Hypothetical: Subang instead of Sepang

[H Azmal 0]

Just had this idea:

 

 

What if the authorities had decided to extend Subang rather than build the new one at Sepang? How feasible is the attached design (from technical, financial POVs)?

 

My 'proposed' idea would be to extend the cargo area - yellow blocks are pax terminal buildings (terminal 4), red line are runways (18-36 and 9-27).

 

Looking forward to your opinions and ideas.

 

LEGEND:

Yellow block: pax terminal (new)

Orang Block: pax & cargo terminal (new)

pale yellow line: underground transit (rail)

R - transit stops

Edited June 24, 2006 by H Azmal

[S V Choong 4]

Looks to me the current green area behind MAS maintainance facility is a hilly area. The end of the "new" runway would encroach two residential area, subsequently with more compensation for claiming their land. Also unsure about the approach from both runway, needs to check if any buildings in the way.

 

If you propose to bulldose the hill to a flat land, from an urban design point of view it is a no no situation. Bulldozing ain't cheap either and you need to figure out where to dump the earth. The total embodied energy involved in moving the earth is high and you will probably end up generating more energy. Many of our housing area in Malaysia in the past have been unsympathetically bulldoze into flatlands by those money hungry developers. We could have preserve at least the natural landscape and contour of our natural area. Look at the area of Subang and USJ just as an example, it has been raped by these money hungry developers.

 

My 2 cents worth.

Edited June 24, 2006 by S V Choong

[Seth K 3]

IMO, extend the Subang will be a waste of money. In fact, it's near the resedential area

Why don't make one at KLIA instead? Can increase traffics and money and good for our spotters Someone mention in a thread earlier, MAS also has to waste fuel by flying back and forth for maintainence. Isn't the residents of Subang strongly oppose this idea?

[TW Teo 0]

Wouldn't the approach for Runway 33 and Runway 36 cross? Is that possible?

 

Subang / USJ could use a underground transit system though...

[S V Choong 4]

Wouldn't the approach for Runway 33 and Runway 36 cross? Is that possible?

 

Subang / USJ could use a underground transit system though...

 

Anything is possible with a bit of money But as far as resource and money is concern, it is better spend on KLIA than Subang.

 

But in reality, it will go against the governmental policy as they are establishing KLIA to be the aviation hub. Developing Subang will slow the plans. Plus KLIA is catering for KL, Seremban and Melaka combined, whereas Subang is more for KL. I believe the establishment of Putrajaya and KLIA is to divert traffic load off KUL central.

 

Just wondering, what really is the future of Subang.... is it going to be dead or just purely a Transmile base?

 

No offence intended or what-so-ever, Azmal My 2 cents worth.

[H Azmal 0]

Nah...no worries S.V. ... I suppose because there were no review and scrutiny in most of the projects in this country and abroad that a lot of them turned into white elephants.

 

Cheers!

 

[KK Lee 5]

 

Originally, Subang airport had lots of reserved land for 2 runway and further expansion. Sepang was not a necessity.

 

The decision taken to develop Sepang instead of Subang was to make some people very rich;

1. Reserved land at Subang was sold for development and golf course.

2. Construction of Sepang, highway, etc generate income for contractors.

3. Usage of highways between KLIA and KL generate more income for concession holder.

4. Land near KLIA was ‘parcelled out’.

 

At the end, tax payers and travellers are paying for these expensive exercises. While our competitors are getting more competitive and we are adding more layers and cost to our daily life. Hence, Malaysia have not seen much investment, innovation, advancement since 1997.

 

 

[Shu Sheng 0]

a nice proposal...i totally agree...

but from the urban and planning view... the location of sepang is better...

i think one of the main reason y government want to shift the airport is they r trying to shift people from the congested kl n klang valley area...

[S V Choong 4]

But was Subang originally designated to have two runways?

 

Just hope that KLIA will not end with the same fate as Subang... We still have 3 satellite and 1x MTB to build.

[KK Lee 5]

But was Subang originally designated to have two runways?

 

 

Yes. Enough Land was gazetted for two runways.

[Sandeep G 1]

any politician will tell you that "urban sprawl" is the main reason as to why SZB was never expanded to remain as KUL.. However, we all know money politics is rife and a few billion bucks was spent (and made) in the process of shifting to Sepang..

 

However, Subang was already a nightmare.. the surrounding hills make it a further problem and the amount of development aroudn the airport (in part due to the sale of airport land) was crazy.. Sepang was needed and is ultimately a good move!! Of course now we hope that history doesn't repeat itself again (which inadvertadly seems to always happen in Malaysia) and in 30 years time, Sepang is faced with the same problem as Subang... maybe in 100 years or so, we will have moved KLIA soooo far south that it eventually will be merged with Changi (SIN) and then we don't have to complain about the competition anymore hehehe