeep G 1]

Tbh - the layout is ok - but the second satellite plans in their original form would make it a bit messy.. but if they were to redesign the sections between the two satellite terminals and integrate them (including "rejigging" the standalone Aerotrain Maintenance Building), they could make it work with even more gates on the Southern side (narrowbodies/MARS). The current airside access way and roundabout may need to be sunk  a little further to permit building/apron operations atop - but doable. Only consideration/issue is where the existing fuel line infrastructure resides in the sub-soil. And ofcourse, unlike T2, they should not stinge on the Rigid Pavement for aircraft stands/aprons.