Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Asia Pacific Needs More LCC/LCCTs  
User currently offlineVincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 1
Posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3352 times:

I came across a few articles and found them interesting

http://www.airway.com.tw/T2002ShowAn...i178&y_HrefId=14228&y_KindId=43679

In a few brief words, it says LCCs in Asia are pushing for developing more LCCTs as there're needs for more no-frill services, many passengers don't mind basic/no amenities, walking to the planes instead of bridge, etc as long as fares stay low.

another article (AirAsia is planning to build another LCCT in Penang)

http://www.airway.com.tw/T2002ShowAn...i178&y_HrefId=14228&y_KindId=43836

"AirAisa is looking at building second LCCT in Northern Malaysia, currently, all passengers have to go through KLIA to get to the north and vice versa, openning up hub will provide more direct links to other points in Indonesia, Thailand, China, and Eastern Malaysia from Penang (most likely) rather than going through KLIA"


the challenges, read this article (Asian LCCs struggling due to high oil cost and increased competition)

http://www.airway.com.tw/T2002ShowAn...i178&y_HrefId=14228&y_KindId=43738

To translate briefly, 5 years ago when AirAsia surfaced, many neighboring states followed suits with their own LCCs, however, the cost of oil have more than doubled since 2001, lack of airports slots, high fixed costs, and governments' reluctance to embrace LCCs, many predict 2007 will be even tougher for LCCs to survive.


My opinion (others are welcome): So far the only good example is Malaysia, where MH are unloading all the loss making domestic/regional routes to AirAsia, AirAsia will transform these services into no frill since the mass population don't mind the basic services.

There's definitely a need for LCC in almost all countries, but they need to develop secondary airports, rather than traditional gateways (HKG, SIN, TPE), I've checked Jet Stars' TPE-SIN fares and they aren't much cheaper but with far more limitations/contraints than SQ/BR/CX/CI.

Other than KUL, most of the aforementioned airports will eventually run out of slots, the alternative will be:

SIN - Johor Bahru, and also high speed rail to Malaysia
MNL - Clark
HKG - Macau, Shenzhen
TPE - TSA (high speed rail will free up some slots in TSA, but in the long term, at TPE, perhaps build Terminal 3, and tear down or reconfigure Terminal 1 into LCCT)

As mentioned earlier, there're still a lot of cities/islands lacking viable, convenient air services (ie Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia), LCCs will be the solution.

24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCentrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3598 posts, RR: 20
Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3298 times:

In all of Asia we need more LCCs.

I love flying the full fare carriers but on flights like Japan-Korea or Japan-Eastern China, LCCs would be nice. NH and JL have cut back on service on some on those flights but they are still pricey. $300 for a 90 minute flight served by JL, NH, KE and OZ. NH plans to start a new LCC in the next few years.

We have the new LCC based in Kitakyushu but it only serves HND. It has plans for more airports in Japan and the region. The big airlines still have too much of a hold to make it happen here.

Japan could never have LCCTs, no land.



Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
User currently offlineCXA330300 From South Africa, joined May 2004, 1560 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 3283 times:

LCCTs would be a challenge in some of the traditional gateways (NRT, HKG, TPE, and SIN come to mind) due to the lack of land. HKG is already building a satellite terminal IIRC for expansion.

However lower fares would be nice.................



The sky is the limit as long as you can stay there
User currently offline9MMAR From Malaysia, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 2107 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3220 times:

Quoting Vincewy (Thread starter):
"AirAisa is looking at building second LCCT in Northern Malaysia, currently, all passengers have to go through KLIA to get to the north and vice versa, openning up hub will provide more direct links to other points in Indonesia, Thailand, China, and Eastern Malaysia from Penang (most likely) rather than going through KLIA"

From my reading AK is not going to build an LCCT. They are in the final process of deciding whether to use PEN or AOR, both in the northern part of Peninsular Malaysia as their 4th hub. This hub will served the northern part of Peninsular Malaysia as well as Southern Thailand. PEN is an international airport, served by SQ and CX. AOR, Alor Setar is a domestic airport, in the capital state of Kedah. Rumours are spreading that AOR may be chosen.

