Christchurch Airport Plans NZ$220M Upgrade

VirginFlyer · Sun Aug 07, 2005 12:11 pm

This article appeared in yesterday's The Press (Christchurch's newspaper):

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3368925a13,00.html

The gist of it is that the airport is going to announce a major building and expansion project within the next 4-6 weeks. It is expected the international terminal will be expanded further, and the domestic terminal will be completely rebuilt. There is some discussion in the article about the runways, however the airport has previously stated that the current runway complex will be able to handle the predicted traffic for the next 40 to 50 years, so I would take that with a grain of salt.

Christchurch Airport's website has a section about their master planning. I guess we're not going to find out much more until they make the big announcement though:

http://www.christchurchairport.co.nz/airport/master_plan/

I must say that the timing of this report appearing in the paper is interesting, given there is really nothing new to report at this stage. I guess it is in reaction to Wellington's announcement last week.

It will be good to see Christchurch do something with the domestic terminal - the international terminal is a superb facility, and hopefully the new domestic terminal will be able to complement it properly.

V/F

HKGKaiTak · Sun Aug 07, 2005 12:23 pm

Wow I certainly like the announcement from across the "dutch" . . . first WLG, now CHC.

I agree about the domestic term at CHC, it isn't that brilliant and nowhere near as good as the international.

ZK-NBT · Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:10 pm

I found the CHC International lterminal quite nice when I walked through about 3 years ago. I no they have expanded it since.

CHC added 4 new gates just a couple of years ago, so good to see them doing well.

I wonder if EK has any plans to fly the A380 to CHC?

Now for AKL to actually do something properly rather than add these stupid little peaces in bit by bit, AKL is like a Jigsaw. Hopefully NZ will build their own Domestic and International Terminal combined in a few years anyway.

777ER · Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:36 pm

I have to agree that the CHC domestic is in major need of being re-built. Why didn't CHC add on the extra International gates that they now predict that they will need when the terminal was added onto. Hope CHC leave the viewing platform there, or extend it a bit towards the runway so we can get excellent views of the furthest international gate. Anyone know if CHC has been planning adding on to the International terminal even thou it had 4 gates added on recently?

gardermoen · Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:05 pm

Great to see CHC expanding. Yes I do agree that the domestic wing should be brought up to the same level as the International area. Lets hope they keep the great viewing deck as well.
I wish the next announcement will be that the AKL domestic terminal will be knocked down and rebuilt completely. That is a real embarrasment, especially being the domestic hub for the country.

777ER · Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:15 pm

AKL domestic terminal will be knocked down and rebuilt completely. That is a real embarrasment, especially being the domestic hub for the country. Actually I think WLG is the domestic hub due to more domestic flights then AKL and CHC, although I'm not totally sure. Not sure where I saw the figures

VirginFlyer · Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:42 pm

I was just reading on another forum that part of the upgrade will involve the ability to handle the A380 (I'd suspect more for the sake of diversions from AKL than the real expectation of A380 services to CHC...).

Quoting 777ER (Reply 3):
Anyone know if CHC has been planning adding on to the International terminal even thou it had 4 gates added on recently?

I wonder whether the journalist is getting confused when they say the international terminal will be expanded - the fact that the domestic terminal was going to be redeveloped was announced at around the same time as the expansion of the international terminal.

Quoting Gardermoen (Reply 4):
I wish the next announcement will be that the AKL domestic terminal will be knocked down and rebuilt completely.

Well, with these high-profile upgrades from WLG and CHC, Auckland does risk looking a bit behind. How much that actually matters, I don't know, but the present domestic terminal is pretty woeful. Hopefully any new terminal will be integrated with the international terminal (proably to the north of it, especially if the 2nd runway gets built), sort of like at Christchurch and Wellington (and Melbourne over on this side of the Tasman). But this is really an issue for another discussion.

Back to the topic at hand, given the negative reaction to Wellington spending $76 million, I wonder what Air New Zealand will have to say about Christchurch spending $220 million?

V/F

777ER · Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:51 pm

I was just reading on another forum that part of the upgrade will involve the ability to handle the A380 (I'd suspect more for the sake of diversions from AKL than the real expectation of A380 services to CHC...) I thought with the last upgrade CHC had, it was now able to handle A380s

aerokiwi · Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:52 pm

Apart from a spruce up inside, I don't really see the need for CHC to do much to its domestic facilities. I think they're generally pretty good, especially when compared to the dreadful situation in Auckland.

