Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SIN To Tear Down And Rebuild Budget Terminal  
User currently offlineGneissGuy From Singapore, joined Jul 2006, 200 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 9801 times:

All LCCs will be shifted to the 3 existing terminals in the interim until the new LCCT is ready in 2 years time.

Details: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori...porelocalnews/view/1186047/1/.html

27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBD338 From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 709 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 9475 times:

Wow, 6 years old and they are demolishing it and replacing. I guess kudos for being ahead of the demand but how did they get the original design so wrong that it has to be demolished rather than expanded?

User currently offlineQF340500 From Singapore, joined Oct 2011, 160 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9286 times:

Well done, tare it down after a few years, build it new and keep on doing that.... YEAH!

Guess someone has not had the future-looking ideas when the old terminal was build... a very rare mistake in Singapore, this being a planning-addicted society...

Hope they build proper connecting bridges to the other terminals into the new one. and apparently there is a huge lack of carpark space????

Good luck!


User currently offlineCXfirst From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 3069 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9271 times:

Well, I don't think anyone at SIN 6+ years ago was expecting the growth of LCC's that the airport has seen. But good that they are rebuilding a more suitable terminal rather than adding to a terminal making it seem like a Heathrow terminal at the end. Better to build a new bigger and more prepared terminal.

-CXfirst



From Norway, live in Australia
User currently offlineaGreatWayToFly From Canada, joined Jul 2006, 42 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8993 times:

The terminal was pretty bare bones in terms of construction design. It wouldn't surprise me if it was built to be temporary from the start.

User currently offlinegardermoen From Australia, joined Jul 1999, 1522 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 7582 times:

While they are at it, rename it "Terminal 4" instead of "Budget Terminal"

User currently offlinemcogator From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 183 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 7566 times:

Isn't the current one just a big "warehouse" type facility with chairs? What was the original cost of the build?

User currently offline6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3329 posts, RR: 20
Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6587 times:

Quoting mcogator (Reply 6):
What was the original cost of the build?

$45m (SG), with a further $10M expansion a few years ago.


User currently offlinerogercamel From Singapore, joined Feb 2012, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6453 times:

Good news - the budget terminal at SIN is a very weak experience compared to the other 3. As others have said the Budget Terminal is little more than a water-tight shed with some seats and some shops, and has pretty poor transport links to the other terminals and city; no good way to reach the MRT, and it is not connected with the inter-terminal train system either.

My guess is that the budget terminal was a temporary terminal building to provide short term capacity prior to the opening of T3 in 2008, or simply to provide some interim capacity while they decided how best to deal with the airport expansion. The use of temporary transport buildings is commonplace for bus interchanges here whilst better provision is constructed, and it wouldn't surprise me if this approach had been extended to airpor terminals.

Incidentally, some LCCs are already operating out of the numbered terminals - Air Asia goes from T1.


User currently onlineinfinit From Singapore, joined Jul 2008, 570 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5832 times:

Yes, I think the "Budget Terminal" was meant to be temporary- a trial if you will. It is in the former Airport Police Division HQ if memory serves me right.

Hopefully the folks at the Changi Airport Group would learn from the mistakes of this one and improve the user experience with the new one


User currently offlinenethkt From Thailand, joined Apr 2001, 1086 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5457 times:

Singapore government is always the aviation industry leader.
Airlines, airport, aircraft leasing etc. they know how to do it all, great job!!

I'm sure the new budget terminal will be renamed for the sake of better name.
And it won't be that kind of warehouse/IKEA looking atmosphere.

Can't wait to see!!!
What a powerful tiny country!!



Let's just blame it on yields.
User currently offlineGneissGuy From Singapore, joined Jul 2006, 200 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4421 times:

-New terminal will be named Terminal 4
-Expected to be operational in 2017
-16 million capacity
-No aerobridges (so basically an expanded and improved version of the existing Budget Terminal)

Link: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori...porelocalnews/view/1186306/1/.html


User currently offlineTriple Seven From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 530 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4401 times:

Truth be told, SIN is probably under competitive pressure to upgrade the Budget Terminal considering KUL is building a big and rather posh LCCT that should be operational Q1 2013.

User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1114 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3776 times:

Quoting BD338 (Reply 1):
Wow, 6 years old and they are demolishing it and replacing. I guess kudos for being ahead of the demand but how did they get the original design so wrong that it has to be demolished rather than expanded?

Six years is not a short time by Singapore's standards. That building, by the way, was built in a matter of months, so it is hardly a sophisticated building meant to last decades.

Quoting QF340500 (Reply 2):
Guess someone has not had the future-looking ideas when the old terminal was build... a very rare mistake in Singapore, this being a planning-addicted society...

Hope they build proper connecting bridges to the other terminals into the new one. and apparently there is a huge lack of carpark space????

This sounds like something coming out from TR, but anyway, many have already pointed out that the building was meant to be an interim experimentation in the first place. At the time when the idea was mooted and when construction commenced, it was the first dedicated LCC terminal in Asia, so it was considered a high-risk expenditure. Not all LCCs were willing to use it, and should Tiger fail as an airline (as it very well could in this cut-throat industry), the entire terminal almost becomes an empty shell as only one other airline was using it for some time (Cebu Pacific, IIRC?). It is a good thing that they had to rebuild to expand, rather than demolish it for being underused, the later of which would be a bigger sign of poor planning.