AK opened its second hub in BKI in June, followed by its 3rd in KCH in July.


User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4775 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3142 times:

Quoting Vincewy (Thread starter):
MNL - Clark

Clark would be a welcome development. It already sees limited use as a diversion/alternate airport and package shipment point. It would decongest MNL as passengers bound for northern/central Luzon no longer need to go down south to Manila and suffer backtracking up again. The parallel runway project terminated for convenience when the base closed could be revived. The problem with it is not land but inadequate infrastracture to support an LCC hub there - and the Philippine government does not have the werewithal to see those through. The North Rail Project is still years away from completion and the NLEX component not one would expect of a major artery. There is also the issue of convincing LCCs to operate there instead of crowded MNL, and the spectre of Mt. Pinatubo permanently hanging in the air. Though I would love to see it becoming reality and having E170s or ATR425s to fly on instead of the beat-up Let 410s, DHCs and DC-9s.



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineVincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3122 times:

Quoting CXA330300 (Reply 2):
LCCTs would be a challenge in some of the traditional gateways (NRT, HKG, TPE, and SIN come to mind)

I've talked about this earlier, LCCs can't compete with legacy carriers in Far East through traditional gateways because:

1. Can't add frequencies since those airport slots are limited.

2. Cost per seat mile is actually higher when you use 737/A320, compared to legacy carriers all using wide bodies.

3. Fixed costs are high (pilots, landing charge, oil), cutting corners won't make significant difference on fares.

4. There're enough customers willing to pay more for frills under current capacity, with slot/capacity constraints at major Asian airports, airlines have no incentives (nor need) to lower fares to compete.


Just like Ryan Air, LCCs will use secondary airports, perhaps more time getting to airports (ie: ferry to Maucau from HK)


User currently offlineCXA330300 From South Africa, joined May 2004, 1560 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3108 times:

Quoting Vincewy (Reply 5):

Just like Ryan Air, LCCs will use secondary airports, perhaps more time getting to airports (ie: ferry to Maucau from HK)

Then why are two large LCCs headquartered at SIN, Oasis HK Airlines hubbing in HKG, and TPE and HND both have LCC service?

LCCs don't just stick to little airports. AirTran operates from ATL, EZY out of LGW, B6 out of SLOT-CONSTRAINED JFK, and many LCCs have obtained slots and started operations from the ever-congested LGA.



The sky is the limit as long as you can stay there
User currently offlineCentrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3598 posts, RR: 20
Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks ago) and read 3087 times:

CXA330300 you are right.

Now NRT is highly slot restricted so it is out, but HND, is adding an extra terminal and a runway. NH is starting a LCC in the next few years to offer service to many parts of Japan, Korea and some major places in China. We also have Starflyer from Kitakyushu operating to HND but has plans to expand to ITM, CTS, ICN, PUS, Jeju, OKA, NGO, and a few other locations.

In Japan, the airports that could see massive LCC would be FUK, Kita Kyushu, and CTS. Most residents in FUK will fly to Korea for quick vacations as it is closer than Tokyo. Having cheap quick transport is good.



Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2940 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3070 times:

We have LCCs in Asia, it call the back section on any widebody flying within Asia. One can fit the similar number of 737/A320 class Y-seats, so who needs LCCs and even get a meal and drinks in the process. While I am for more deregulated markets and all, but I wish the types like Ryanair to stay out of Asia. I could careless for meals on short-haul flights but paying for even a cup of water, no sunshades, no backpockets, etc. is too far.

In domestic Japan, we already have a pseudo-LCC in the form of NH & JL. No meals except in premium-class and free drinks only if you ask the F/A.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 7):

I would hardly call Starflyer, a LCC. Their fares maybe low in comparison to JL on the HND-KKJ route, but they have very generous seat pitch (much, much more than NH or JL), powerports, and PTVs. For example, Starflyer configures its A320 for only 144 pax in an all-Y seating, in contrast to NH seating 166 in all-Y. I don't know any other A320 operator worldwide that has less than 144 seats in an all-Y config. Most LCCs generally seat the max. capacity of 180 in the A320.