Though I have been at CHC when every single domestic gate has been occupied, so an expansion of sorts is probably a good idea. Their international facility is excellent, the best in the country, though they already have more gates than Auckland so I doubt they'll need to expand further in that area.

Quoting VirginFlyer (Reply 6):
I was just reading on another forum that part of the upgrade will involve the ability to handle the A380 (I'd suspect more for the sake of diversions from AKL than the real expectation of A380 services to CHC...).

I think you hit that nail on the head. Though also a possibility for flights from Japan being operated by "one" of the superjumbos in the future.

777ER · Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:55 pm

Didn't CHC say that they were struggling to even get new airlines to CHC. Would JQs announcement have any impact on this announcement

aerokiwi · Sun Aug 07, 2005 6:34 pm

Well, with all the carriers that are just going to flock to Wellington now, I guess life's just been made a lot harder for CHC

Yeah sure

Fly2CHC · Sun Aug 07, 2005 7:11 pm

Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 10):
Well, with all the carriers that are just going to flock to Wellington now, I guess life's just been made a lot harder for CHC

Such as????

NZ107 · Sun Aug 07, 2005 7:12 pm

Just that WLG won't be able to take the size of some a/c like CHC can. I'm sure that companies like MY would think about CHC first. Taking a 777 to WLG is a horrible idea, not knowing how much you could lose from this.

aerokiwi · Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:22 am

Oh I absolutely agree that the idea of WLG getting long haul flights is an absolute joke. I was trying to be sarcastic above Smile

NZ747 · Mon Aug 08, 2005 2:13 pm

Last time I was at the CHC Air NZ domestic terminal (not too long ago), they had expanded the small cafe downstairs slightly. They had also added heaps of room and seating, if not too much, upstairs in the departure area. The check in facilities have also doubled. A hell of a lot more work is still needed, but then again it's not as bad as the AKL airnz domestic terminal.

Quoting 777ER (Reply 7):
I thought with the last upgrade CHC had, it was now able to handle A380s

Gate-wise, yes, but I'm not sure if they need to do anything with the runway.

NZ107 · Mon Aug 08, 2005 4:54 pm

Quoting NZ747 (Reply 14):
Gate-wise, yes, but I'm not sure if they need to do anything with the runway.

So did CHC have gates ready for an A380 before AKL did?? Why haven't AKL or CHC included the double airbridges in their airports?? I believe that this is crucial for loading and unloading the A380.

Kiwi dave · Mon Aug 08, 2005 5:56 pm

I thought that with CHC the runways would have already been ready for the A380 since CHC has had a number of C-5 movements in the past, unless of course the A380 has a wider wingspan than the C-5.
Good news about the upgrade.

VirginFlyer · Mon Aug 08, 2005 7:19 pm

Quoting Kiwi Dave (Reply 16):
I thought that with CHC the runways would have already been ready for the A380 since CHC has had a number of C-5 movements in the past, unless of course the A380 has a wider wingspan than the C-5.

Dave, the issue isn't wingspan, but rather engine position. The reason Auckland (and Melbourne) widened the runways was so that the engines would hang over sealed surface. Otherwise, there are issues with dust and assorted other stuff being blown by the engine exhaust, and the consequent FOD risk.

Also, the C-5 'only' has a 67m span (as opposed to 79m on the A380, and 64m on the 747)...

I guess we'll have to wait until the announcement is made to find out how much more work (if any) will be needed to prepare for the A380...

V/F

ZK-NBT · Tue Aug 09, 2005 10:18 am

Why haven't AKL or CHC included the double airbridges in their airports??

Not sure if AKL will? But the A380 won't park at the current Pier at AKL anyway. The new Pier will have A380 capable gates.

777ER · Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:10 pm

The new Pier will have A380 capable gates. Would this be going where the new extension is on the northern side of the International Terminal? Is the original plan for the entension to have an uncovered walk way to the aircrafts still planned?

VirginFlyer · Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:23 pm

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 18):
The new Pier will have A380 capable gates.

From what I have read, the new pier hasn't been given the go ahead yet - it will only happen 'when demand dictates'. Those northern stands which it will eventually serve will be air-stair served for the immediate future. Since Auckland are expecting the A380 before the new pier is built, surely they have plans to park them at some of the gates of the present pier. I'd be very surprised if they had all A380 passengers using stairs. Still, anything is possible I guess...

V/F

ZK-NBT · Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:30 pm

Yes it will go to the Northwest of the current Pier, 4 gates are already there used as layovers. It will have a covered walkway which was always planned. Then again this is AIAL we are talking about so anything is possible.

