MISC | What's your vision for a future airport?

[fieldsofdreams]

Originally Posted by Aerolineas

Laoag
Clark
Puerto Princesa
Daraga(Bicolandia)

Tacloban
Kalibo/Caticlan (either)
Iloilo/Bacolod (just need only expansions)
Cebu-Mactan
Tagbilaran

Zamboanga
Davao
Gensan

I hope All this Airports after 10 Years will be more World Oriented Airport at par with World Class Gateways.

I definitely hope so too. I think investing in infrastructure, especially for VORs and ILS systems, as well as giving more generous salaries and benefits to ATCs, will definitely help make the Philippines an aviation-friendly destination. It takes government manpower and will, as well as private sector participation, to make airport modernization happen throughout the country.

[fieldsofdreams]

Originally Posted by mwg12a

Mine is the close proximity of the airport, accessibility within the terminal itself,. spaceous which pretty much would equate almost to room for future expansion. My number one issue better transit connection which should be in one roof pretty much, if not a good shuttle or rail service to connect international terminal to domestic. Lastly, efficiency and of course some amenities. If Manila is an international transit hub, yes, i'd be looking for more amenities but since it's an end point of international travel? I wouldn't care too much other than wifi spots or lounge areas that's not necessarily for business class passengers only, Business class lounges are provided by the airline companies anyway. But on the domestic side, I'd be wanting a bit more when it comes to amenities and if they can go away with the tiange like or turoturo style food kiosk.

What do you think is the possibility that MNL can become an international transit hub for passengers from SE Asia to travel between the region and the United States and Australia? We are strategically located near the center of countries such as China, Japan, S Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Taiwan, and Brunei, in which we can create MNL into a hub for connecting passengers to the US. And by the way, if we can make the country a business-friendly destination, then surely, investments will grow much faster.

[NTprime]

Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams

What do you think is the possibility that MNL can become an international transit hub for passengers from SE Asia to travel between the region and the United States and Australia? We are strategically located near the center of countries such as China, Japan, S Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Taiwan, and Brunei, in which we can create MNL into a hub for connecting passengers to the US. And by the way, if we can make the country a business-friendly destination, then surely, investments will grow much faster.

I'm looking beyond SEAsia, as I am including India as well. If PAL can maximize on their MNLDEL by getting Indian traffic to the west coast, they can do away with the stop in BKK (obviously they took out their non-stop MNLDEL due to poor economics). And not just DEL, they should get BOM as well while BKK is not yet a non-stop option to the Westcoast.

Aside from servicing India, PAL (or the new airport) should look at the likes of smaller ASEAN countries that don't have an airline that can compete directly with PAL. So we're talking Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar. The Philippine government will have to sell very well this concept of Manila as a hub to the westcoast over HKG (most likely the biggest competitor here), or even ICN, TPE and SGN.

So yes, I think this can happen if there are few roadbumps to getting the new PAL airport done. Well, even if the existing airport at Clark, this can already be done. What is lacking are the long haul flights from CRK to the US, since the LCCs don't have that at all.

[Aerolineas]

Originally Posted by NTprime

I'm looking beyond SEAsia, as I am including India as well. If PAL can maximize on their MNLDEL by getting Indian traffic to the west coast, they can do away with the stop in BKK (obviously they took out their non-stop MNLDEL due to poor economics). And not just DEL, they should get BOM as well while BKK is not yet a non-stop option to the Westcoast.

Aside from servicing India, PAL (or the new airport) should look at the likes of smaller ASEAN countries that don't have an airline that can compete directly with PAL. So we're talking Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar. The Philippine government will have to sell very well this concept of Manila as a hub to the westcoast over HKG (most likely the biggest competitor here), or even ICN, TPE and SGN.

So yes, I think this can happen if there are few roadbumps to getting the new PAL airport done. Well, even if the existing airport at Clark, this can already be done. What is lacking are the long haul flights from CRK to the US, since the LCCs don't have that at all.

Transit is Cool as long as Manila, or Cebu Airports as vibrant as Changi, Incheon, or Hong Kong with lots of shops, activity area while waiting for hours, spacious lounges for passengers with more than 3 Hrs. to wait with our present Terminals of Manila and Cebu is not for transit, passengers will get bored.

[fieldsofdreams]

Originally Posted by NTprime

I'm looking beyond SEAsia, as I am including India as well. If PAL can maximize on their MNLDEL by getting Indian traffic to the west coast, they can do away with the stop in BKK (obviously they took out their non-stop MNLDEL due to poor economics). And not just DEL, they should get BOM as well while BKK is not yet a non-stop option to the Westcoast.

