Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,329 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This idea is obviously not new and is very common in the USA, and other places.

Max More Bullshit has been suggesting more life could be squeezed out of his airport by having QF and VA (and their partners) terminals, rather than Domestic and International.

Perth is moving to more specialist terminals.

Melbourne probably no need given all part of one building, but still could be beneficial to pax flow.

Adelaide is too small but Bris might be worth the look.

What do people think - is the complications about customs etc clearance easier to resolve now than it used to be, so we really should be worried about pax flow rather than government flow?

How does it look for overall airport planning eg does it postpone the need for larger upgrades or new/additional airports?
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
809 Posts
Make sense. Most airlines are in alliances now and connecting flights are with a partner airline or codeshare. The int'l vs domestic thing is out-dated. I fucking hate having to transfer terminals at Sydney for an onward flight either inbound or outbound internationally. Such a (first world) pain. Bring it on I say. And if it squeezes more capacity out of SKS airport then even better.
 

·
Sydney: World's best city
Joined
·
40,696 Posts
At the international airport in Buenos Aires, Aerolineas Argentinas has had their own international terminal with other airlines flying out of another terminal. Back in 1998/99, Qantas was the only airline with the exception because of an agreement with them (codeshare and planes).

But as for trying it here, Melbourne Airport could be a model for its done. If Sydney Airport would want to do it, it would be a matter of partitioning the terminals e.g. Qantas occupying the domestic terminal buildings hand having T3 as the domestic section and T2 as their international section.

I think some though might question it because it favours certain airlines e.g. Qantas over others and then there has to be say two customs areas which makes management of people into and out of Australia a little more challenging.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,229 Posts
I think it's only likely to have a significant benefit where the different terminals are physically seperate buildings. At airports like MEL it is unlikely to give much benefit, but they could still devolve check in and bag drop to the counters in T1 and T3 for QF and VA (and certain partner airlines) respectively, and leaving the counters in T2 purely for the remaining international carriers.

If I was designing a new terminal from scratch I would look at ways of combining things for a passenger flow point of view. Whilst I haven't thought about it much, I don't see any reason why a given gate at the airport cannot be configurable for use by either a domestic or international flight, with passengers being funnelled along the appropriate corridors as required, keeping apart int arrivals, int departures and all domestic pax. An A380 capable gate for example should be able to be configured into a pair or 737/A320 sized gates when needed. Likewise in the main terminal complex I don't see why a check in counter or bag drop should relate specifically to either international or domestic services, or even to a specific airline for that matter.
 

·
Registered Melbourne
Joined
·
4,166 Posts
Why not have two electricity networks, several water suppliers- ... several phone net works... and two or three road networks, that you only committed to when you signed up ... or when you voted?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Well in Europe, Asia or America it is not usual to have a domestic and international Terminal. To be honest I don't know any other country where this idea is such widespread. Nzl? There are airline or alliance-specific terminals at major airports which are nonetheless connected, by some kind of free transport or are under one roof.

It seemed to me outrageous to pay for a train between terminals as in Brisbane but no other terminal is that far away.. If I remember correctly the Transport between the Terminals in Perth was not for free and dodgy too a couple of years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,329 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
You can also have terminal arrangements where everyone is airside cleared for security and boarding, then the subset of those who need passport control get that as well. I certainly think NZ only flights eg 737s to small cities should be able to go from the same terminals as Australia only flights, and aust/NZ citizens using the machines and perhaps two fedgov employees on duty paid for by QF or VA to oversee the whole thing.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,255 Posts
I seem to recall an experience overseas where one airline owned a complete terminal building. And predictably anything you bought whilst inside that building (right down to the vending machine) was branded by that airline and was pricey$
 

·
メルボルン | &#51652
Joined
·
4,328 Posts
I think, especially in Melbourne, they should push Virgin and NZ into an upgraded T3, they just need to build a 77W capable gate and they should be fine as there is only 1 77W flight per day anyways. Extend Pier F further out and they are done for the next 5 or so years, the gates can act as "swing gates" operating international/domestic flights depending on demand/time. VA and NZ can open a large shared lounge there too.

JQ and QF have quite a number of International flights out of MEL so they can stay put in T2, plus T1 can't really be extended any further.

Either way its not really an issue in Melbourne as its pretty much a short walk between terminals.
 

·
Moon Transit
Joined
·
1,949 Posts
and then we would have an added issue to consider when inevitably airlines go bust, split or merge... then .. what to do with the terminal?

Terminals are best set up in such a way to make them as efficient and convenient as possible, has to do with the size of terminals, airlines (hubs or not) and overall layout, and that all varies from airport to airport.

More importantly, airport operators should be prohibited from charging passengers travelling between terminals. Sydney, Brisbane and Perth are of only a handful of airports worldwide that charge passengers transferring to flights in other terminals.

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,745 Posts
I think it's only likely to have a significant benefit where the different terminals are physically seperate buildings. At airports like MEL it is unlikely to give much benefit, but they could still devolve check in and bag drop to the counters in T1 and T3 for QF and VA (and certain partner airlines) respectively, and leaving the counters in T2 purely for the remaining international carriers.

If I was designing a new terminal from scratch I would look at ways of combining things for a passenger flow point of view. Whilst I haven't thought about it much, I don't see any reason why a given gate at the airport cannot be configurable for use by either a domestic or international flight, with passengers being funnelled along the appropriate corridors as required, keeping apart int arrivals, int departures and all domestic pax. An A380 capable gate for example should be able to be configured into a pair or 737/A320 sized gates when needed. Likewise in the main terminal complex I don't see why a check in counter or bag drop should relate specifically to either international or domestic services, or even to a specific airline for that matter.
You only need to look at Heathrow T5 and the new T2 to see what you suggest in action. The only major difference is all departing pax share a common departures area, helped by the fact that there is no outbound passport checks. Though domestic and Irish passengers get their picture taken and verified at the domestic/Irish gates on departure. Arrivals they just get funnelled to the domestic/Irish arrivals hall and out.

Also closer to home the new Canberra airport the same idea. The international gate/s (not sure how many they have) have been designed to funnel arrivals into the immigration hall. Departing it seems they will for the most part share the domestic concourse, then head down to passport control. Of course not in use and not fitted out, but certainly designed for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,329 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
They should never charge you. Example. You departed domestic and caught the international flight in another city. But return direct to international. You no longer have a valid air ticket as you have completed your air journey, but your car is at the domestic car park.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Sydney: World's best city
Joined
·
40,696 Posts
and then we would have an added issue to consider when inevitably airlines go bust, split or merge... then .. what to do with the terminal?

Terminals are best set up in such a way to make them as efficient and convenient as possible, has to do with the size of terminals, airlines (hubs or not) and overall layout, and that all varies from airport to airport.

More importantly, airport operators should be prohibited from charging passengers travelling between terminals. Sydney, Brisbane and Perth are of only a handful of airports worldwide that charge passengers transferring to flights in other terminals.

.
Perth does it for free.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top