I honestly couldn't care less about the proposed casino projects around the area, to put it bluntly. I mean, private corporations running and controlling vast swaths of land in the Philippines isn't exactly new (*cough* BGC *cough* Nuvali *cough* Cebu Business Park). This aerotropolis wouldn't be any different, perhaps with the exception of multiple casinos. As long as they construct a world-class, future-proofed airport it doesn't really matter at the end of the day.
Maybe you should...those other projects do not involve land/space with airport potential. Tieng-Sy were proposing to reclaim land for their gaming resorts first...could be the reason the Ramboll concept prominently showing the airport, seaport and that wide empty space in the middle was set aside. If they were selected, authorities could be pressured to negate existing legislation prescribing approach patterns and building height limits in the vicinity to suit their plans. It may turn out there isn't an airport in the end. And it's not hard to imagine with politicians in the mix.
opinion piece on the subject merits serious consideration..... https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... ppens-next
Quote:"On the other hand, Megawide Construction and its partner GMR of India submitted a more modest proposal that addresses current deficiencies of NAIA and run the facility over 18 years.
Louie Ferrer of Megawide, in an e-mailed response to my questions, dismisses the need for another runway. He said Gatwick Airport, one of several airports servicing London, operates 57 movements per hour with a single runway, a point I have raised in this column for years.
NAIA, on the other hand, with two cross sectional runways only operates about 40. Ferrer thinks fixing the deficiencies in NAIA operations will produce dramatic improvements without a new runway.
Ferrer said that by fixing deficiencies in landside, terminal and airside, they will progressively increase air traffic movements to 60 per hour by the end of Phase 1c, which is six years from start of the project.
It is interesting that the Megawide proposal talks of fast delivery of improvements and a shorter concession period. We all know we can use quick relief from NAIA’s problems.
The fact that MIAA officials and Sec. Art Tugade succumbed to the Speaker’s demand to 'rationalize' terminal assignments is worrisome. If they know their business, they shouldn’t have agreed to such a separation because it is clear the facilities available right now make that impractical and inconvenient for passengers.
So we ought to manage our expectations. The proposals of Megawide and the super consortium may make us hopeful. But in the end, we still don’t have a bureaucracy capable of picking one proposal from among the four in a way that will benefit us all."
So far, only Megawide/GMR
have presented a realistic, functional, workable and convincing modernization concept for NAIA
BTW, things have been very quiet on the new terminal
project at CRK ever since the unsolicited MNL
proposals came out.
In another development, this photo of PR
(?) sans GTF
s was uploaded on SkyscraperCity
. Still am not a fan of the offset title....
Based on discussion in the LH A321LR
thread, it still does not have the range for MNL-AKL
It's possible to modernize NAIA but in the end there's a need for a new airport with two parallel runways to begin with and room to add more later. Putting more money into NAIA is wasting time and effort into something that badly needs replacing in the long run anyway.
Boeing 777s flown: UA, TG, KE, BA, CX, NH, JD, JL, CZ, SQ, EK, NG, CO, AF, SV, KU, DL, AA, MH, OZ, CA, MS, SU, LY, RG, PE, AZ, KL, VN, PK, EY, NZ, AM, BR, AC, DT, UU, OS, AI, 9W, KQ, QR, VA, JJ, ET, TK, PR, BG, T5, CI, MU and LX.. Further to fly.. LH 777