User currently offlineCXA330300 From South Africa, joined May 2004, 1560 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3067 times:

Quoting Carpethead (Reply 8):
Most LCCs generally seat the max. capacity of 180 in the A320.

B6 seats 156 in its 320.



The sky is the limit as long as you can stay there
User currently offline9MMAR From Malaysia, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 2107 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3026 times:

Quoting CXA330300 (Reply 9):
B6 seats 156 in its 320.

Really? That's very generous of them. The legroom must be above average then. AK seats 180 pax in their A320s.


User currently offlineCXA330300 From South Africa, joined May 2004, 1560 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3021 times:

On some trunk routes (NRT-HKG, HKG-BKK, BKK-SIN, BKK-MNL) isn't there de-facto cheap flights with fifth freedom flights?

Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 10):
The legroom must be above average then.

32-34 inches. Just like MH.



The sky is the limit as long as you can stay there
User currently offlineVincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2969 times:

Quoting CXA330300 (Reply 6):
Then why are two large LCCs headquartered at SIN, Oasis HK Airlines hubbing in HKG, and TPE and HND both have LCC service?

LCCs don't just stick to little airports. AirTran operates from ATL, EZY out of LGW, B6 out of SLOT-CONSTRAINED JFK, and many LCCs have obtained slots and started operations from the ever-congested LGA.

LCC fever has just started in SIN, as mentioned earlier, there're challenges ahead and there'll be some shakeout in the next few years with only 1 or 2 dominant players. IMO most LCC flights will need to go in/out of Johor Bahru eventually. The current LCCT is very small and limited in growth.

Oasis isn't really LCC, but low fare airlines, they'll offer meals and basic frills on board, again, they haven't really started but given the current low fares offered by VS and BA out of LHR (Oasis go into LGW) I doubt they can stay below what BA and VS offer unless they don't mind losing money forever. One solution will be Air Madrid model where you charge exorbitant amounts for foods on board, ie $25 for a sandwich.

The only LCC flight out of TPE is Jetstar, TPE-SIN, again, their fixed cost is high and the timing of flight is horrible, after checking the rates online with taxes, it's only marginally lower plus you have to pay for drinks on board.

US airports, compared to Asia, is far from slot constrained, if airlines in US increase the size of fleet (737 to 767, 767 to 777/747) in all areas of operation and reduce frequencies, that perceived problem will be solved right away.


User currently offlineMandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6760 posts, RR: 76
Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2940 times:

Is there a need for more LCC in Asia? Yes and No... Here's the case in Indonesia...

1. Passengers claim that first and foremost they want cheap fares.
2. Passengers don't mind a no frills service at first... but they eventually get bored.
3. The formerly "elite" group of passengers will stay with the full fare airlines... but with reduced levels of service for airlines to stay competitive with the LCCs, they have to endure less service, and now share the cabins with the "plebs".
4. Eventually, the industry attracts the "annoying pax"... which is the ones who want to pay the least but refuse to accept the lower service... When they're in a minority that's OK... but when you start having >5% of your pax like that, it brings a lot of bad publicity.
5. Pax don't mind walking to their aircraft... Well here, apart from a few airports, they will have to walk to the aircraft anyways. And NO ONE likes to walk to the aircraft in the rain... LCC or not.

Is there a need for (more) LCCTs in Indonesia? No...
What we need is more apron space and more terminal floorspace. The situation is such that the slot constraints here are lack of parking space.

anyways, back to the LCCs....
In Indonesia, despite almost everyone claiming to be an LCC, the only true LCC style operations are Indonesia Air Asia and Garuda's Citilink... Only Garuda is the proper Full Service Carrier... The rest is a confused bunch unable to make up their mind which end they want to go to.

