Majority Support For New Airport

[highdiver]

why Roo...?

Why do you take it seriously?

you have been a member on this forum from 2004 have you not? is this th first thread on this subject.

this issue surfaces every year again and again with the same results.

a very nice article in bkk post put a nice summery to it.

the result will be the same... there is no and there will be no second airport in Samui for all those reasons mentioned in the article.

if you read it closely then you will see that the same factors were discussed on various posts here on this forum many years ago.

or are you taking seriously the "test plane emergency" i was joking about. ( sorry Gator... Couldn't resist)

back on the subject.. since it is apparent that there will be no second airport in the near or long future...

even if they approve one, buying land changing the land zoning and planing infer structure to support it, not to mention construction time and objections from owners of houses in the "quiet part of the island" as some realtor's refer to it. (no one likes 747 landing over his house) are going to take a really long time.

the only sensible solution for having more planes land is the following:

1.to allow bangkok airways to fly 24 hours thus allowing more landings. (some residents may object to this noise all night long)

2. as Gator suggested...make the existing airstrip longer and wider allowing heavier larger aircraft landings. if needed reclaim land into the sea in BanRak area.

[SamuiJens]

Rooo, as I see him, is an elderly gent (sorry If I'm wrong) that is serious about what he writes, and I respect him for that, even though we don't always see eye to eye! If it's "joking and fun", you want, Highdiver then there is a thread about that on TV!

Edited April 8, 2008 by SamuiJens

[Rooo]

why Roo...?

Why do you take it seriously?

you have been a member on this forum from 2004 have you not? is this th first thread on this subject.

this issue surfaces every year again and again with the same results.

a very nice article in bkk post put a nice summery to it.

the result will be the same... there is no and there will be no second airport in Samui for all those reasons mentioned in the article.

if you read it closely then you will see that the same factors were discussed on various posts here on this forum many years ago.

or are you taking seriously the "test plane emergency" i was joking about. ( sorry Gator... Couldn't resist)

back on the subject.. since it is apparent that there will be no second airport in the near or long future...

even if they approve one, buying land changing the land zoning and planing infer structure to support it, not to mention construction time and objections from owners of houses in the "quiet part of the island" as some realtor's refer to it. (no one likes 747 landing over his house) are going to take a really long time.

the only sensible solution for having more planes land is the following:

1.to allow bangkok airways to fly 24 hours thus allowing more landings. (some residents may object to this noise all night long)

2. as Gator suggested...make the existing airstrip longer and wider allowing heavier larger aircraft landings. if needed reclaim land into the sea in BanRak area.

Rooo, as I see him, is an elderly gent (sorry If I'm wrong) that is serious about what he writes, and I respect him for that, even though we don't always see eye to eye! If it's "joking and fun", you want, Highdiver then there is a thread about that on TV!

Firstly, I posted the original article & I commented on it. I have also commented on various threads on this subject.If you read my last comment ( with a smiley),tongue in cheek comment.

Maybe Samui Jens is right, at 50+ I'm an elderly person & probably can't communicate a bit of sarcasm.Now where did I leave that wheelchair?

Highdiver please refer to my earlier comment & my thoughts on the subject of a second airport.

[LaoPo]

Now where did I leave that wheelchair?

I'll be with you in a minute, Rooo..and we're off, back home baby...

LaoPo

[Rooo]

Now where did I leave that wheelchair?

I'll be with you in a minute, Rooo..and we're off, back home baby...

LaoPo

[SamuiJens]

Changed you hair, huh Rooo?!

[LaoPo]

Changed you hair, huh Rooo?!

Can't you see that's a girl Jens....?

But:

LaoPo

[highdiver]

Changed you hair, huh Rooo?!

If it's "joking and fun", you want, Highdiver then there is a thread about that on TV!

[highdiver]

back to the subject...

there is another option that i did not think about before and that is to buy bangkok airways out.

on the contrary to the government they are business oriented and for the right price will be willing to sell.

[SamuiJens]

back to the subject...

there is another option that i did not think about before and that is to buy bangkok airways out.

on the contrary to the government they are business oriented and for the right price will be willing to sell.

This is the FUN section, remember Highdiver, to get a good price!

Edited April 8, 2008 by SamuiJens

[SamuiJens]

Changed you hair, huh Rooo?!

Can't you see that's a girl Jens....?

But:

LaoPo

YEP!

[suegha]

The thread has become

[ClaudeFeller]

Why a second airport?

We had 10 % less arriving passengers in 2007 compared to 2006.

Whole discussion is ridicolous.

[LaoPo]

Why a second airport?

We had 10 % less arriving passengers in 2007 compared to 2006.

Whole discussion is ridicolous.

