Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Sign in to follow this  
Naim

KLIA Masterplan

Recommended Posts

dont think it'll be a reality...just like the plans to turn SZB terminal 1 into a convention centre many years ago - Ground breaking by Dr Mahathir, demolition of terminal 1 and in the end nothing was built because MAB couldn't raise RM1bn for the project (as a result KL Convention Centre was built).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will all the runways have the same 4km length like the current 2?

 

If it will be... how big is KLIA going to be? 4++ km wide and more than 8km long?

 

It probably big enough so that we dont need Subang anymore huhuhu....

 

let demolish Subang to the dust bit by bit... hehehe

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello everybody I am all for KLIA to expand as Changi is just taking off and KLIA can not be left behind right?

 

Changi already taken off and established as a major air transport hub decades ago (probably pre-dating back to Seletar days even) KLIA is still having to lure new customers with offers of "free this & discounted that" - even then most 'majors' are not biting.

 

Harsh reality is, KLIA has already been left way way behind. But then this issue has been more than adequately covered elsewhere before :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

agree with BC Tam, Changi is at least 20 years ahead of us. we were left behind ages ago - most of the international routes were given away to singapore at the time of MSA splitting. Singapore WAS OUR main hub. when it became a different country, we were left with simpang airport.

 

singapore was the major port and centre of commerce. KL was a shithole. no one wanted to fly to KUL.

 

in the 80s - KUL had 27 airlines serving it. SIN already had 50 or more ...including Air Canada, air seychelles, air france, air niugini, CAAC, interflug, tarom, alitalia, NW, UA, olympic etc etc etc.

 

we missed the boat by a few years. after the financial crisis etc etc - India/China opened up and ALL airlines were rushing to fly there. KULs offers of free landing fees etc etc where peanuts compared to the opportunities there to make a killing.

 

we are just a little too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
agree with BC Tam, Changi is at least 20 years ahead of us. we were left behind ages ago - most of the international routes were given away to singapore at the time of MSA splitting. Singapore WAS OUR main hub. when it became a different country, we were left with simpang airport.

 

singapore was the major port and centre of commerce. KL was a shithole. no one wanted to fly to KUL.

 

in the 80s - KUL had 27 airlines serving it. SIN already had 50 or more ...including Air Canada, air seychelles, air france, air niugini, CAAC, interflug, tarom, alitalia, NW, UA, olympic etc etc etc.

 

we missed the boat by a few years. after the financial crisis etc etc - India/China opened up and ALL airlines were rushing to fly there. KULs offers of free landing fees etc etc where peanuts compared to the opportunities there to make a killing.

 

we are just a little too late.

 

Agreed with BC and Izanee. Just to add a bit to Izanee's comment. Before the split of MSA, the Malaysian government wanted to focus on domestic route, while Singapore wanted to focus on International route. The two different directions and ideology eventually caused the split of the MSA into two airlines. The international route were probably not "given" to SQ, but it may have always been with Singapore in the first place. During the 1960-70s, Singapore was already more developed than the newly established Malaysian capital, Kuala Lumpur. For example, last year, I went to the library and manage to refer to Air New Zealand's route map published in the mid-1960s, the map showed that Air NZ had already started flying into SIN.... KUL is not even on the map yet. That demonstrated Singapore was a more important destination in South East Asia since the day of being a colonial outpost.

Edited by S V Choong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mushrif, not everyone understands what a masterplan is ;)

 

This grand masterplan is only showing the full fledge development if there is a need to it. The whole masterplan won't be developed at one go, more likely to be developed under a few staged development.

 

Yes, some components of a masterplan may not even see the light of day. Hey, I hope the solitary 'east-west' runway at KLIA may not materialise, otherwise I may planes flying over my future house. :-) - see 'old' masterplan here:

 

800px-KLIA_Masterplan.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, some components of a masterplan may not even see the light of day. Hey, I hope the solitary 'east-west' runway at KLIA may not materialise, otherwise I may planes flying over my future house. :-) - see 'old' masterplan here:

 

800px-KLIA_Masterplan.jpg

 

Thanks for showing us the old masterplan Naim. I really like the 4 crucifix satellite building as it read like a whole development. No doubt the mirror terminals will pick up a different architectural style and if the architecture design of the future terminal be really sympathetic to the existing KLIA terminal, everything will read cohesively rather than piece by piece add-on like the awful London Heathrow and to some degree Singapore's Changi terminals. My 2 cents at the end of the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what MAB need to expand is their security screening checkpoints between the immigration & the aerotrain stations.

And also bring back foreign carriers usage of the MTB

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, some components of a masterplan may not even see the light of day. Hey, I hope the solitary 'east-west' runway at KLIA may not materialise, otherwise I may planes flying over my future house. :-) - see 'old' masterplan here:
I think that solitary E-W rwy is only for take-offs to the West.
MAHB need to do sumthing with their satellite building, so boring........
MAHB did say that some major renovations will be done to the retail areas in 2008. This wwas delayed to avoid disruptions to service during VMY 2007.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Satellite terminal add distance between the gate and check-in counter/baggage reclaim conveyor i.e. time and cost, is unsuitable for a hub. Unless the satellite terminal concept is modified (e.g. to a complete terminal), KUL is always at disadvantage to compete with SIN or BKK.