I do not see an issue with being a "planning-addicted society", btw. If you think there is a lack of carparking space, you can very well arrive earlier, park in T2, and take the free shuttle bus to the BT, all in a matter of 15 mins or so. But then again, I suppose you do not like to plan....?  
Quoting rogercamel (Reply 8):
The use of temporary transport buildings is commonplace for bus interchanges here whilst better provision is constructed, and it wouldn't surprise me if this approach had been extended to airpor terminals.

Indeed when the BT first opened, many commented it looked just like a temporary bus interchange!

Quoting rogercamel (Reply 8):
Incidentally, some LCCs are already operating out of the numbered terminals - Air Asia goes from T1.

AirAsia chose to fly from the main terminals to "improve the traveller's experience", as they put it. Jetstar uses T1 mainly because the QF group is also located there.

Quoting Triple Seven (Reply 12):
Truth be told, SIN is probably under competitive pressure to upgrade the Budget Terminal considering KUL is building a big and rather posh LCCT that should be operational Q1 2013.

The pressure comes from outside and wihin. In particular, Scoot is going to have problems finding parking space with their fleet of widebodies if nothing is done to the BT, which has space for only ten narrowbodies. It is the same problem which AirAsiaX experienced in KUL. It is obvious they need to upgrade quickly or else the Singapore-based carriers will loose out to the regional competition.

[Edited 2012-03-01 18:21:45]

[Edited 2012-03-01 18:24:27]


It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlineaviasian From Singapore, joined Jan 2001, 1486 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3572 times:

Truth be told, I have loved flying out of and back into the Budget Terminal. It is a no-nonsense, sensible, practical, visually pleasing what-I-call a shoebox facility. You cannot even get lost if you tried. The only facility missing is a cafe on its rooftop for those of us who love to watch planes and perhaps wave to arriving and departing friends (and strangers).

I am glad that the new terminal which will be built in its place will be called Terminal 4 (I have always disliked the name "Budget Terminal" ... for which someone was named a winner for suggesting that name!!). It is better to see a totally new facility that hopefully provides lots more room for future growth than for bits and pieces to be added to the existing facility like a wart here and a tumour there.

I absolutely love the idea that there will not be aerobridges ... I may be a minority in loving the concept of walking across the ramp from the terminal to the plane. Three cheers to all those airports that still allow for this ... including Pyongyang Sunan Airport!

Now I must rush to photograph the Budget Terminal before it is torn down ... for posterity of course. This must go down Singapore's aviation history as the airport terminal with the shortest lifespan. Thank goodness it was covered in a book recently published to mark Singapore's Aviation Centenary entitled: Where Lions Fly.

KC Sim


User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19233 posts, RR: 52
Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3553 times:

Quoting nethkt (Reply 10):
And it won't be that kind of warehouse/IKEA looking atmosphere.
Quoting rogercamel (Reply 8):
others have said the Budget Terminal is little more than a water-tight shed with some seats and some shops
Quoting mcogator (Reply 6):
Isn't the current one just a big "warehouse" type facility with chairs? What was the original cost of the build?

Evidently you are unfamilar with what budget and budget terminal means: simplisticity, removing any superfluous elements, and minimal cost.



"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlineIndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 2982 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3438 times:

Seems that a few airports that developed minimalist LCC terminals have gone about creating the 'next big thing' only a few years later. It makes sense in one way to have a quick and relatively cheap option set up, but as KUL found out things can get very overcrowded fast. Short term thinking can have downsides.

SIN, KUL (In progress) and MEL come to mind with plans to rid themselves of 'tin sheds' and replace them with more traditional airport terminal concepts.

SIN seems to have a fair aount of available capacity currently though in its existing T1, T2 and T3 which comes in handy in this transition period.


User currently offlineCysafan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3388 times:

By building the new T4 , I am pretty sure the low-cost travel prices will be higher as from what I have heard from my friends at Changi Airport that it will be something like what the other three terminals are boosting.(High quality facilities) I am pretty sure T4 will be build in mind to handle the current Jetstar A330s , the future Scoot B777s as well as maybe the low-cost Japanese carrier , Skymarks 's future A380 as well so that Changi Airport will have the opportunity to move out all of the low-cost carriers from T1 and T2 ( Jetstar , Air Asia , Indonesia Air Asia , Lion Air , Tiger Airways , Jetstar Airways , Jetstar Asia , Thai Air Asia , Cebu Pacific , Scoot) in order to give Changi Airport some good image of their management by separating legacies and low-cost carriers. Of course , there 's an advantage of moving the low-cost carriers out of the current T1 and T2 so that Changi Airport will be able to free up slots for more legacy carriers to fly to Singapore and we might have more unique airlines at the airport in the future.

User currently offlineIndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 2982 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3073 times:

^^ Wasn't the point though for these LCC terminals to be basic and therefore offer lower fees?

