Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Are Southeast Asia's Hub Airports Sustainable?  
User currently offlineGneissGuy From Singapore, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 200 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4311 times:

3 major hubs now in Southeast Asia, BKK, SIN and KUL. Strong competition from Hong Kong as well.

I was just wondering, given the current outbound and inbound traffic, is the Southeast Asian market large enough to sustain the 3 major hub airports? Or will we see some consolidation in the future? Who will survive and who will lose out? And what are the roles of the respective national carriers (and fifth freedom rights) in the success of hub airports?

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4306 times:

Is KUL a serious hub? I always thought that SIN had larger through traffic?


"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5610 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 4275 times:

Quoting GneissGuy (Thread starter):
I was just wondering, given the current outbound and inbound traffic, is the Southeast Asian market large enough to sustain the 3 major hub airports

Those three airports are not just SE Asia hubs. They are also hubs for Oz, NZ and the South Pacific to Europe, India & the Middle East. For example QF hub their Oz-Europe operations there. They are also hubs for North Asia - Africa traffic. Oz/NZ, SE Asia, India & North Asia all have economies that are currently doing very well. Barring something major, I think all three can coexist. Having said that I do think that KUL is the shakeist of the three, partly because BKK is a Star Alliance hub, HKG is a One World hub and SIN is both.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offline9MMAR From Malaysia, joined Jul 2006, 2107 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4202 times:

Good day All,

I would say sustainable. Or perhaps more than enough, given Thailand's new Suvarnabhumi will replace BKK.

KUL is indeed very much under utilised. It was built with several strategies, trying to lure some big players from SIN among others, but somehow it is still can not be considered as a hub, yet.

IMHO, should MH joins Skyteam as a full member, then perhaps we may see some changes in KUL.


User currently offlineGr8Circle From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 3092 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4193 times:

High time that India developed a strong hub of its own.....the future BOM airport plan is the only glimmer of hope in this respect.....

Let's face it...SIN, and maybe to a lesser extent, BKK and KUL, all benefit tremendously from the high density India - US traffic.....and this is solely due to the fact that airports in India do not offer adequate connections and facilities to cope with the traffic....


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4496 posts, RR: 72
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4138 times:

GneissGuy, a warm welcome to airliners.net. I hope you'll have a good time here.

Quoting GneissGuy (Thread starter):
3 major hubs now in Southeast Asia, BKK, SIN and KUL. Strong competition from Hong Kong as well.

I would say that of these 3 airport, SIN is likely the strongest in terms of overall hub function. The home to Singapore Airlines, Changi airport also features the BA/QF minihub as well as a very popular transit port for countless airlines.

BKK, on the other hand, is different in that it is not only a traditional transit point and the home of Thai Airways - although a lot is to be said about TG's connectivity - but also the main gateway to Thailand, which remains a magnificent tourism attraction pole.

KUL has joined the hub game later and is suffering to attract additional business, and I believe it will never be able to equal the likes of Changi. Yet, interestingly, KUL seems to be more successful in the LCC market segment. That has of course a lot to do with Air Asia's overwhelming presence at KUL, but at the same time, one cannot deny that fact that, apart from the homegrown LCCs, Singapore has been doing all it could to avoind LCC operating into Changi.

All in all, I believe all three airport are sustainable, for sure given the tremendous growth potential in the region, yet I believe that KUL will never be able to attain the grandeur as a hub for major international longhaul travel that SIN has been enjoying.


User currently offlineGneissGuy From Singapore, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 200 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 days ago) and read 4089 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 5):
GneissGuy, a warm welcome to airliners.net. I hope you'll have a good time here.

Thank you!

Whilst SIN has tremendous 5th and 6th freedom traffic, it does lose to BKK in terms of inbound visitors....


User currently offlineGneissGuy From Singapore, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 200 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 days ago) and read 4075 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 1):
Is KUL a serious hub? I always thought that SIN had larger through traffic?

Well, they always claimed to want to be one..........

Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 3):
KUL is indeed very much under utilised. It was built with several strategies, trying to lure some big players from SIN among others, but somehow it is still can not be considered as a hub, yet.

Yes, i've been there on transit late at night and the place looks like a ghost town - but a very nice and modern one also!


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4496 posts, RR: 72
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4031 times:

Quoting GneissGuy (Reply 6):
Whilst SIN has tremendous 5th and 6th freedom traffic, it does lose to BKK in terms of inbound visitors....

