According to sources, Changi is looking into closing the current Budget Terminal and moving all the current flights operating there to the main terminals. I guess they want to build a new and bigger budget terminal to rival KLIA2?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
New Budget Terminal?
Collapse
X
-
Tags: None
-
Originally posted by ycp81 View PostAccording to sources, Changi is looking into closing the current Budget Terminal and moving all the current flights operating there to the main terminals. I guess they want to build a new and bigger budget terminal to rival KLIA2?
-
guess the need to have a better n larger Budget terminal and hopefully with covered walkways - and also the current budget terminal tarmac cannot accomodate the bigger aircraft than the current A320s, as few LCCs have bean to use larger planes like the A330s and even the upcoming SQ's "Scoot" using ex-SQ 772s.
Comment
-
They have to do something as the BT is all but full, and TR have a number of additional aircraft due. Having aircraft towed in is already beginning to cause frustration now, so that will only get worse.
I believe moving TR to T2/T3 was suggested/offered but wasn't favoured as that means a hike in charges. This issue may also speed up the proposed T4.
Comment
-
This can only be a good thing. BT is a hopeless Terminal that truly epitomes its name. Budget!Life's A Bitch,
Love It
If GOD created me for only 1 reason. That reason would be to the love of my wife. If there was any other reasons involved, that would be for the love of Singapore Airlines
Flown with me? - http://my.flightmemory.com/inix
Comment
-
Originally posted by ycp81 View PostAccording to sources, Changi is looking into closing the current Budget Terminal and moving all the current flights operating there to the main terminals. I guess they want to build a new and bigger budget terminal to rival KLIA2?
Comment
-
Initially without the Budget Terminal, CAAS should then have extended T1 and perhaps have say 2 piers for budget n "niche" airlines; and it seems odd that when designing n buidling T3 which has actually fewer aerobridges for planes than T2.
Comment
-
Originally posted by boing View PostI thought they were expanding BT with the empty land to east ?
Originally posted by cscs1956 View PostThis is a welcome move. We simply has too many terminal for a small island.
What has the number of terminals go to do with it ?. Would it be better if they just had one terminal with a capacity of 180 million ?. And what on earth has the size of Singapore got to do with how many terminals there are at Changi ?!.
This sounds like it may come as a bit of a shock to you, but Changi is not there just to fly Singaporeans around. It is what is know as a 'hub' for people to 'connect from one flight to another'.
Google it, it should help you understand how airports work. Although coming from someone who thinks Suvarnabhumi is a good airport I am not sure it will.
Comment
-
Originally posted by MAN Flyer View PostI suppose it is, if you like badly designed poorly thought out airports built on swamps.Life's A Bitch,
Love It
If GOD created me for only 1 reason. That reason would be to the love of my wife. If there was any other reasons involved, that would be for the love of Singapore Airlines
Flown with me? - http://my.flightmemory.com/inix
Comment
-
Originally posted by MAN Flyer View PostThey have to do something as the BT is all but full, and TR have a number of additional aircraft due. Having aircraft towed in is already beginning to cause frustration now, so that will only get worse.
I believe moving TR to T2/T3 was suggested/offered but wasn't favoured as that means a hike in charges. This issue may also speed up the proposed T4.
This is a welcome move. We simply has too many terminal for a small island.
Initially without the Budget Terminal, CAAS should then have extended T1 and perhaps have say 2 piers for budget n "niche" airlines; and it seems odd that when designing n building T3 which has actually fewer aerobridges for planes than T2.
I was told that the reason why T3 has less aerobridge bays compared to T2 or even T1 is because it was built with wide body aircrafts, namely A380 in mind. Every bay in T3 is able to accommodate at least a 777. Compared to T2 and T1, which have some bays that can only accommodate narrow bodys saving on space. And speaking of aerobridges, the old ones in T2 are starting to get replaced, starting with F50.
Comment
Comment