 

:drinks:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
..... everything will read cohesively rather than piece by piece add-on like the awful London Heathrow .....

But it does have its unique charm attributable to the mumbo-jumbo hotpot ! I believe CDG is another place where variety in building designs is apparent ?

At the other extreme I suppose would be our KLIAConsult "inspired" sterility, particularly over here in Sabah/Sarawak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But it does have its unique charm attributable to the mumbo-jumbo hotpot ! I believe CDG is another place where variety in building designs is apparent ?

At the other extreme I suppose would be our KLIAConsult "inspired" sterility, particularly over here in Sabah/Sarawak

 

Difficult to put down in words, but there is this cohesiveness in CDG... For example, the two D shapes building divided by the roading in between two terminals at Terminal 2. But not the same with terminal 1. Yes on a larger scale, CDG is rather confusing.

 

Copying of architectural style from one to another probably means cutting design time and saving construction cost. Not the best solution if one is to place emphasis on a bit of local style and character ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Satellite terminal add distance between the gate and check-in counter/baggage reclaim conveyor i.e. time and cost, is unsuitable for a hub. Unless the satellite terminal concept is modified (e.g. to a complete terminal), KUL is always at disadvantage to compete with SIN or BKK.

 

:drinks:

I disagree with this. If the airport is big enough, a singular terminal will result in very long walks. Try connecting planes when their gates end up from one extreme end to the other! I rather have a train to take me there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree with this. If the airport is big enough, a singular terminal will result in very long walks. Try connecting planes when their gates end up from one extreme end to the other! I rather have a train to take me there.

 

Comparing T2 of SIN and KUL, both have similar capacity. SIN T2 last bag on belt is 20 minutes and minimum transit time is 40 minutes. KUL first bag on belt is 20 minutes and idea transit time is 2 hours.

 

Average distance between gates and bag sorting area at KUL is much longer than SIN, KUL needs longer time for everything. By design, KUL is at disadvantage to be a hub.

 

:drinks:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Comparing T2 of SIN and KUL, both have similar capacity. SIN T2 last bag on belt is 20 minutes and minimum transit time is 40 minutes. KUL first bag on belt is 20 minutes and idea transit time is 2 hours.

 

Average distance between gates and bag sorting area at KUL is much longer than SIN, KUL needs longer time for everything. By design, KUL is at disadvantage to be a hub.

 

:drinks:

Isn't the baggage handling system that's at fault here instead of the design of a satellite terminal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree with this. If the airport is big enough, a singular terminal will result in very long walks. Try connecting planes when their gates end up from one extreme end to the other! I rather have a train to take me there.

A big single terminal does result a long walk, example IAH! Took me forever to get to the gate from security check, the airport authority introduced rail system, but that doesn't seem to help much thou. I like KLIA design, it's big, original, and of course the best part of KLIA is the train ride! That's my entertainment if I'm bored :drinks:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Michael

Who knows what will happen as Malaysia is full of surprises including its architecture people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I see on this impression: http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/3644/img7579yl1.jpg

Cowboy town stays alife? :clapping:

 

the cowboy town is exactly on the site of the new LCCT..so no more cow boy town....the cluster of building that u see behind the 2nd?3rd?MTB is supposed to be part of the MAHB new complex.. ( the empty lot around KLIA mosque )....u can see the photo by BAIM below ..there's even a golf course next to the runway..ala the old BKK....as far as I know, so far, only soil investigation have started for the new MAHB complex....and knowing MAHB, I'm not surprised if the project doest take off at all...... ( rumors going around saying insufficient budget for this project)

 

 

57964117co9.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the cowboy town is exactly on the site of the new LCCT..
It will take ages for AK taxi to and from runway 15R/33L. Guess AK will need to add 5 to 10 minutes to their block time. :drinks:
A big single terminal does result a long walk, example IAH! Took me forever to get to the gate from security check, the airport authority introduced rail system, but that doesn't seem to help much thou. I like KLIA design, it's big, original, and of course the best part of KLIA is the train ride! That's my entertainment if I'm bored :drinks:
Satellite terminal and sky train at KUL was designed to impress leisure travellers. :drinks:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For KLIA to become as big (or nearly busier), it needs to attract airlines to set up KLIA as a hub. As of now, only MAS, AK, and D7 made the airport as their hub. KLIA management needs to attract new airlines and for already established airlines to switch their hubs from SIN/BKK/HKG into KUL.

 

Currently, Jetstar Airways and Jet Airways do express interest to choose a hub within SEA (KUL, BKK, SIN, SGN). No words yet on their final say, but I must say, KLIA has not done enough to help attract them or switch them into KUL. Between these two, it is a very low chance they'll choose KUL:

  • Jetstar may not choose KUL as that would mean competing directly against D7. (Jetstar/Qantas hates competitors).. So they are most likely going to choose SGN as their partner, pacific airlines's hub which is in SGN
  • Jet Airways may choose SIN as currently they have more frequency into SIN. But we'll never know.
  • Do I miss anymore?
Yes, many middle-eastern airlines fly to Malaysia, they may be good contenders in terms of making KUL as a hub.

 

As for other airlines who chose SIN/BKK over KUL, they are very comfortable where they are and have never shown any sign in changing their ground. It needs this to happen before KUL can become a hub. From the look at our state currently, it may never happen. Sigh. :sorry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...