V/F, yes that is right! Though the current Pier is quite tight for room to squeeze in an A380, they would have to re align some of the gates to park an A380 there. Gates 1 and 4 can't take 744's as it is.

[Edited 2005-08-09 07:33:41]

777ER · Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:31 pm

The new pier hasn't been given the go ahead yet - it will only happen 'when demand dictates'. When Demand dictates! worried

Whats AKLs defination of demand? worried

Well as far as I'm concerned the demand is 100% there, during peak time more like 1000% there. Maybe AKLs CEO should get off his backside and get down onto the shop floor and look at all the aircraft parked at hard stands unloading/loading passengers because there is no gates free and then say if there is demand for the extra gates NOW. AKL is just a disgrace and a joke for New Zealand considering its the gateway for nearly 80% off all International flights

ZK-NBT · Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:38 pm

That may be right aswell V/F, i'm not to sure if it has been given the go ahead yet, I just presumed it had.

Demand is definatly there and has been for some time for AKL to build another Pier.

They expanded the baggage handling area by adding that stupid bit near gate 2 aswell, meaning that aircraft on gate 2 now have to push back into L81 and tow foward from there, also meaning that they can't park an aircraft on L81 anymore. How stupid is that.

Kiwi dave · Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:03 pm

I wondered why there no aircraft parked on L81 when I was at AKL in May.

I think the reason why CHC has not put in double airbridges is that the times that if the A380 was to be flown to CHC there is only one international movement (EK) and therefore not the demand unlike say the demand at AKL at peak times that is what I think.

aerokiwi · Tue Aug 09, 2005 6:24 pm

It's true, AIAL management are extremely stingy when it comes to terminal expansion and most of Auckland Airport is becoming something of a joke now.

Kiwi dave · Tue Aug 09, 2005 6:44 pm

Quoting Aerokiwi (Reply 25):
It's true, AIAL management are extremely stingy when it comes to terminal expansion and most of Auckland Airport is becoming something of a joke now.

I bet if they needed money to upgrade the boardroom there would be more than enough money to upgrade the boardroom.

aerorobnz · Tue Aug 09, 2005 6:57 pm

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 23):
they expanded the baggage handling area by adding that stupid bit near gate 2 aswell, meaning that aircraft on gate 2 now have to push back into L81 and tow foward from there, also meaning that they can't park an aircraft on L81 anymore. How stupid is that.

It's probably less stupid than you'd think - it's just less spotter friendly than it used to. It's the only thing I will stick up for AIAL for because the baggage services needed such an overhaul to cope with the current (and for once - the future's) flights.

There are heaps of new layovers on the otherside if things got tight and these days remote departures are actually reasonably few and far between. Layovers 15-18 are the future 380 gates (KE almost always goes to 17 or 18 for the day and large unscheduled eg: PNG 763/ Boeing 772LR/ RAAF 707 & PK 313 ) and there are also layovers 76-80 out there which handle TG M11s, EK Aircraft etc overnighting aircraft such as SJ733s/DJ738s/QF763s.

ZK-NBT · Tue Aug 09, 2005 7:12 pm

I wasn't actually thinking spotting wise believe it or not. Though now you can't get shots from by the fence there I guess, haven't been down there for ages.

That was what a contact who is a baggage handler for NZ told me. Basically said AKL airport management seem to like doing little piddle jobs rather than perhaps spending a little more time planning things.

Thats one persons opinion though so I guess we can't read to much into it.

Is it actually that big? So how long will it last until they need another small shed to cope for 2 years growth?

On the other hand it is good on the other side where they park KE on the new layovers. For layover 80 there is just 1 annoying light Pole in the way otherwise you could get a clean photo from the fence there.

Ohwell, atleast as young guys into planes we still have some good places to spot anyway! And a chance to see the airport grow over the next 50 years, hopefully many new airlines, (no idea where from).

aerorobnz · Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:22 am

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 28):
Basically said AKL airport management seem to like doing little piddle jobs rather than perhaps spending a little more time planning things.

That is true in general. Most of the jobs have been futile and a waste of time.

The new Baggage shed has ample room for at least 5-6 years growth and It is pretty big by AKL standards, by the time the older area is upgraded and assigned to NZ it will be able to cope for probably the next 8 years before extensions in all likelyhood. The proof will be in the pudding however - It only takes one boom in air travel like cheaper fares or for another airline to start hubbing and we'll probably be up the creek again.

aerokiwi · Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:32 am

Quoting Kiwi Dave (Reply 26):
I bet if they needed money to upgrade the boardroom there would be more than enough money to upgrade the boardroom.