Why does that happen?
Again, pax want the lowest fare but not the lowest service, and yes, they're pretty vocal about it. It quite frequent for a cabin crew to say to a pax "Sir, if you want a hot meal, you should fly Garuda next time," only to be replied with "But I want a hot meal now and on your flight." Again, when you get 1 or two of these people in your flight it's OK, but when you start getting 5 of them out of 125 pax EVERYTIME, you know something's wrong... What's needed is passenger education.

Why is passenger education needed?
Many airlines here are NOT honest about their true service character. Whaddahell does that mean?
Let's take the example of Air Asia and Citilink, they are what I call the honest LCC... why? They say it up front:
1. Use it or loose it!
2. No meals! Mineral water only!
3. We're here to get you from A to B safely and reliably.

The rest of the LCC-wannabes go like this:
1. Buy the ticket, and once the seats have filled up, you can't get on... Oh we forgot to tell you we sold 10% more seats than the airplane... Check in 2 hrs before the flight next time! (yes, it happens)... Then, "we can always rebook you if you pay another 75% of the fare!"
2. "We serve meals" advertised, but the reality is only bread rolls, tea or mineral water.
3. "We fly from A to B 10x a day (but we regularly cancel 5 of them and try and make them leave on time, or even earlier if we've filled up thanks to the overbooking)."

It is a sad situation when in holiday season, you see a family stranded at the airport when they've done nothing wrong but end up the victims of overbooking... Sure they paid 50% of a Garuda ticket, but then, get told by the airline "you have to rebook (and pay 75% of your ticket price) or your ticket will not be refundable)."

The sad thing is many have fallen to this... and some airlines look at their station performance using "incidental revenue" as a performance criteria.

Schedules? WHAT SCHEDULE? In order to cut costs, some airlines have resorted to cold-blooded tactics of cancelling at will without notification, or even moving the schedule forward and then use the standard overbooking policy to get more money. And these carriers oppose to radical solutions of their competitors' more honest approach to the LCC and/or carrier reliability issues by playing the regulator's xenophobia/lack of understanding of the real issues.

So, more LCC's in Indonesia? Well, Garuda's planes are still "full", and they're returning jets to cut capacity and keep yields up. Even Lion Air, the so-called "champion of low costs" in Indonesia with the slogan of "We make people fly" have now turned around saying the LCC model is out of date (yes, they received a HELL OF A LOT of complaints). Then we have airlines like Sriwijaya, who grew rapidly over the last year to double its fleet to 15 732s, by adopting the middle market and dumping their "LCC-wannabe" style... result... full loads.

Does Indonesia need more LCC?
1. Garuda's Citilink - Despite an honest approach to what they've provided, given their "flag carrier's baby" status, they made huge losses and now have decided to leave the Jakarta market and have realigned their routes, either because its finding the markets, or they're still trying.

2. Garuda Full Service - The Low Fare attack have hit its yields and overcapacity. Its major problem however is its debt... loads are still high on routes people want to go on, and the ticket prices are high.

3. Lion Air/Wings - The champion of low cost carrier is going full service (or trying). Try and book on a Lion ticket and don't be surprised if you find the fare is higher than the Garuda one... Their LCC operations in the name of Wings Air is a mess. However, this airline has publicly stated that they are going for the low fare full service road.

4. Adam Air - The airline that started as the low fare full service carrier have gone to shambles in terms of operations. It has now stripped its service to the lowest level... no more meals... and don't forget the overbookings, and the maintenance "cuts" to keep its margins (culminating in the spectacular incident where a 733 lost its way and landed 400NM from its destination due to an IRS problem). Lets not forget the lowest salaries around.

5. Batavia Air - Despite the new A319s, the pursuance of low fares have eaten this carrier alive. One by one their 732s are grounded, 6 at the moment which are grounded due to various maintenance issues... Spare cash for this airline has also run out according to one financial institution.

6. Express Air - After their previous operations (LCC) went bust, they are now making nice gains as a "normal carrier", with good loads on their niche routes.

7. Kartika Airlines - LCC attempt failed, now gone the complete opposite and still struggling.

8. Bouraq / Bali Air - The LCC attempt of Bali Air ended as a spectacular failure when their partners decided to set up Batavia Air and then Sriwijaya Air. Internal struggle to be an LCC or not eventually caused their collapse as they lost focus on the importance of debt service.

