AOT asked to reconsider Suvarnabhumi Airport expansion plan

 

 

BANGKOK, 29th September 2018 (NNT) – The Council of Engineers of Thailand has called on the Airports of Thailand Public Company Limited (AOT) to rethink its Suvarnabhumi Airport expansion plan. 

According to Kamol Takabut, the president of the Council of Engineers, the AOT’s 2014 Master Plan concerning the expansion of Suvarnabhumi International Airport is not compatible with the structure of the airport nor its location. If pushed through, the expansion project could cause technical problems in terms of land and air transportation and would lower the airport’s capacity which today stands at 30 million passengers a year. 

Kamol also questioned the legality of the 2014 Master Plan, saying it could violate the Government Procurement and Supplies Management Act B.E. 2560. 

Meanwhile, Amorn Pimanmas, the council’s secretary general, said if asked his organization is willing to offer the AOT advice on the construction of its second passenger terminal. 

 

Source: http://thainews.prd.go.th/website_en/news/news_detail/WNSOC6109290010025

 

 

-- nnt 2018-09-29

Well, AOT did such a good job the first time around -- with subsiding runways and tarmacs, lack of restrooms, excess commercial space allocation -- why should anyone expect the next go-round to be any different?

 

Maybe what's needed is an entirely new "Third" airport, on much higher ground than the current two are that so after 2050 it can still operate as an airport rather than a marine terminal.

8 hours ago, Jonathan Fairfield said:

Meanwhile, Amorn Pimanmas, the council’s secretary general, said if asked his organization is willing to offer the AOT advice on the construction of its second passenger terminal. 

"Give us a job"

Airport planning . . . with that special Thainess touch. Or, maybe 'joke of the week' would be more apt.

1 hour ago, Ossy said:

Airport planning . . . with that special Thainess touch. Or, maybe 'joke of the week' would be more apt.

It goes without saying that King Power will have first say on the floor plans of the terminal. 

After that has been "agreed upon" the rest of the expansion plan will be designed by a committee. You know, the same sort of committee that set out to design a horse but ended up with a camel.

Naturally helpful input from people like the Council of Engineers will be ignored by AOT in favour of advice by people motivated by money and greed.

1 hour ago, Cadbury said:

It goes without saying that King Power will have first say on the floor plans of the terminal. 

After that has been "agreed upon" the rest of the expansion plan will be designed by a committee. You know, the same sort of committee that set out to design a horse but ended up with a camel.

Naturally helpful input from people like the Council of Engineers will be ignored by AOT in favour of advice by people motivated by money and greed.

Wonderful! . . . You're on fire, today, Cadbury

If pushed through, the expansion project .... would lower the airport’s capacity which today stands at 30 million passengers a year. 

 

Thailand - the only place in the world where expanding the airport would lower its capacity. Hilarious  

5 hours ago, Bangkok Barry said:

If pushed through, the expansion project .... would lower the airport’s capacity which today stands at 30 million passengers a year. 

 

Thailand - the only place in the world where expanding the airport would lower its capacity. Hilarious  

That's EXACTLY what I was thinking. Every now and then a particularly stinky brain fart rises above the rest.

On 9/29/2018 at 8:57 AM, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Well, AOT did such a good job the first time around -- with subsiding runways and tarmacs, lack of restrooms, excess commercial space allocation -- why should anyone expect the next go-round to be any different?

 

Compared to The British who have been arguing about Heathrow Airpory for decades. 

On 9/29/2018 at 9:36 PM, Esso49 said:

Maybe what's needed is an entirely new "Third" airport, on much higher ground than the current two are that so after 2050 it can still operate as an airport rather than a marine terminal.

Or maybe try to do better than France where "Décentralisation" remained wishful thinking. Chiang Mai, Phuket and Pattaya could take over a lot of the international tourist load. The share of business travel could then be increased in BKK. To do so the problem would probably be the dumb arrogance of the Krung Thep ruling class.