No, it's not.

You didn't even read in the Nathon Daily that they opened a flight school for Bangkok Airways on Samui ? Where on earth have you been lately ?

LaoPo

[Rooo]

Why a second airport?

We had 10 % less arriving passengers in 2007 compared to 2006.

Whole discussion is ridicolous.

No, it's not.

You didn't even read in the Nathon Daily that they opened a flight school for Bangkok Airways on Samui ? Where on earth have you been lately ?

LaoPo

That's the one for the new jets,the A320's are coming.Great flight simulator.

Edited April 8, 2008 by Rooo

[Samui Coconut]

Who wants a new airport on Samui?

The spectre of a new airport continues to haunt Koh Samui. As your April 3 edition reports, a public hearing was organised on March 12, furnishing fresh information and allowing the general public to voice its opinions and grievances.

The "majority support" stated in your headline is misleading. The majority (of 342 people) who attended the meeting, encouraged by interested parties, may have given their support. But even so, a majority vote cannot change the fundamental issues - something that none of the past discussions have examined in a comprehensive and objective manner.

These include the basic geological unsuitability of the site, the exorbitant costs of expropriation and landfill, the environmental impact, and the ultimate futility of creating a second airport when the problem of the first can be addressed.

Once one has reviewed these issues logically, one can only be troubled by the nagging thought that, based on the fundamental infeasibility of the airport project and consequent waste of resources, that either a personal vendetta against Bangkok Airways, or a grand plan for financial gain must be at play.

By default, a project of these proportions will invite the age-old practice of money under the table and kickbacks proportional to the size of the budget.

Land expropriation: Supporters of a new airport have already drawn up complete plans for its construction without consulting the local community. The area envisioned for the new airport used to be Samui's largest rice growing basin (thung naa) and is still subdivided into small plots owned by hundreds of families.

Many people in Na Mueang district are opposed to the idea of an airport next door, and any expropriation plan will have to deal with hundreds of different parties and separate court cases.

In addition, it is rather naive to assume that 500 million baht will be sufficient for land expropriation. Appreciation in land values on Samui is one of the highest in Thailand, and for a 2,100-rai property in the thung naa area of Na Mueang even 1 billion baht would not suffice.

It is also naive to believe that the costs involved in building the airport would be in the area of 1 billion baht. Realistically speaking, we are looking at an amount well in excess of 2 billion baht.

Geology: The area in question constitutes an expansive floodwater basin acting like a sponge for excessive seasonal rain water runoff from the mountains to the north. That is why, with the right type of clay soil and seasonal flooding, the terrain was indeed ideal for growing rice, and should be earmarked for an enlarged water reservoir in future.

By contrast, one would in fact be hard pressed to find a less suitable site for building a runway, which needs to absorb the impact of heavy planes landing.

Both the top soil and in particular the geological strata below are by nature clayey and unsupportive compared to rock, gravel or sand. Therefore, in order to build a foundation suitable for a runway, large-scale excavation and re-fill would need to take place. As the bedrock only starts at a depth of 80 metres, piling is an unlikely option.

Because of the natural cycle of seasonal (at times severe) flooding, not only the runway but all other utility areas such as terminals, will need to be raised at least two metres above the level of the existing rice fields. Due to the scarcity of suitable soil on the island, large-scale landfilling is a very costly undertaking.

Once the area can no longer function as a flood plain, many surrounding residential areas and roads would be subject to severe flooding, unless a floodwater diversion system of large proportions is built to deal with this problem.

Bangkok Airways: There are many good things to be said about Bangkok Airway and one can only admire Dr Prasert's pioneering vision to invest hundreds of millions of baht to build a private airport on Samui.

Whether one feels that this was positive or negative for the island is a matter of perception and personal opinion. Fact is, investment on the island increased tremendously and many upmarket hotels and residential homes were built as a direct consequence of this development.

Samui can pride itself in being home to one of Asia's most beautiful airports. Using a combination of simple yet aesthetically pleasing architecture and well-maintained gardens, the airline has made a serious effort in providing a beautiful gateway for Koh Samui What is more, with its recent completion of a new terminal and facilities, passenger capacity has been increased significantly.

The ugly downside is that Bangkok Airways, as the sole owner of the existing airport, engages in monopolistic practices that enrages locals. The airport maintenance tax of 300 baht (which does not exist at any other domestic airport in Thailand) is just one example of squeezing money out of passengers. Everyone on the island has suffered at one point or another from the airline's high-handed disregard for its customers. Flight delays are more the rule than the exception.