9. Indonesia Air Asia - The true and honest LCC, still hasn't rocketed to prominence despite airlines leaving the LCC sector. The previous plans of operating 12 aircraft by this year is not being met with only 5 in service.

10. Jatayu - Offering Low fares with minimal service... and now only their Medan - Malaysia operations are running, and that's probably going to have a shaky future as Adam decides to dump spare capacity out of Medan.

So, the above are just simplified versions of the stories. It looks like Indonesia is turning its back on LCC and prefer to settle for the more moderate "lower to middle" market. On the international markets, full service carrier still offer cheap fares with very low margins, thanks to the cargo carried underneath.

Where has it all gone wrong? Lack of gateways and infrastructure. Airports having limited apron and terminal floor spaces and the lack of suitable alternative airports for catchment areas is a problem.

Where it has gone right is where they can use an alternative airport. Air Asia hit the jackpot on Bandung and Solo. Bandung is estimated at 15 - 25% of the Jakarta's international market, its Bandung - KUL flights tapped into this nicely, followed by Adam. Solo, has the catchment market of a few million people between itself and Surabaya, and has always been undermined by the proximity of Jogjakarta and Semarang which have better connectivity. Here, Air Asia again caught it right. Adam has decided to fly to Solo too (following Sriwijaya).

One recent gem is the city of Malang, south of Surabaya. Sriwijaya aggressively pursued this city during its initial LCC wannabe days, and Adam has recently entered the route. This airport is slot controlled by the military but has the catchment area of anywhere from it to the Bali strait.

Despite inflation fears, economic stagnation, the passengers are still not embracing LCCs the way the Americans and Europeans have. The situation in Indonesia is showing that a carrier must be a true LCC or don't bother claiming to be one. And even as an LCC, your lower cost structure, your low fares, might not be able to attract the yields, and infact, it could kill you! In the end, with the cases of Bandung, Solo and Malang, it goes to show that the key here is still to open new routes, or attack alternative markets... however, you don't need to be an LCC to do that... though it helps.

Sorry, just my 20 minutes worth of junk typing... so don't slap me if I'm writing rubbish...

Mandala499



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4775 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2924 times:

Quoting CXA330300 (Reply 11):
On some trunk routes (NRT-HKG, HKG-BKK, BKK-SIN, BKK-MNL) isn't there de-facto cheap flights with fifth freedom flights?

There is this on the BKK-MNL run - but I doubt if they have fifth freedom rights.....
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Wim Callaert - Brussels Aviation Photography



The media release in the ff thread classifies 5J as a low cost carrier which had just gotten a slot to operate into Changi's budget terminal.....
Changi's Budget Terminal Gets 2nd Airline (by GneissGuy Jul 24 2006 in Civil Aviation)

I just hope the ills enumerated above would not plague this travel alternative into and within the Philippines.



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offline9MMAR From Malaysia, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 2107 posts, RR: 18
Reply 15, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2874 times:

Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 13):
Sorry, just my 20 minutes worth of junk typing... so don't slap me if I'm writing rubbish...

NOT AT ALL. You gave a clear explanation about the aviation situation in Indonesia. Being working and living in the country, I couldn't agree more about the "confused" status of all the carriers other than GA and Indonesia AK. I fly 7P frequently, they are my official Indonesian carrier.


User currently offlineMandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6760 posts, RR: 76
Reply 16, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2843 times:

9MMAR,
Well, 7P literally rule the PNK market don't they?  Smile I hear their PNK-JOG is doing very well...

Mandala499



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offline9MMAR From Malaysia, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 2107 posts, RR: 18
Reply 17, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2799 times:

Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 16):
7P literally rule the PNK market don't they?

Yes, even during the time when GA was still around in PNK, 7P soars higher than any other carriers. It can be said that they are PNK's main carrier. I only flew them PNK-KCH vv. KCH is one of their only 2 international route. The route has enjoyed monopoly since MH pulled out in March 2006.