As I said, that is because of the fact that BKK is the main gateway to Thailand's phenomenal tourism infrastructure. I am pretty sure that BKK could do better as a hub as well, yet that would take some major effort on the part of TG to clean up its schedules and increase connectivity. Right now by looking at its schedules, it seems TG is doing everything to avoid connecting passengers.

Quoting GneissGuy (Reply 7):
Well, they always claimed to want to be one..........

That is/was of course Dr. M. at his heydays... He was the one who pioneered the idea that Malaysia was to have the biggest, tallest, greatest, largest, you name it, is just about every domain. And this came KLIA, an gigantic airport with no flights to cater for.

Quoting GneissGuy (Reply 7):
Yes, i've been there on transit late at night and the place looks like a ghost town - but a very nice and modern one also!

Strangely enough, late at night is kind of a the busiest time of the day at KLIA. Anyone who regularly passes through that airport can testify that it is a ghost town at virtually any time of the day. Nevertheless, Air Asia seems to be bringing quite a bit of life to the new Low Cost Terminal. Too bad, one has to go on a scenic tour of KLIA and surroundings to reach the damn thing.


User currently offline9MMAR From Malaysia, joined Jul 2006, 2107 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3949 times:

I have to disgaree on the followings:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 5):
yet I believe that KUL will never be able to attain the grandeur as a hub for major international longhaul travel that SIN has been enjoying



Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 8):
And this came KLIA, an gigantic airport with no flights to cater for.

KUL was designed to be used for the next 100 years. It is a very long period. So it is very wrong to say that KUL will never be able to attain the function as a hub that SIN has been experiencing. KUL's progress relates very much to Malaysia's economy and of course MH as the main player at the airport. Although Malaysian economy can be said as progressive (although somewhat stagnant post crisis), MH is in its worst position since 1990s. It was when MH has done with its Business Turnaround Plan, then hopefully they will start to expand once again. This will have direct effects to KUL. As AK is making tremendous progression as the region's biggest LCC, KUL is set to become a hub, although with a title as an LCC hub first.

KUL is Malaysia's answer to SIN. It is true that is was built to lure some of the big players from SIN as Malaysia is relatively more competitive in term of cost compared to Singapore. Quoting the case of Port of Tanjung Pelepas in Johor (slightly off topic), it was built to rival Singapore's port. And it succeed in getting Maersk, BMW and some big players to left Singapore port. KUL is expected to repeat the same feat. The day will come someday.

In 20 years or so, Malaysia is hoping to have a population of 70 million (to ensure smooth running of Dr. M's inspired Vision 2020) and with that amount of population to serve, KUL is set to be an airport what it is envisaged to become.

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 8):
late at night is kind of a the busiest time of the day at KLIA. Anyone who regularly passes through that airport can testify that it is a ghost town at virtually any time of the day.

I think it is untrue. The busiest time of the day at KUL is between 0600 to 1000. It is not a ghost town at day time most definitely.

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 8):
one has to go on a scenic tour of KLIA and surroundings to reach the damn thing.

One doesn't have to go to KUL's main terminal building in order to get to the LCC terminal. Just go straight away to the LCC terminal from your point. Unless you are from the main terminal building. KUL's LCC terminal is not a damn thing. It is the home of AK and it worth MYR 108 million to say the least.


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4496 posts, RR: 72
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3833 times:

Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 9):
So it is very wrong to say that KUL will never be able to attain the function as a hub that SIN has been experiencing.

The only thing everyone and his uncle can currently conclude it that KUL has spectacularly failed to lure international carriers of standing away from SIN. That is despite the huge incentives, which are bordering a shameless policy selling out.

Sure, KUL has been able to attract a plethora of flights from the Middle East, but those airlines would have come anyway, and the likes of EK and QR have meanwhile also built on their presence in BKK and SIN and have made those two airports more important transit points than KUL. But the stated intention of luring traffic away from neighboring SIN and BKK. So, no BA, no AF, and most notably, no American carriers for KUL.

Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 9):
KUL is Malaysia's answer to SIN.

And a completely unnecessary answer, at least in its current form, if you ask me. Driven by an illusion - some will call it a vision - of greatness and grandeur and an obsession with any initiatives set up by arch rival Singapore.

Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 9):
One doesn't have to go to KUL's main terminal building in order to get to the LCC terminal. Just go straight away to the LCC terminal from your point. Unless you are from the main terminal building. KUL's LCC terminal is not a damn thing. It is the home of AK and it worth MYR 108 million to say the least.