Aside from servicing India, PAL (or the new airport) should look at the likes of smaller ASEAN countries that don't have an airline that can compete directly with PAL. So we're talking Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar. The Philippine government will have to sell very well this concept of Manila as a hub to the westcoast over HKG (most likely the biggest competitor here), or even ICN, TPE and SGN.

So yes, I think this can happen if there are few roadbumps to getting the new PAL airport done. Well, even if the existing airport at Clark, this can already be done. What is lacking are the long haul flights from CRK to the US, since the LCCs don't have that at all.

You've got similar thoughts as mine... indeed, PAL can venture into more flights to India as long as the market for it is ripe enough to haul in more tourists and investors. I would definitely venture into a MNL-BOM route, but I would also look into either codesharing with either AI or 9W, or look for a way to bring in either or both airlines to MNL, provided that slot restrictions are lifted per domestic flight and general aviation transfers to CRK.

Also, providing flights to other SE Asian countries by either PR or 5J could work too: those might need to study the current economic and tourist climate of Laos, Myanmar, and East Timor so that they can determine what flights can be mounted to such destinations as Vientiane, Yangon, and Dili, respectively.

[fieldsofdreams]

Originally Posted by Aerolineas

Transit is Cool as long as Manila, or Cebu Airports as vibrant as Changi, Incheon, or Hong Kong with lots of shops, activity area while waiting for hours, spacious lounges for passengers with more than 3 Hrs. to wait with our present Terminals of Manila and Cebu is not for transit, passengers will get bored.

You have similar ideas as mine indeed. Sadly, NAIA is unlike SM: it has a combination of limited shopping and dining amenities, combined with no on-site hotel facility for weary travelers, and not enough cool amenities in which everyone can enjoy. Must be the relative age and size of the two older terminals that can cause that scenario, although Terminal 3 can make up for a lack of amenities.

[NTprime]

Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams

You have similar ideas as mine indeed. Sadly, NAIA is unlike SM: it has a combination of limited shopping and dining amenities, combined with no on-site hotel facility for weary travelers, and not enough cool amenities in which everyone can enjoy. Must be the relative age and size of the two older terminals that can cause that scenario, although Terminal 3 can make up for a lack of amenities.

The trend of airports in the past decade has been to expand to ancillary services such as lodging, shopping, leisure and the like. Thus the need for larger tracts of land for airport complexes. Since the newer airports being built are far away from the city, it makes sense to provide all the creature comforts just like a mini-city. As a result we are seeing more privatization of airports worldwide and larger and more integrated terminals.

The problem with NAIA is that there are 3 separate islands, oops, terminals. They are not even connected to each other, whether underground or by driverless train! That is the reason why NAIA is not your ideal transit hub.

A short term solution to making NAIA better for travelers is to interconnect all three terminals, but the biggest stumbling block are the airlines themselves. It doesn't make sense to have one terminal just for international, then another just for domestic LCCs, and then the other one for just one airline (Terminal 2).

It doesn't take that much money compared to transferring to Clark or making a new airport to make for a more pleasant experience at NAIA.

[Aerolineas]

Old Terminal is not really issue when aesthetic appeal is concern may "remideos dyan" my best example is Sydney Kingsford Smith I notice it's also old but with the help of bright colored carpet and art claddings Ok, yun nga Lang their airport is spacious iba sa issue ng Terminal 1 NAIA congested. Miami International Airport is also old like Sydney with the help of arts around nari-Remedyohan din but spacious and connected to each other plus equipped with electric Rail System.

[aahimself]

Answered all of the above..

As for my "others" choice...

I would like to add up amenities or spaces that would showcase our culture so that our visitors would really know what's beautiful here in our country. It's basically changing their perception of the Philippines. Bring all the positivity, remove all the negativity.

Airports, nowadays bring the image and impression of the country so, it must do its job to bring the good impression to the travelers.

[fieldsofdreams]

Originally Posted by NTprime

The trend of airports in the past decade has been to expand to ancillary services such as lodging, shopping, leisure and the like. Thus the need for larger tracts of land for airport complexes. Since the newer airports being built are far away from the city, it makes sense to provide all the creature comforts just like a mini-city. As a result we are seeing more privatization of airports worldwide and larger and more integrated terminals.

The problem with NAIA is that there are 3 separate islands, oops, terminals. They are not even connected to each other, whether underground or by driverless train! That is the reason why NAIA is not your ideal transit hub.

A short term solution to making NAIA better for travelers is to interconnect all three terminals, but the biggest stumbling block are the airlines themselves. It doesn't make sense to have one terminal just for international, then another just for domestic LCCs, and then the other one for just one airline (Terminal 2).

It doesn't take that much money compared to transferring to Clark or making a new airport to make for a more pleasant experience at NAIA.