Booking on 7P from PNK to CGK has to be made early. Everytime I asked for one, I will be let down. The route suffers serious inadequacy. The same goes for their PNK - Jogjakarta route.


User currently offlineMandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6760 posts, RR: 76
Reply 18, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2771 times:

7P won over GA because PNK is a very price conscious market... GA having 3 flights a day + 1 Citilink vs 7P's 7x daily at <75% the price you can see what will be the result...

7P won, even Citilink had to be humbled... But 7P is lucky in this case because PNK's improvements won't come until 2008 for completion of the runway strengthening and extension, and the new terminal I think won't be completed before 2010-2012... Why does this mean luck for 7P? Lion can't enter since they're operating no 732/5 but MD82s, 90s and 734s due to the low PCN at PNK... And the 733s have severe weight penalties going there. 7P is known to be ruthless at its costs where it can't carry much (if any) cargo (PNK and SRG as the prime example).

It can be said that 7P went all out to dominate PNK (they even got an F28 (PK-YCM ex KFD ex MFD ex GFD) just to enable themselves to carry under the belly stuff to PNK with pax on top (albeit only 70pax).

Adam and Sriwijaya have so far only able to get half as lucky as 7P. But after the runway strengthening and extension it would be very interesting to see if 7P can continue dominating PNK... The same goes for 7P's "success" in SRG.

JT I hear is very eager to return and is waiting for the runway strengthening and extension... and Adam wants to expand there too. 7P's precarious cashflow vs Adam's ample cash vs JT's huge marketing machine will make PNK an interesting place after 2010... if none of the 3 goes bust before then that is...

Many cabin crew find it not a pleasant route to fly due to the pax mix.

Coming back to the LCCT idea... the LCCT proposal in CGK I think has been scrapped as JT refuse to utilise such a terminal for itself or Wings and IndoAirAsia don't have the volume to justify it (JT+Wings share T1A with QZ/IndoAirAsia). CGK itself is set to choke before 2010 as pax figures from 2005 shows almost 28m pax while it is designed for 21m pax. JT is said to want to move to HLP airport, which would relieve about 5-7m pax from CGK, but HLP can't accomodate that number of pax, and HLP airport is wondering if JT is serious or not (I've heard a few grumbles from HLP)...

Converting HLP to become an LCC Airport was an option thrown about a few years ago, but was opposed by airport operator AngkasaPura-II. So JT has decided to get the HLP owner, the Air Force... this is where the grumbles started. The Air Force is now stuck between JT and other operators wanting to use HLP...

Mandala499



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlineVincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (7 years 11 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2655 times:

Well I checked skyscraper's thread, looks like SIN will have more than enough space in the long term and they're serious about competing with KUL, you can check this post

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=1411998&postcount=59


T3 will be finished soon, but they are already thinking of T4 and T5 on the new reclaimed land, so a mega LCCT is possible, perhaps with more terminals opened, they can reconfigure the oldest terminal into LCCT, no bridges, just large parking area for planes.

Creating reclaimed land now for use decades later means the land will be much more stable, I still have reservation about Dubai's Palms and Kansai Airport (it's still sinking BTW), a major earthquake can sink those areas.

[Edited 2006-08-22 05:22:13]

User currently offlineKEno From Malaysia, joined Feb 2004, 1842 posts, RR: 28
Reply 20, posted (7 years 11 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2587 times:

Quoting Vincewy (Thread starter):
Other than KUL, most of the aforementioned airports will eventually run out of slots, the alternative will be:
SIN - Johor Bahru, and also high speed rail to Malaysia

Air Asia is still fighting to obtain rights from Singaporean authorities to provide direct ground transfer between JHB airport and downtown Singapore. Such services are now only available for passengers flying on MH services fom JHB to KUL, KCH and BKI. AK is very popular among Singaporeans to take advantage of cheap flights to Borneo; they have more direct flights from JHB than MH with nonstop services to SBW, MYY, TWU & SDK in addition to KCH and BKI. Despite the close proximity between JHB and SIN, the difference in fare between MH direct flights to these cities from Borneo is massive.