I wouldn't advise anyone, though, to try and embark on the arduous trip from KLIA's main terminal to airport's low cost terminal, because although KLIA absolutely needed a Skytrain - just like Singapore - to reach the completely unnecessary and redundant remote terminal, nobody has apparently come to the bright idea of extending that thoroughly underused train line to the low cost terminal, which is located at spitting distance from the remote international terminal.

As such, international passengers arriving at KLIA and wishing to continue their trip on Air Asia shall be treated to a 30 to 45-minute scenic tour of the airport and its surroundings at rip off taxi rates. There is a shuttle bus, but it's all but impossible to be found and it's not free either. Unlike Singapore, for once.


User currently offlineMAS747 From Malaysia, joined Mar 2004, 88 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3809 times:

HB-IWC Said

" nobody has apparently come to the bright idea of extending that thoroughly underused train line to the low cost terminal"


by that i assume you mean the KLIA Express?

i really doubt that it is "thoroughly underused", everytime i've been on it in the past year or so, the train carriage has been reasonably full, and by that i mean at least 50%, and to me, i do not call that thoroughly underused.. (journeys have been at a variety of times, from 6am, 11am, 3pm, 5pm, 9pm, 11pm)


HB-IWC Said
"The only thing everyone and his uncle can currently conclude it that KUL has spectacularly failed to lure international carriers of standing away from SIN. That is despite the huge incentives, which are bordering a shameless policy selling out. "

would you mind expanding upon the huge incentives?



And To continue upon your statement about the shuttle bus

this is taken from the LCCT website

) Public Buses
Public bus services are available to/from KL Sentral, KLIA Main Terminal Building, Pekan Salak Tinggi, Pekan Sepang, Pekan Banting, Salak Tinggi ERL Station and Nilai KTM Komuter Station.



Destination (MTB - LCCT - MTB)
Pick Up / Drop Off
MTB : Platform No. 8, Bus Station
LCCT : Bus Station RM1.50 - one way
Schedule : First trip / Last Trip
MTB : 5.30am / 12.10am
LCCT : 5.55am / 12.35am

Frequency : Every 20 minutes


It is not that hard to follow the signs (in multiple languages i might add) to the stated Platform No. 8 at the Main terminal building

and for that paltry sum of RM1.50, which is about 0.40 US dollars at todays rates, i dont see much complaining to be done with prices like that...


And also, HB-IWC, if i may ask, what are your views on the LCCT that lead you to say that it is unnecessary and redundant? i dont disagree with you, i somewhat agree with you, as the land the LCCT is built on was originally designated for something else.. cant remember what it is now, and i cant find the masterplans online...

But this is a good discussion, but lets not turn it into a Malaysia v Singapore thread, we have enough A v B threads and the like on this forum, lets remain civilized.


User currently offlineGneissGuy From Singapore, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 200 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3802 times:

Can i say that it is because of Malaysia's geographical location (in between two major hubs, BKK and SIN) which has resulted in its relatively less success than the 2 other hub airports?

Or would you think it has more to do with government and aviation policies (e.g. restricted open skies in Malaysia)?

IMO, i think the Malaysian government has invested heavily and wisely into the construction of KLIA, but it could be a case of "too late" given the established statuses of BKK and SIN as major hubs in the region.


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4496 posts, RR: 72
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3759 times:

Quoting MAS747 (Reply 11):
by that i assume you mean the KLIA Express?

Nope, I was referring to the little train that runs between KLIA's main terminal and the remote international terminal. As I find this terminal redundant, so is the train line, but now that it's there, why not extend it to the low cost terminal.

As for the very existence of the remote terminal, linked by this 'Skytrain' - or whatever it's called - I know for a fact, that the Malaysian Government absolultely insisted on having such a remote terminal and connecting train just because Changi has something similar between its two main terminals.

Quoting MAS747 (Reply 11):
would you mind expanding upon the huge incentives?

I was working for an airline that was visited by delegation from KLIA and some of the incentives offered were reduced landing and terminal fees, with discounts up to a full hundred percent depending on the commitment the airline was willing to make. The airline I am talking about decided to stay in SIN. Other incentives included government sponsored office space in down town KL and assistance in marketing programs to convey the transfer from SIN to KUL to the general public.

Quoting MAS747 (Reply 11):
lets remain civilized

You may not agree with my points of view, but I don't see anything uncivilized in this discussion so far.