That is true. I believe that if government is serious about hauling in 10,000,000 tourists by 2016, then it should consider such options like yours; unfortunately, being a government that is mired in corruption and scandals, airport expansion may not likely be happening. Unless a strong hand from the private sector can bring the government up to speed and have a serious discussion with private companies and stakeholders, the likelihood of expanding or improving NAIA, as it is right now, may just be cosmetic, not full rehabilitation. It's akin to a partial restoration of an old beauty rather than a full restoration. Of course, a full restoration and expansion can cost a lot, but the ROI can be enormous over time.

I truly long for the day that NAIA is not only a throng of separated terminals, but also a complete facility like SM wherein people can shop, dine, and watch before or after flying. Why not integrate the concept of a shopping mall at an airport if it is at all possible?

[NTprime]

Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams

That is true. I believe that if government is serious about hauling in 10,000,000 tourists by 2016, then it should consider such options like yours; unfortunately, being a government that is mired in corruption and scandals, airport expansion may not likely be happening. Unless a strong hand from the private sector can bring the government up to speed and have a serious discussion with private companies and stakeholders, the likelihood of expanding or improving NAIA, as it is right now, may just be cosmetic, not full rehabilitation. It's akin to a partial restoration of an old beauty rather than a full restoration. Of course, a full restoration and expansion can cost a lot, but the ROI can be enormous over time.

I truly long for the day that NAIA is not only a throng of separated terminals, but also a complete facility like SM wherein people can shop, dine, and watch before or after flying. Why not integrate the concept of a shopping mall at an airport if it is at all possible?

The reason NAIA will never become or have an SM (at least for now) is because Henry Sy's SM Prime is not a stakeholder in what used to be Paircargo/Fraport/PIATCO (same goes for Lucio Tan but LT is not into malls). The original 6 taipans (Henry Sy, Lucio Tan, John Gokongwei, Andrew Gotianun, George Ty, Alfonso Yuchengco) who formed AEDC (Asia's Emerging Dragon Corporation) in the early 90s have already sold out to Lucio Tan. Since LT was at one point the most hated person of the PAL labor unions, anything associated with him was like the plague. I don't know if that had anything to do though with their decision not to request PAL operations to be moved to T3 from T2 since somehow they are a protagonist in the T3 issue.

I don't know if Sy or Gokongwei are still interested in building a mall within Terminal 3, but from their actions, the answer is NO for now. Who will then build a mall inside Terminal 3? Ayala? Gaisano? some foreign entity? Your guess is as good as mine but chances are it won't happen in the near future.

With the new PAL airport, they can start from scratch and Ramon Ang will probably have the taipans/big property companies bid for the shopping/retail complex within the airport.

[fieldsofdreams]

Originally Posted by aahimself

Answered all of the above..

As for my "others" choice...

I would like to add up amenities or spaces that would showcase our culture so that our visitors would really know what's beautiful here in our country. It's basically changing their perception of the Philippines. Bring all the positivity, remove all the negativity.

Airports, nowadays bring the image and impression of the country so, it must do its job to bring the good impression to the travelers.

That would mean bringing the Nayong Pilipino indoors... just reminds me of bringing in local artists inside airport terminals and showcase their talents. I wonder though if airport officials will be accommodating to such a move.

[aahimself]

Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams

That would mean bringing the Nayong Pilipino indoors... just reminds me of bringing in local artists inside airport terminals and showcase their talents. I wonder though if airport officials will be accommodating to such a move.

Ofcourse not the whole models..but by cultural museums and exhibitions along the halls and also, bring in some festival performances in the terminal as well and decorate the terminal according to the different festivals during the summer. I think that would be great.

Did you know that the CCP did a flash mob performance at NAIA T3? I think by that performance, it's a start of many cultural things to come at our airports.

here, see it for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMUGNNJdfrk

[fieldsofdreams]

A follow-up question:

I've checked the polls, and it seems like not a lot of you want to see shorter walk times from airport door to gate (and vice versa) at the airports. How come? Would you rather have a 15-minute walk time from after check-in to the gate (departures) and a 12-minute walk time from the gate to after customs (arrivals), on average, similar to Incheon Airport near Seoul, or would you rather wait in long lines and take an hour to get between the gate and the departure or arrival lobby?

[aahimself]

Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams

A follow-up question:

I've checked the polls, and it seems like not a lot of you want to see shorter walk times from airport door to gate (and vice versa) at the airports. How come? Would you rather have a 15-minute walk time from after check-in to the gate (departures) and a 12-minute walk time from the gate to after customs (arrivals), on average, similar to Incheon Airport near Seoul, or would you rather wait in long lines and take an hour to get between the gate and the departure or arrival lobby?