Don't count on SIN-KUL highspeed rail would go beyond the drawing board in the near future. Recent public opinion shows a majority opposition to the plan, as there are still other higher priority development projects that should be given attention first. While Malaysia is well capable in building skyscrapers, mega airports and urban railways, the same can't be said about their long-distance rail. The northern railways (KL-Ipoh) double tracking/electricififcation is years behind schedule and grossly over-budget.

Quoting 9MMAR (Reply 3):
AK opened its second hub in BKI in June, followed by its 3rd in KCH in July.

At Kota Kinabalu (BKI), AK and its rural air service operator FAX (Fly Asian Express) use the old terminal (T2) while MH uses the new terminal. T2 qualifies as a LCCT.


User currently offlineLufthansa747 From Philippines, joined May 1999, 3201 posts, RR: 43
Reply 21, posted (7 years 11 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2537 times:

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 14):
There is this on the BKK-MNL run

5J doesn't fly to BKK and never has. That Airbus is on a delivery flight.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 14):
I just hope the ills enumerated above would not plague this travel alternative into and within the Philippines.

I wouldn't suggest 5J to my worst enemy at the moment. Some moron decided to get rid of the DC9s too early, and the current Airbus fleet is not sufficient for their ops.

This month, both our MNL-CEB and CEB-MNL were cancelled, resulting in 2-3h delays. The rest of the flights were 2-6 hours late, with not a single flight on time. I told them to fork out the money we had paid as I was ready to buy tickets on PAL instead - "that will take 45 days to process sir". Ryanair can manage in 6 days.

The 5J 319/320s are the most uncomfortable planes I have ever been on as well.

Nothing but bad experiences on TR/AK/FD/5J/3K/JT/IW, so I will avoid these LCCs like the plague.



Air Asia Super Elite, Cebu Pacific Titanium
User currently offlineNaritaflyer From Japan, joined Apr 2006, 549 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (7 years 11 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2529 times:

Airfares in domestic Japan are already cheap by comparison to other (western) countries and are offered by JL and NH. I believe LCCs just for LCCs' sake is not necessarily a good thing. JL and NH have always had to comepete against the Shinkansen so they have adapted with their high-density aircraft on domestic (and Korea) routes making them LCCs, plus with superb service.

User currently offlineVonRichtofen From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 4627 posts, RR: 36
Reply 23, posted (7 years 11 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2522 times:

And watch the standards go down a la North America and Europe?

No thanks



Word
User currently offlineLufthansa747 From Philippines, joined May 1999, 3201 posts, RR: 43
Reply 24, posted (7 years 11 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2514 times:

Quoting VonRichtofen (Reply 23):
And watch the standards go down a la North America and Europe?

No thanks

Amen to that.



Air Asia Super Elite, Cebu Pacific Titanium
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...
Embraer: Asia-Pacific Region Needs 1000 RJs posted Tue Feb 21 2006 21:48:52 by Leelaw
CX Is Pregnant, More LCC For Asia posted Tue Dec 16 2003 21:35:17 by Aussieboggie
Brazil Needs More Hubs!? posted Sat Sep 9 2006 17:04:37 by Neo
DHL Adds New Asia Pacific Flights Direct To New YO posted Thu Aug 3 2006 21:42:07 by Tpac
SAA In US Needs More Res Agents posted Sat May 6 2006 01:55:46 by TonyBurr
Mandarin On Course For Asia Pacific E-190 First posted Mon Apr 24 2006 18:45:42 by Leelaw
Boeing Predicts $770 Billion Asia-Pacific Market posted Sun Mar 12 2006 06:36:42 by LAXDESI
Harmony Airways Introduces YYC-Asia Pacific Link posted Mon Feb 13 2006 20:09:03 by DFORCE1
More LCC To CPH? posted Mon Dec 12 2005 10:37:35 by SK909
The A380 Starts Its Asia-Pacific Tour In Singapore posted Thu Oct 13 2005 11:52:32 by Squirrel83