User currently offline9MMAR From Malaysia, joined Jul 2006, 2107 posts, RR: 18
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3693 times:

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 10):
nobody has apparently come to the bright idea of extending that thoroughly underused train line to the low cost terminal, which is located at spitting distance from the remote international terminal.

The LCCT was built on a rather ad hoc basis. KUL was designed and constructed in the mid 1990s. I think there is no parcel of land in its masterplan dedicated for an LCCT. At that time AK is not as what the present AK is. Back then, AK is also a full service airline with 2 Boeing 734s. The Malaysian Government was not aware that LCC will become a hit and its homegrown AK will become the region's biggest carrier in that market segment.

When AK business expanded, they wanted to operate from SZB, Malaysia's former gateway but since the government insisted on turning KUL into a hub, that is when AK was asked to operate from KUL, in the main terminal building. AK, given its different business concept has been complaining about a rather high cost to operate in KUL main terminal.

When Singapore announced its own LCCT in SIN, AK suggested that KUL also needs an LCCT, to be AK's home which really fit its business operation and structures. Given historical (ecomonic) rivalry between the two countries, the government approved the plan to build up an LCCT in KUL on a fast track basis. The construction is very fast, it managed to overtake SIN's LCCT and opened 2 days earlier than SIN's LCCT, thus becomming Asia's first LCCT.

The Skytrain was design to ferry passengers to the international Satellite Terminal. A passenger has to depart from the International departure area to get access to this train. Even the domestic passengers at the main terminal building can not access it (unless you are on transfer). If the Skytrain line is going to be extended to the LCCT, an entirely new departing system has to be introduced, i.e. the passengers to LCCT will not distrupt the movement of passengers to the Satellite terminal. A lot of matters have to be considered, immigration and safety being the most crucial. Very difficult although seems possible.

On the other hand,

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 10):
As such, international passengers arriving at KLIA and wishing to continue their trip on Air Asia shall be treated to a 30 to 45-minute scenic tour of the airport and its surroundings at rip off taxi rates. There is a shuttle bus, but it's all but impossible to be found and it's not free either. Unlike Singapore, for once.

is a very good point to ponder as AK will take the bulk of MH's domestic operations. There will be a high number of international passengers who will be connecting to other point in Malaysia from KUL using AK. They may face some problems in getting to the LCCT.

Quoting GneissGuy (Reply 12):
Can i say that it is because of Malaysia's geographical location (in between two major hubs, BKK and SIN) which has resulted in its relatively less success than the 2 other hub airports?

A good point as well. However, IMHO, it is not because of the location. It is more on the function of Malaysia and what brings the people around the world to come to Malaysia. Singapore has a world class financial district in its center, luring a lot of business passengers. Malaysia on the other hand is not the regional base of these major, world leading financial houses and institutions. Malaysia's progress in this particular subject is mediocre.

Thailand is attracting a huge number of tourist to its beautiful country, luring a lot of leisure passengers. Malaysia on the other hand, is somewhat mediocre as an international tourist destination as well.

Should Kuala Lumpur one day, become an important financial center and Malaysia as a whole becomming a top international tourist destination, the approximate location between BKK, KUL and SIN will no longer be an issue. People will fly to their desired destination straight away. And believe me, the Malaysian government is working very hand to achieve this objectives. The Multimedia Super Corridor and the Visit Malaysia Year 2007 being some significant examples of the government seriousness in luring more people to come to Malaysia.

Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 13):
I was working for an airline that was visited by delegation from KLIA and some of the incentives offered were reduced landing and terminal fees, with discounts up to a full hundred percent depending on the commitment the airline was willing to make. The airline I am talking about decided to stay in SIN. Other incentives included government sponsored office space in down town KL and assistance in marketing programs to convey the transfer from SIN to KUL to the general public.

Are you referring to the airline that you are presently work for? I am surprise they turned down the offer, given the airline's financial and performance background.


User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2011 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3686 times:

I used the KUL LCC terminal for an Air Asia flight recently, I took the bus from Sentral station, which was fine. It does seem strange to an outsider having such a remote facility to the flashy main terminal, it's almost like another airport!

It seems to me that KUL is a less popular longhaul stopoff point than SIN or BKK (which is a reflection on the relative attractions of the cities perhaps...), but has gained enormously from the growth of Air Asia



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4496 posts, RR: 72
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 day ago) and read 3604 times:

Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 14):
Are you referring to the airline that you are presently work for? I am surprise they turned down the offer, given the airline's financial and performance background.

