jetlag73 From France, joined Sep 2011, 69 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 6489 times:
I just got back to Bali from Phuket, with a stop in KUL.
while taking off from KUL, I saw a new terminal in building. It looked more like a whole new airport to me !
Is it the new terminal for AIR ASIA ?
Seems pretty ambitious, bigger than the 2 present terminals combined !
In the middle left are the 2 main present terminals (for MH and others use) and top right corner of the airport is the temporary warehouse-like Air Asia terminal (a real mess).
Sorry for the poor picture quality, used my iphone.
phatfarmlines From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1395 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6342 times:
Yes, this will be the facility to replace the current LCCT (The warehouse terminal as you described). Despite this new facility being labeled as a "budget terminal", it certainly does not resemble one.
Actually it is not a low cost terminal at all... It is just that the low cost carriers like Air Asia and soon Malindo are the big ones operating there...
The new terminal will be know as KLIA2 and not LCCT...
Official Opening : May 1, 2013
Floor Area : 257,000 m2
Handling Capacity : 45 million passengers per annum
Parking Bays : 68 (gates) 80 (aerobridges) and 8 (remote stands)
Milestone : World's largest purpose-built terminal for Low Cost Carriers
MillwallSean From Singapore, joined Apr 2008, 1366 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6101 times:
And from pretty decent sources its said that May 2013 wont happen but autumn October 2013 will.
Unless Air Asia manage to convince the authorities that they can fly from a building site (and that wouldnt surprise me with the state of Air Asias present terminal.
We shall see, anyway, its a good project and I'm happy they started it. The shed Air Asia operates out of these days is hindering business. Itll be great for them when they get a brand new and shining so called lowcost terminal thatll be better than most airports in Europe or North America...
It sure looks bigger than KLIA I wonder if this will make certain politicians and connected MAS staff push for a second satellite terminal to be built. They cant be dwarfed by Air Asia...
Also interesting with Air Asia being able to expand full out and a possible Malindo starting new routes (even though I suspect they wont do that well) and Qantas scaling down SIN will this mean that KLIA overtakes Changi in regards to passengers per annum in a year or three?
Wouldn't surprise me.
I guess a certain old PM of Malaysia would be cheering that pretty vividly...
blink182 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 5493 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6025 times:
Why didn't KLIA build another satellite terminal next to the current satellite or a road accessible terminal right behind the main terminal? IIRC several years ago I saw a master plan for KUL which called for such if the need arose.
For the uneducated reader, can any locals discuss why such a massive construction project is taking place when the existing field has ample space for new terminal infrastructure?
Thanks, and happy new year!
Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
Based on Air Asia's model, KLIA did not want to use the aerobridges, the baggage or the check-in systems. Also Air Asia needed to have power-in, power-out apron operations. As long as Air Asia remained at the main terminal, its growth would have been hindered.
To enable them to grow, the best solution was to provide them a separate facility to meet their operational requirements which would then enable them to have greater operational efficiency. So it was decided to look for a place to build a separate facility for low-cost airlines. MAHB managed to identify seven sites where the facility could be built.
Under the original master plan for KLIA, there is ample land to house four satellite buildings, two terminal structures and five runaways. If all the buildings are constructed, KLIA should be able to handle 100 million passengers a year.
For now, only one satellite and terminal building is available to handle 25 million passengers a year. There is no denying that a new satellite building needs to be constructed next to the legacy hub to meet future growth in full-service passengers, but before 2015.
What is more urgent now is a permanent structure for low-cost air travel since growth in this sector is robust. Therefore, MAHB's proposal makes a lot of sense. It would not just allow both the legacy and LCC hubs to be housed next to each other but, in terms of logistics, it will provide connectivity for passengers who need to change from low-cost to full-service carriers.
[Edited 2013-01-01 02:50:41]
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
jsnww81 From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2180 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (2 years 5 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 5430 times:
Quoting EK413 (Reply 6): Based on Air Asia's model, KLIA did not want to use the aerobridges, the baggage or the check-in systems.
If I remember correctly, there was a pretty public battle between Air Asia and the airport authority over whether or not the new terminal would have airbridges. Air Asia didn't want them, as I recall, but certain figures within the airport authority and government were insisting the terminal must have them. It does seem surprising given current industry trends that a building designed for low-cost carriers is opening with so many airbridges.
Regardless, I'm a believer that any airport expansion is good news these days. I flew through KLIA twice last May and the scale of the construction is pretty impressive, although it was a bit hard to see things in detail from the existing terminal area.
The low cost carrier concept is to provide lowest fares as possible which is achieved with the "power in, power out" apron concept which consists of your basic amenities such as portable bridges, nil air bridges, etc... It hasn't been proven boarding via stairs is quicker than via air bridges but it certainly cuts costs therefore no need to have a gate operator...
I understand Ryanair for example have stairs fitted to their B737 fleet which eliminates the need for any ground stairs therefore less ground staff... All these costs add up...
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
jetlag73 From France, joined Sep 2011, 69 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3066 times:
Thanks guys for your posts.
Then it is only good news for us travelers.
Going through the present AirAsia terminal was a pathetic experience for us.
Miles to walk to and out of airplanes, no signs, unattended AirAsia customer service desks, overcrowded.
We had to connect between 2 AirAsia flights in KUL, with both flights on the same ticket, and only 2 hours to transfer.
Still AirAsia asked us to clear customs, pick the luggage, check-in again, clear customs again ! They said their system could not allow us to interline !!! First time I hear this in many years traveling !