Originally posted by wsssaero
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
New Budget Terminal?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by lingua101 View Posthow about reclaim nearby islands and build a new airport there? is it a possibility? like u said there is so much land that u can have in mainland
Comment
-
Originally posted by lingua101 View Posthow about reclaim nearby islands and build a new airport there? is it a possibility? like u said there is so much land that u can have in mainland
Why on earth would they need to do that when they already have the third runway in place and plenty of space for additional terminals ?.
Comment
-
Originally posted by lingua101 View Posthow about reclaim nearby islands and build a new airport there? is it a possibility? like u said there is so much land that u can have in mainland
I don't think the SQ 777's going to their LCC have been pulled from SQ service yet. Every time I pass by the BT I see different SIA 777s there, and sometimes A333s too.
It's probably cheaper to build a bridge across to batam and use the severely under-utilised 4000m runway airport there.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SilverChris View PostThat was the mistake KUL made. When they built the current LCCT and moved AirAsia there, they didn't really think more than 4 or 5 years ahead.
They waited for it to be operating way beyond capacity before thinking "Hmm.. I *think* we need a new terminal"
Originally posted by wsssaero View PostI don't think the SQ 777's going to their LCC have been pulled from SQ service yet. Every time I pass by the BT I see different SIA 777s there, and sometimes A333s too.
Comment
-
Originally posted by MAN Flyer View PostI see. Well, whatever 777's are there it's p*ssing Tiger off and they have complained about not being able to use that area themselves.
Comment
-
Originally posted by boing View PostSG Government has invested too much money in Changi airport that the idea of relocating SIN's international airport seems far fetched. Changi will be the core of future aviation growth, no doubt about it. I believe this location was chosen, among other reasons, as it has the potential to be expanded through land reclamation if the need arises. It is surrounded by sea !
The master plan allowed for a full service terminal to be built and fully operational every 10 to 12 years.
Comment
-
Originally posted by wsssaero View PostI don't really see why they need to make a big deal of it. Stands 103 and 104 where the SIA aircraft are parked are perpendicular to the BT Apron and aren't connected to the BT apron too, so pax can't walk over there to board (and I'm sure APD is not going to allow it). Wherever the aircraft are parked it's just a matter of coordination to tow them in on time.
Originally posted by SilverChris View PostNot really, IMO. Changi still has time to build a new BT, rather than the guys at KUL who wait for the terminal to be overloaded before deciding to take action.
Comment
-
IIRC, there's a plot of land next to the BT which used to be a sand dump during the T3 construction period. It has since been reinstated to a grass patch. Wonder why this plot has yet to be converted to tarmac, will probably address the lack of stands around the BT.
Originally posted by flying.monkeyz View PostIt's probably cheaper to build a bridge across to batam and use the severely under-utilised 4000m runway airport there.
Comment
Comment