No, it was a European airline.


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4496 posts, RR: 72
Reply 17, posted (8 years 23 hours ago) and read 3561 times:

Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 14):
Are you referring to the airline that you are presently work for? I am surprise they turned down the offer, given the airline's financial and performance background.

The fact remains that despite a wide range of incentives to lure a number of airlines of some standing, KLIA didn't succeed in attracting a single one. To the contrary, they are about to lose OS and its 12 weekly frequencies.

That leaves KLM, which has firmly established itself at KUL through its cooperation with MH. Lufthansa was supposed to come back nonstop, but that has still failed to materialize, as even for next winter KUL is only served at a 4 weekly tag on to the airline's main FRA-BKK route.

In short, the efforts and incentives to lure major European and North American companies away from SIN and BKK and into KUL have dramatically failed to achieve any results.


User currently offlineCloudyapple From Hong Kong, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 2454 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (8 years 22 hours ago) and read 3512 times:

Quoting GneissGuy (Thread starter):
Strong competition from Hong Kong as well.

A quick count will tell you Hong Kong has by far the most number of daily air traffic movements:

Hong Kong 800
Bangkok 730
Singapore 560
Kuala Lumpur 490



A310/A319/20/21/A332/3/A343/6/A388/B732/5/7/8/B742/S/4/B752/B763/B772/3/W/E145/J41/MD11/83/90
User currently offlineCHANGYOU From Singapore, joined Nov 2003, 268 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 18 hours ago) and read 3453 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Am wondering how much impact is affecting SIN as a hub in SEA as we see big airlines like NZ/SK/OS terminating their service into SIN? What do you think will become of SIN in the future if the fuel prices continue to rise and threats from hubs like HKG/DXB?

User currently offlineRyanair!!! From Australia, joined Mar 2002, 4742 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (8 years 13 hours ago) and read 3392 times:

Am wondering how much impact is affecting SIN as a hub in SEA as we see big airlines like NZ/SK/OS terminating their service into SIN?

How will it affect SIN? Almost nil effects if you ask me. Reputations aside, many of these airlines cannot make a profit bercause they are, after all, up against one of the most successful and profitable brands - SIA.

With the exception of LH, QF and BA, I really wonder about how profitable are the rest of the European carriers than fly here? NZ held on for this long but decided to pull the plug, SK's one stop service to CPH (compared to SQ's nonstop), and OS suicidal venture down under (competing against SQ's multiple frequencies).

Next on the line, I assume would be LX one stop service to ZRH. That service has never been profitable since SR's era due to it's inablility to attract premium traffic and the one stop in BKK is really unattractive for business travellers. Why dont they want to try a nonstop to compete against SQ is anyone's guess. Not enough planes to operate ZRH-SIN / ZRH-BKK at the same time? Does not make economic sense to send 2 planes to Asia? Reasons can be plenty.

Many slam KLIA for its existence. But lets all not forget that would you rather have Subang represent Malaysia as a capital's airport? Won't be long before the control tower catches fire - AGAIN!



Welcome to my starry one world alliance, a team in the sky!
User currently offlineGneissGuy From Singapore, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 200 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 10 hours ago) and read 3332 times:

Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 18):
A quick count will tell you Hong Kong has by far the most number of daily air traffic movements:

Hong Kong 800
Bangkok 730
Singapore 560
Kuala Lumpur 490

Yes but Hong Kong is not in Southeast Asia........


User currently offlineGneissGuy From Singapore, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 200 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 10 hours ago) and read 3327 times:

Quoting CHANGYOU (Reply 19):
Am wondering how much impact is affecting SIN as a hub in SEA as we see big airlines like NZ/SK/OS terminating their service into SIN? What do you think will become of SIN in the future if the fuel prices continue to rise and threats from hubs like HKG/DXB?

Interesting point, but do these carriers contribute a sizable amount of passengers who transit in SIN? I'm not so sure.......... Besides, many of the pax can still get to where they want to go via codeshare agreements which are plenty in this region


User currently offlineHB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 4496 posts, RR: 72
Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 hours ago) and read 3295 times:

Quoting Ryanair!!! (Reply 20):
Next on the line, I assume would be LX one stop service to ZRH. That service has never been profitable since SR's era due to it's inablility to attract premium traffic and the one stop in BKK is really unattractive for business travellers. Why dont they want to try a nonstop to compete against SQ is anyone's guess. Not enough planes to operate ZRH-SIN / ZRH-BKK at the same time? Does not make economic sense to send 2 planes to Asia? Reasons can be plenty.