I really like to explore the whole airport first before going to the gate. Incheon is one of the best airports in the world..so when i went there, i got curious on why is it one of the best, what does it make it one of the best..so i explored it.

[fieldsofdreams]

Originally Posted by aahimself

I really like to explore the whole airport first before going to the gate. Incheon is one of the best airports in the world..so when i went there, i got curious on why is it one of the best, what does it make it one of the best..so i explored it.

hahahaha I would do so too. But do you think departure and arrival procedures at NAIA can be made more efficiently than what it is right now and model Incheon Airport in terms of fast departure and arrival walk times?

[aahimself]

Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams

hahahaha I would do so too. But do you think departure and arrival procedures at NAIA can be made more efficiently than what it is right now and model Incheon Airport in terms of fast departure and arrival walk times?

Yes, ofcourse IF the airport was designed to adjust for its increasing capacity in the coming years. But, the airport really lacked the flexibility to expand, which in airport planning, flexibility is one of the major design considerations.

I think longer/bigger circulation spaces is a big factor in departure and arrival procedures.

[fieldsofdreams]

Originally Posted by aahimself

Yes, ofcourse IF the airport was designed to adjust for its increasing capacity in the coming years. But, the airport really lacked the flexibility to expand, which in airport planning, flexibility is one of the major design considerations.

I think longer/bigger circulation spaces is a big factor in departure and arrival procedures.

I then believe that long-term airport planning is a crucial step towards building a strong economy for the Philippines. By investing in important steps and infrastructure now and in the future, the country can be better-prepared for future tourist growth, which is one of the goals of the Aquino administration.

[NTprime]

Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams

I then believe that long-term airport planning is a crucial step towards building a strong economy for the Philippines. By investing in important steps and infrastructure now and in the future, the country can be better-prepared for future tourist growth, which is one of the goals of the Aquino administration.

Long term airport planning was already there, especially during the time of FVR. That's why when he was inaugurated in 1992 he already set out the vision of making Clark the premiere international gateway. Unfortunately that was overshawdowed by the Asian Currency Crisis of 1997 and the loss of the project by AEDC to PIATCO. Then the Estrada and 1st term Arroyo governments did nothing much to further the development of the premiere airports. Only when the LCC business started putting MNL and CRK back in the maps of travelers did they take notice and start making terminal extensions and the like. However, most of the DOTC budget for the airports was spent on maintenance or rehabilitation (not to mention corruption), and not improvement or major upgrades. So the VOR equipment issue finally catches the MIAA with its pants down the past couple of years. And then they forget, until it happens again this month.

Long term planning is there, it is execution and follow through that is severely lacking. And budget, of course.

Which is why I strongly am for more private sector participation in the thrust to increase tourist numbers. Good thing the new DOT Secretary Ramon Jimenez has private sector roots - look how successful he is so far, even more than what Ace Durano has done.

[fieldsofdreams]

Originally Posted by NTprime

Long term airport planning was already there, especially during the time of FVR. That's why when he was inaugurated in 1992 he already set out the vision of making Clark the premiere international gateway. Unfortunately that was overshawdowed by the Asian Currency Crisis of 1997 and the loss of the project by AEDC to PIATCO. Then the Estrada and 1st term Arroyo governments did nothing much to further the development of the premiere airports. Only when the LCC business started putting MNL and CRK back in the maps of travelers did they take notice and start making terminal extensions and the like. However, most of the DOTC budget for the airports was spent on maintenance or rehabilitation (not to mention corruption), and not improvement or major upgrades. So the VOR equipment issue finally catches the MIAA with its pants down the past couple of years. And then they forget, until it happens again this month.

Long term planning is there, it is execution and follow through that is severely lacking. And budget, of course.

Which is why I strongly am for more private sector participation in the thrust to increase tourist numbers. Good thing the new DOT Secretary Ramon Jimenez has private sector roots - look how successful he is so far, even more than what Ace Durano has done.

Hmmm... if that's the case, then corruption indeed is a major problem to finally making our airports modern and attractive to both travelers and the general public. On top of that, airport mismanagement and mispriorities are commonplace that we are still stuck with FAA's Category 2, EU's airlines ban, and ICAO's significant safety concerns. How will the government finally catch up to the mistakes done by the previous administration... and fast?

I've seen a lot of progress made to address the FAA issues. ICAO is coming in this month to do an assessment. And hopefully the EU will review the country's policies soon. Why do we deserve to be in such predicament to begin with? Do we really deserve to be punished this severely by aviation regulators? What do you think can be done to improve this situation?

As for NAIA, yet another VOR breakdown means another setback to progress to be upgraded to Category 1. That definitely is a sign that the government is still missing out on a priority (and maybe opportunities) to replace the broken VOR system and getting a new one. The culture of corruption must be cut, and cut cleanly.