The ore these terminals become like traditional facilities, where will the fee advantage offered by airports to these carriers be able to be applied without further fuss from competing carriers?


User currently offlinerogercamel From Singapore, joined Feb 2012, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2948 times:

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 18):
^^ Wasn't the point though for these LCC terminals to be basic and therefore offer lower fees?

Ok - but at SIN the concept is somewhat diluted because some LCCs are in the main terminals. Given the option, I'd rather fly from the main airport - not least because it is better by public transport.
My guess is that the new T4 at SIN will be a middle ground between the existing basics only Budget Terminal, and the main terminals.


User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19233 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2942 times:

Quoting rogercamel (Reply 19):
some LCCs are in the main terminals.

I have often wondered why AK/FD/QZ didn't use SIN's Budget Terminal when they're clearly so cost-conscious. Perhaps that terminal didn't have sufficient capacity or infrastructure (e.g., stands) for its scale of operation?



"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlineCysafan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2900 times:

Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 20):
I have often wondered why AK/FD/QZ didn't use SIN's Budget Terminal when they're clearly so cost-conscious. Perhaps that terminal didn't have sufficient capacity or infrastructure (e.g., stands) for its scale of operation?

It is because the current terminal is too crap for most airlines to dock at. The facility is just a single floor terminal with very few shops and seating areas which is not even enough to handle the crowd when it is loaded. So these three airlines from the Tune group decided to give the passengers more comfort , so they choose to dock at T1 instead which is much better. with adequate seating and facilities.


User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19233 posts, RR: 52
Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2894 times:

Quoting Cysafan (Reply 21):
It is because the current terminal is too crap for most airlines to dock at. The facility is just a single floor terminal with very few shops and seating areas which is not even enough to handle the crowd when it is loaded. So these three airlines from the Tune group decided to give the passengers more comfort , so they choose to dock at T1 instead which is much better. with adequate seating and facilities.

I don't really accept that: having flown through there 2 or 3 times, it isn't that different from KUL's LCCT (other than scale and the consequent lower amount of facilities). And given AK's cost-consciousness, I cannot imagine it would happily pay more - assuming the cost differential is decent - for 'better' facilities given its target audience. However, unless we have someone from SIN or AK itself, we won't know precisely why.



"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlineIndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 2982 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2851 times:

Quoting Pe@rson (Reply 22):
I don't really accept that: having flown through there 2 or 3 times, it isn't that different from KUL's LCCT

Exactly. Both are 'tin sheds', with one larger than the other (KUL bigger than SIN's).

Overall, both werelikely short sighted in their approach, and developed for speed over any real strategic plan. The investment is therefore written off quite quickly as it turns out and more work is now required to rectify those limitations.


User currently offlineAkiestar From Philippines, joined May 2009, 786 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2837 times:

Quoting Cysafan (Reply 21):
It is because the current terminal is too crap for most airlines to dock at. The facility is just a single floor terminal with very few shops and seating areas which is not even enough to handle the crowd when it is loaded. So these three airlines from the Tune group decided to give the passengers more comfort , so they choose to dock at T1 instead which is much better. with adequate seating and facilities.

For some airlines, it's not all about comfort. This is in the case of 2P and 5J.

As far as I know, 2P docks at Terminal 2 to better-compete with 5J: PR can say that 2P is better because they dock at main terminals which are more convenient for passengers to use than low-cost terminals which, as in the case of SIN, are harder to reach. All while competing with 5J price-wise. I'm not sure how well the strategy has worked, but I'm inclined to believe that it has worked to an extent.


25 aviasian : Yes, one could unkindly call the Budget Terminal a tin shed (and I call it a shoebox, no better) ... but it is one airy, brightly-lit, comfortable, we
26 LJ : Why would Skymark send their low density A380 (with only J or Y+ seats) to a budget terminal????
27 Post contains images sallecc : I didn't mind using Budget terminal... it was what it name says, and low-fares were what mattered most. Connection to other terminals (and subway to c
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...
Herb And Colleen To Step Down In 2008 posted Thu Jul 19 2007 21:48:22 by DeltaFFinDFW
Nonrev Westbound To SIN With NW, DL And UA posted Sun Feb 12 2006 23:39:40 by SK973
AA Continues To Trim Down RDU, Cuts CMH And PHL posted Mon Mar 28 2005 07:51:29 by LambertMan
JFK Terminal 5 (TWA) Tear-Down? posted Sat May 31 2003 07:58:47 by Danielbk
Gulf Air To Shut Down ATH, DAM, KUL, MXP posted Tue Feb 14 2012 02:21:32 by LIPZ
JAL To Launch Helsinki And San Diego posted Mon Feb 13 2012 17:25:39 by mah4546
RedQ: QF To Partner AK And MH, Flying MH A330s? posted Fri Jan 13 2012 15:46:50 by cbrboy
Norwich To Manchester, Exeter, And Newquay posted Wed Dec 14 2011 02:14:46 by Pe@rson
LH To Open Shenyang And Qingdao posted Tue Nov 22 2011 08:32:54 by stylo777
RAK Airways To Launch Peshawar And Lahore posted Mon Oct 10 2011 13:44:20 by 777way