Understandably, many people are disgruntled. However, building a new airport is not the solution to this particular problem. It would be like shooting sparrows with cannons or prescribing unnecessarily expensive medication, which only addresses the patient's symptoms. If indeed the problem is Bangkok Airways, then why not address this issue directly and force the company to improve its services, allow other airlines to operate, and charge more reasonable prices?

I believe hotel operators and local organisations (if they join hands) are in a very strong position to achieve this.

Impact on infrastructure and environment: The desultory state of Koh Samui's infrastructure, public facilities and services simply cannot cope with increasing numbers of residents and visitors. In fact, more and more visitors are choosing not to return to Koh Samui because the glossy brochures do not always match the reality of its increasingly damaged environment.

Surely, slowing development to resolve existing problems before they completely get out of control would be the wisest choice.

Conclusion: It appears there will be no problem raising funds (to the tune of 2 billion baht) to build a new airport. A concerted effort to address and deal with many of the problems plaguing Samui today would cost a lot less. The present dispute over the new airport should be seen as an opportunity to re-examine Samui's present state of development. Instead of more indiscriminate development and building, the island urgently needs visionary planning based on sustainable tourism concepts.

We should not allow this beautiful island to become another victim of short-sighted and destructive, big-money politics. Efficient solutions to the island's present problems, the long-term effect on limited natural resources and ultimate sustainability should be carefully considered before any more development takes place.

[sbk]

SamuiCoconut, is this your letter or is this one found online? If so, please post a source, thanks.

[Samui Coconut]

SamuiCoconut, is this your letter or is this one found online? If so, please post a source, thanks.

No its not mine, its BKK Post Post bag, sorry.....I thought it was copied/pasted as well....

[Rooo]

SamuiCoconut, is this your letter or is this one found online? If so, please post a source, thanks.

No its not mine, its BKK Post Post bag, sorry.....I thought it was copied/pasted as well....

http://www.bangkokpost.com/070408_News/07Apr2008_news99.php

[BlackWolf]

Samui Coconut

I think the article in Bangkok Post to which you refer is wery wise. Many opinions and replies on this topic has a background from personell feelings and subjective meanings. But this article is based on realyties and facts. And to people who make complais over a high prices to go with Bangkok Air I will say there are a lot of other possibilities if you want to go to Bangkok. From Surrathani there is 2-3 low-carry companies who bring you there for cheap money. Or you can take a bus up there, or speedboat to Chupong and bus from there.

If you get your self a Samui Resident card they give you 20 % dicount.

I hope this talk about a 2. airport is dead and gone forever, and we insted try to take care of the beaty and envirmont on this Island.

[LaoPo]

Samui Coconut

I think the article in Bangkok Post to which you refer is wery wise. Many opinions and replies on this topic has a background from personell feelings and subjective meanings. But this article is based on realyties and facts. And to people who make complais over a high prices to go with Bangkok Air I will say there are a lot of other possibilities if you want to go to Bangkok. From Surrathani there is 2-3 low-carry companies who bring you there for cheap money. Or you can take a bus up there, or speedboat to Chupong and bus from there.

If you get your self a Samui Resident card they give you 20 % dicount.

I hope this talk about a 2. airport is dead and gone forever, and we insted try to take care of the beaty and envirmont on this Island.

Seconded.

Excerpt:

"The ugly downside is that Bangkok Airways, as the sole owner of the existing airport, engages in monopolistic practices that enrages locals. The airport maintenance tax of 300 baht (which does not exist at any other domestic airport in Thailand) is just one example of squeezing money out of passengers. Everyone on the island has suffered at one point or another from the airline's high-handed disregard for its customers. Flight delays are more the rule than the exception."

I always hear people complain about BKK Airways' prices.

In the '80's they took the risk of buying land, building the airport, buying airplanes and hiring a lot of staff, next to the promotion, to operate the route (first just BKK>>>Samui vv)

Nobody could foresee whether it would be a profitable investment or not. That is the risk of doing business.

Now that it is a huge success, people who never heard before of Koh Samui, Koh PhanGan and Ko Tao, are complaining....

Nobody is forcing anybody to come to Samui. There are many beach places left to be reached with a cheap bus-fare from BKK.

Note: BKK Airways did the same thing, opening/re-structuring TRAT airport, making Koh Chang a fly-to destination instead 5-6 hours by bus.

Monopoly: ? Yes, so is Windows and I haven't seen a thread yet, coming from Samui, from Expats or locals complaining they are 'forced' to use Windows...?

LaoPo

[Samui Coconut]

Samui Coconut

I think the article in Bangkok Post to which you refer is wery wise. Many opinions and replies on this topic has a background from personell feelings and subjective meanings. But this article is based on realyties and facts. And to people who make complais over a high prices to go with Bangkok Air I will say there are a lot of other possibilities if you want to go to Bangkok. From Surrathani there is 2-3 low-carry companies who bring you there for cheap money. Or you can take a bus up there, or speedboat to Chupong and bus from there.

