Why aren't all of SQ's flights just in SIN T3?

[ycp81]

I think it might have something to do with baggage handling onto the next point of arrival? Hmm... Mar 26, China Eastern, Qatar, United and Jet Airways will all join SQ at T3. I wonder why they don't just put SQ all in the new terminal...

Put SQ all in T3 and T2 will turn into a ghost town. Only a handful of airlines operate from there. Even with half of SQ still operating from T2, already some shop tenants have threatened to move out the of the terminal with the accumulating losses incurred due to drastic drop in pax numbers using the terminal.

[huaiwei]

I think it might have something to do with baggage handling onto the next point of arrival? Hmm... Mar 26, China Eastern, Qatar, United and Jet Airways will all join SQ at T3. I wonder why they don't just put SQ all in the new terminal...

Each of the four airlines who are moving to T3 do not have significant operations out of T3, so it will not contribute much to traffic there. But of course, T3 does have more than enough space to fit all of SQ in there.

I would be expecting a few to move to T2, especially when renovation works commence in T1. Some simply will not wish to put up with the inconvenience.

[zvezda]

I wonder why they don't just put SQ all in the new terminal...

I don't think T3 has enough gates for SQ without T2.

[ycp81]

I don't think T3 has enough gates for SQ without T2.

T2 actually has more gates than T3

[huaiwei]

T2 actually has more gates than T3

That's because T3's gates have far bigger capacities than T2's. Do they really have problems squeezing completely into T3? There are other airlines in T2, and it is not like the Terminal was anywhere close to being fully occupied.

[zvezda]

That's because T3's gates have far bigger capacities than T2's. Do they really have problems squeezing completely into T3? There are other airlines in T2, and it is not like the Terminal was anywhere close to being fully occupied.

SQ could not have fit into T3 alone had it been available to them. Also, the airport didn't offer SQ all of T3 because that would have left few flights in T2, which would have become a ghost town and the retailers would have been even more unhappy than they presently are.

[zvezda]

T2 has 35 gates, all suitable for widebodies. T3 has 30 or 31 gates, 2 or 3 of which (A6-8) appear to be bus gates.

[huaiwei]

SQ could not have fit into T3 alone had it been available to them. Also, the airport didn't offer SQ all of T3 because that would have left few flights in T2, which would have become a ghost town and the retailers would have been even more unhappy than they presently are.

Retailers' concerns aside, is T3 significantly smaller than T2, when all of SIA could fit into T2 and be joined by all of SilkAir and a number of other airlines without being at maximum capacity?

[flyguy]

T3 could easily handle all SQ's flights - but believed that for CAAS sake and that of some retailers that SQ is actually complelled to operate from 2 terminals - as like others have said if SQ moves all to T3, then T2 will be very quiet. But this does not go well with passengers and it seems that CAAS have decided to inconvenience pax by making SQ use 2 terminals - as the main grouse still is that one does not know which terminal one is arriving and esp when met by greeters and also greeters have to find out only 2 hrs before a flight arrives, which exact terminal will the flighyt be at. Altho CAAS n SQ maintains that it is easy for greeters to check "due to advanced and easy ways like calling airport info or checking the tv " - it does add to one's effort to do either call the info line or check the teletext. Even for SQ - it would mean a hefty increase in costs - particularly personnel costs as it have to have extra manpower resources to look after its J and F lounges in T2 and in T3 and also gate officers, check-in staff at bother terminals and a host others including ground technical staff. It will simply means adding a few million in staff costs just to operate from 2 terminsla. So much for Changi's efficiency.

[zxcvbn]

If SQ moves into T3, can't *A carriers move into T2 and OW/ST/others move into T1?

It would be easier for flight transfers as well.

[huaiwei]

This news release [http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori...37878/1/.html] says that the three terminals are now each operating at about 50%. Seems like they are all nicely spread out...for now.

[nykelaz]

If SQ moves into T3, can't *A carriers move into T2 and OW/ST/others move into T1?

It would be easier for flight transfers as well.

Moving *A carriers into T2 would sound feasible, probably when T1 goes into renovation.

However, I think the main problem T2 is facing is poor loads at nights. There are practially no flights from 2100hrs till dawn, with the exception of some flights to South Africa.

On the other hand, mornings and afternoons seems to be reasonable filled with passengers. So if moving *A into T2 be not possible, why not move airlines with predominantly evening or night operations to T2?

[up and away]

Let them operate from T2&T3- if something fails (*cough*baggage transport) there's a chance that they won't have to reorganize everything

[SQalMundo]

They should have just created Terminal 3 as a mega terminal to house all SIA's flights instead of splitting the flights up confusingly

[flyguy]

T3 can easily handle all SQ flights - but believed its the govt and CAAS that wants SQ to split terminals and this way to ensure that T2 wont be so deserted - but its a waste of SQ resources.