Agreed.

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 28):
Basically said AKL airport management seem to like doing little piddle jobs rather than perhaps spending a little more time planning things.

Couldn't agree more! The current arrivals/departures separation project was forced upon them and they went for the absolute bare basics in design to get it done. It's aesthetically hideous (making the pier look like one big tin shed) and could have been included in an enlargement of the original pier extension, to create a triangle-shaped end to the pier. the pace is needed and I believe initial proposals fort his back in the 90s included the addition of an 11th gate.

But no, AIAL continue with this cobbled together plan where they build only when the times has aboslutely come and gone.

The inital rebuilding of the terminal back in the 90s was done so well. Such a shame that they've dropped the ball ever since. Will be even more emabrrassing when the "covered walkway" is opened to service the A380. Ttoal jokwe, especially in light of Christchurch's excellent international terminal which is integrated with the domestics.

Let's not even start on the domestic terminals at AKL!!

ODwyerPW · Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:30 am

I find AKL's Airport Arrival/Departure facilities adequate. Why spend a ton of money on something I just want to get through as fast as possible after an 11 hour flight from LAX.

CHC's Domestic Terminal is very spartan. It needs work.

Kiwi dave · Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:12 pm

I hope that when CHC upgrades the domestic terminal to the same standard as the international terminal that they keep the veiwing deck as it is or at least extend it and put in some extra cover when it rains.

ZK-NBT · Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:19 pm

I find AKL's Airport Arrival/Departure facilities adequate. Why spend a ton of money on something I just want to get through as fast as possible after an 11 hour flight from LAX.

What time did you arrive from LAX? Usually AKL early morning is quite busy! With 3 flights from LAX then certain days flights from EZE, SCL, SFO, TBU, RAR, BNE and a few others!

Anyway its not uncommon for people to have to wait for an hour or 2 to clear customs immigration between 11am 1pm. I don't fly that much so aren't to sure exactly. I've never had it quite that bad.

Anyway if managment had had brains whic they don't seem to, they might have seen 10 years ago that the NZ tourist market was growing rapidly and getting rapider. (Can't always tell I guess) If this were the case though they should have seriously looked into a new Pier then, and upgraded the current one to the standards it had to be after that. Perhaps that is I don't really no.

Cheers AeroRob, we'll see how it goes then! Hmm I wonder what other airlines would hub here? EK will likely add more flights than the current 3 eventually.

Carpethead · Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:31 pm

I have been in AKL & CHC this past Feb and both facitilies seemed adequate. AKL & CHC's domestic buildings are dated but the interior is still in good shape.

Many major int'l airports still have pax embark & disembark on remote stands. FRA, CDG & NRT being examples. Numerous times I have been on a loaded 744 to be parked on remote stands at NRT because there's just not enough gate space. Normally, I am not awed by a bus ride around NRT, but any aircraft enthusiast not accustomed to Japan wouldn't drool at the thought of a bus ride to/from a remote stand on the NRT ramps (likes of FX MD-11F, gaggle of JL, NH, UA, & NW widebodies, and then some).

NZ107 · Wed Aug 10, 2005 6:50 pm

Quoting ODwyerPW (Reply 31):
I find AKL's Airport Arrival/Departure facilities adequate. Why spend a ton of money on something I just want to get through as fast as possible after an 11 hour flight from LAX.

When was the last time you passed through AKL? In peak season (Xmas holidays) when it's also hot inside the terminal, it's such a pain getting through customs. Took me about over 2 hrs last time. The layout in the departure hall is shocking. Last year before they had built the new archways and those poles with the fabric that you can pull out and tie to the next pole we could see right into the immigration part.

One thing I dread about the Arrivals hall is the fact that the yellow "KEEP CLEAR" tape on the ground doesn't extend right to the door so when my grandad comes in from HKG every month or so, it's extremely busy and so many people block the entrance that it's not funny. Not even the Airport helpers can help moving them.

[Edited 2005-08-10 11:56:00]

777ER · Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:11 pm

Even thou I have not been in the arrival customs/MAF etc in AKL, so I can't say how bad it is, but I can vouch for the arrivals hall. At times you would think that the Police or even security guards were needed to watch over because thats how bad it gets during the peak times

Kiwi dave · Thu Aug 11, 2005 8:20 am

At least CHC has a bigger arrivals area compared to AKL.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net