I hear you, but Swissair tried nonstop Singapore frequencies before (ZRH-SIN-CGK and ZRH-SIN-SGN) and the route was never in the black. The main problem there was the nonstop didn't go daily so higher yielding traffic still preferred to use the daily SQ nonstop and that there were performance issues with the MD11s that were deployed at the time.

But I agree that the BKK-SIN tag is unlikely to be viable and there have been whispers that it was to be cut. I doubt whether LH would allow LX to try another venture with a nonstop SIN operation. Such a flight would have to be daily to stand any chance as an alternative to SQ, and LX just doesn't have the equipment - more that one airframe needed - for such a venture. We'll see how long LX will last in SIN.

All of this begs the question about the commitment of SQ as a Star Alliance partner. One would expect some kind of cooperation between SQ and LX. Yet nothing seems to be happening. When SK recently gave up its BKK-SIN tag, it embarked on a code share between SIN and BKK with LX and not SQ. SQ's commitment to Star seems tenuous at best.


User currently offlineJetdeltamsy From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2987 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 hours ago) and read 3280 times:

As Malaysia and Thailand each have huge populations, I think their viability as hubs is pretty strong.

Singapore is kind of like Amsterdam. Relatively small population but an airline that enjoys a remarkable reputation, thus drawing passengers from throughout the world.

I think Hong Kong will always be one of the largest air transportation centers in Asia. There is just too much of an economy there to be without major, international hub operations.



Tired of airline bankruptcies....EA/PA/TW and finally DL.
25 9MMAR : Precisely. KUL is relatively a new airport compared to SIN. It is just neutral for a less than 10 years old airport to experience such hiccups, as KU
26 Changyou : Although with the termination of NZ/SK/OS into SIN might benefit SQ but on the other hand the loosing end will be Changi. Seems that these airlines ra
27 BOMboy : I agree, in fact with increasing numbers of non-stop flights from more destinations directly into India will decrease the number of passengers transi
28 Vincewy : I'd say the more the merrier, all 4 (HKG,BKK, KUL, and SIN) will have markets of their own. In fact, there may be a couple more in the future (SGN, MN
29 Ryanair!!! : Such a flight would have to be daily to stand any chance as an alternative to SQ, and LX just doesn't have the equipment Even if LX were to go daily o
30 MH1402 : Another facts I see is that IMHO unlike SIN, KUL can be expand till twice of its current capacity. I believe at some point SIN will run out of land to
31 9MMAR : Should everything goes according to the plan, it will be realised in 5 years time. 2 years to get the 2 governments' approval and the related land ac
32 Airbus Lover : 9MMAR, It is already year 2006 and at the population growth rate, do you really think we will have 70 million by 2020? Wawasan 2020 is of course a gre
33 Ryanair!!! : Mentality and ideology needs a fresh start in Malaysian government, political group and all related entities, including many of its citizens. In my o
34 Carpethead : Answer to your question: Yes. We have just only started scratching the surface when more people will have the standard of living that allows more air
35 Fw1504 : Malaysia's current population is 26 million. There's no way that its going to reach 70 million by 2020 - less 14 years from now. Thailand's populatio
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Hub Airports posted Mon Jul 31 2006 09:18:24 by MPDPilot
Hub Airports That See Only One Airline posted Sat Apr 15 2006 21:01:52 by Mozart
Troubled Airlines' Impact On Hub Airports posted Thu Aug 25 2005 17:00:16 by BigGSFO
Usage Fees At Hub Airports posted Thu May 20 2004 00:01:39 by Cory6188
Old Hub Airports posted Wed May 5 2004 17:58:25 by Swaluvfa
How Are Passenger Number Calculated @ Airports? posted Thu Nov 27 2003 22:04:24 by EA777
Which U.S. Carriers Have Rights To Southeast Asia? posted Fri Mar 22 2002 22:38:45 by Bigmo747
US Non-hub Airports With Most VIP Clubs posted Tue Oct 30 2001 19:09:56 by Zrs70
Which Are The Most Expensive Airports To Land On? posted Thu Jun 28 2001 10:27:07 by TOMASKEMPNER
Least Favorite Hub Airports posted Tue Jun 12 2001 07:08:29 by YoungDon