Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
605 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
605 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Apparently, the management of CPH does not want this investor group to build the terminal, so I guess we will have to see what happens.

P
 

·
Lord of Legoland
Joined
·
10,895 Posts
I like the design, but what's up with the location, seems nuts to me, especially after years of investing in Metro and RE train access to the terminals :eek:hno:

And is it just me or won't they have to make a completely new bagage manegment system now?...

All in all a vert strange choice IMO..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,067 Posts

·
I Love Ice
Joined
·
2,605 Posts
Could be more futuristic or at least shape and facade could be more visually appealing for such an important European city. I am not particularly impressed, but may be it will evolve before construction starts:)
 

·
Timelord victorious
Joined
·
2,681 Posts
This one looks to have been put on ice....
http://www.cph.dk/CPH/UK/Newsroom/News/2008/Alternative+low-cost+terminal.htm

I must agree that the location was pretty bad, considering that there would be shuttle buses between the new terminal and the existing ones.
Sad, but perhaps for the best. It just seamed like an accident waiting to happen. (Not a flight accident)

Hopefully though, the airport will still be forced to do something about the low cost airlines, and quite possibly use much of the same idea, meaning a new terminal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
605 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
I am glad it didn't happen. All the terminals at CPH must be connected and close to the trains etc.
 

·
Timelord victorious
Joined
·
2,681 Posts
I am glad it didn't happen. All the terminals at CPH must be connected and close to the trains etc.
I agree. But I think the investers had a point, in saying that whenever someone has a monopoly, like cph airport does, things tend to take a very long time, and always ends up costing a lot more, and therefor making it uninteresting to the low cost carriers.

But as I said, I think they will have to do something and if they try and take the best of the sugested project, and still connect it with the excisting facilities, it could be very good...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
500 Posts
There's always been plans for a terminal 4 in the airport. It was mainly planned for the non-Schengen countries. Now, maybe because of that invester-group, they start talking about some low-cost improvements. The problem with the invester-groups plan was, that it was situated in the cargo-area that is under upcomming development. So, offcause, there will be something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,073 Posts
Now Copenhagen Airport pressent their plans for a new low cost terminal.

http://www.business.dk/article/20081007/transport/81007052/

This is expected to kill any plans for an alternative terminal A.
Here is a lot more about the new terminal, called Swift:

http://www.cph.dk/CPH/DK/OmCPH/Her+bygger+vi/CPH+Swift/Fakta+om+CPH+Swift.htm

http://www.cph.dk/CPH/DK/OmCPH/Her+bygger+vi/CPH+Swift/

Renderings:

http://www.cph.dk/CPH/DK/OmCPH/Her+bygger+vi/CPH+Swift/Download.htm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
605 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
I was just about to post!

I really like it and think that it is a much better solution than Terminal A. The only thing I don't like is that there aren't any bridges leading straight to the aircraft.

P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
CPH Swift

I was just about to post!

I really like it and think that it is a much better solution than Terminal A. The only thing I don't like is that there aren't any bridges leading straight to the aircraft.

P
I think it's the compromise between making it cheap and efficient. Swift reminds me a bit of the M-gates at Amsterdam Schiphol. When you fly with eg. Sterling from Amsterdam to Copenhagen, you'll be lead into Lounge 4 and M-gates, and it's a bit of an walk. And there's no jetbridges, either. No jetbridges saves a lot of time, I think. And you don't have to pay for the operator, etc.

Anyway, I like the design and concept.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
605 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
I agree that it is a very good idea.

Regarding the jetbridges I doubt that it saves time that there is no jetbridge, since it takes just as long to get the stairs to the plane and then you have to either wait for a bus or wait for clearence to walk into the new terminal building. But is is clear that it is cheaper to build.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top