If you get your self a Samui Resident card they give you 20 % dicount.

I hope this talk about a 2. airport is dead and gone forever, and we insted try to take care of the beaty and envirmont on this Island.

Seconded.

Excerpt:

"The ugly downside is that Bangkok Airways, as the sole owner of the existing airport, engages in monopolistic practices that enrages locals. The airport maintenance tax of 300 baht (which does not exist at any other domestic airport in Thailand) is just one example of squeezing money out of passengers. Everyone on the island has suffered at one point or another from the airline's high-handed disregard for its customers. Flight delays are more the rule than the exception."

I always hear people complain about BKK Airways' prices.

In the '80's they took the risk of buying land, building the airport, buying airplanes and hiring a lot of staff, next to the promotion, to operate the route (first just BKK>>>Samui vv)

Nobody could foresee whether it would be a profitable investment or not. That is the risk of doing business.

Now that it is a huge success, people who never heard before of Koh Samui, Koh PhanGan and Ko Tao, are complaining....

Nobody is forcing anybody to come to Samui. There are many beach places left to be reached with a cheap bus-fare from BKK.

Note: BKK Airways did the same thing, opening/re-structuring TRAT airport, making Koh Chang a fly-to destination instead 5-6 hours by bus.

Monopoly: ? Yes, so is Windows and I haven't seen a thread yet, coming from Samui, from Expats or locals complaining they are 'forced' to use Windows...?

LaoPo

The article is copied from the BKK Post and NOT written by me, thus not necessarily my opinion, so no need to lecture or trying to convince me.......I do not want a second airport either........

[LaoPo]

Samui Coconut

I think the article in Bangkok Post to which you refer is wery wise. Many opinions and replies on this topic has a background from personell feelings and subjective meanings. But this article is based on realyties and facts. And to people who make complais over a high prices to go with Bangkok Air I will say there are a lot of other possibilities if you want to go to Bangkok. From Surrathani there is 2-3 low-carry companies who bring you there for cheap money. Or you can take a bus up there, or speedboat to Chupong and bus from there.

If you get your self a Samui Resident card they give you 20 % dicount.

I hope this talk about a 2. airport is dead and gone forever, and we insted try to take care of the beaty and envirmont on this Island.

Seconded.

Excerpt:

"The ugly downside is that Bangkok Airways, as the sole owner of the existing airport, engages in monopolistic practices that enrages locals. The airport maintenance tax of 300 baht (which does not exist at any other domestic airport in Thailand) is just one example of squeezing money out of passengers. Everyone on the island has suffered at one point or another from the airline's high-handed disregard for its customers. Flight delays are more the rule than the exception."

I always hear people complain about BKK Airways' prices.

In the '80's they took the risk of buying land, building the airport, buying airplanes and hiring a lot of staff, next to the promotion, to operate the route (first just BKK>>>Samui vv)

Nobody could foresee whether it would be a profitable investment or not. That is the risk of doing business.

Now that it is a huge success, people who never heard before of Koh Samui, Koh PhanGan and Ko Tao, are complaining....

Nobody is forcing anybody to come to Samui. There are many beach places left to be reached with a cheap bus-fare from BKK.

Note: BKK Airways did the same thing, opening/re-structuring TRAT airport, making Koh Chang a fly-to destination instead 5-6 hours by bus.

Monopoly: ? Yes, so is Windows and I haven't seen a thread yet, coming from Samui, from Expats or locals complaining they are 'forced' to use Windows...?

LaoPo

The article is copied from the BKK Post and NOT written by me, thus not necessarily my opinion, so no need to lecture or trying to convince me.......I do not want a second airport either........

I beg your pardon ?

I KNOW the article was from the Postbag in the Bangkok Post and I read it; that's where the excerpt is from.

I responded to the message written by BlackWolf and agreed with his vision; I didn't even think for a split second about you or your view upon a second airport.

I wasn't lecturing or trying to convince anybody, just giving my opinion upon the 'excerpt' in the Bangkok post.

LaoPo[/color.]

[jumnien]

Bangkok Airways runs a fine airport for itself. However, it's essential to have a general aviation airport for Samui as well.

[Mark Wolfe]

Jeez, no one copied and pasted MY letter following the original from the Bangkok Post. I guess I'm not famous yet.

Residents are finally waking up to the fact that a new airport will devastate a large area of forest and destroy

much fauna and flora

First let me catch my breath laughing from the source...Samui Express...

Second, a quick look anywhere will topedo that assertion; devastate forest and destroy plants and animals? Shock! That could never happen on Samui...