IATA Wants Single Airport For Bangkok

[webfact]

IATA wants single airport for Bangkok

By THE NATION

Published on November 14, 2009

The International Air Transport Association is urging the government to operate a single airport for Bangkok and suggests officials build a domestic terminal at Suvarnabhumi.

IATA director-general and chief executive Giovanni Bisignani on November 2 delivered a letter to Transport Minister Sophon Saram advocating a single airport for the capital.

It said a one-airport policy was best for passengers, airlines and the local economy.

"IATA asked that the government reconsider its proposal to operate two commercial airports in Bangkok. The old Don Mueang Airport should be used for general aviation and non-scheduled traffic," Bisignani said yesterday.

The government recently announced it would operate two airports for Bangkok: three-year-old Suvarnabhumi Airport and Don Mueang Airport.

Bisignani said Bangkok served as the gateway to Thailand and was a critical transit hub for international and domestic travellers, so it should have all operations in one location.

"Splitting airline operations between two airports will no doubt result in increased passenger inconvenience for travellers flying into one airport and out of the other. Also, two airports will result in a duplication of investment - in airlines, airports and Aerothai [Aeronautical Radio of Thailand, which manages air-traffic control] resources - leading to increased costs for airline and passengers. Both of these factors will have a detrimental effect on the sustainable viability of airline operations in Thailand," he said.

IATA is also aware Suvarnabhumi Airport is operating close to its stated capacity of 45 million passengers.

Rather than diverting resources to Don Mueang, all efforts should be made to optimise and expand Suvarnabhumi's capacity instead, Bisignani said.

"In this regard, IATA urges the government to initiate a new domestic terminal with a capacity of 65 million passengers by 2013. In the interim, all stakeholders need to work together to enhance and ensure initialisation of current facilities," he said.

Bisignani said the present slowdown in aviation traffic provided an added incentive and a window of opportunity for this effort.

The letter said the World Travel and Tourism Council reported travel and tourism last year contributed US$38 billion (Bt1.27 trillion) to gross domestic product and provided 4 million jobs in Thailand.

It said the government should try to maintain its regional leadership in the industry by persuading airlines to remain.

IATA, along with the local Board of Airline Representatives and the Airline Operators Committee of Bangkok, is ready to work with the government in this matter, Bisignani said.

-- The Nation 2009/11/14

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[gotlost]

This is a no brainier. But the no brainier's built the new airport.

[Guest]

I just wonder about IATA's reasoning when you consider that many other big cities have several airports out of necessity, such as New York, London, Berlin, Tokyo, etc.

[cyb]

Bangkok needs more than one airport thats a fact.

I sometimes wonder how they come up with these brainless ideas.

Don Mueang i have a special love for, I used to sit at the smoke bar with a beer waiting for my daughter or son to pick me up. I miss the look my daughter would give me when she said daddy have you being chatting to the ladies again?

[Losangels]

I just wonder about IATA's reasoning when you consider that many other big cities have several airports out of necessity, such as New York, London, Berlin, Tokyo, etc.

That was what I was thinking as well

[chiang mai]

Whilst London does have several airports the traffic from/to those airports is not split based on in country destinations or flag carrier brand. The problem with having two airports in Bangkok is just that, how do you sensibly split traffic between the two airports - allocating all charter flights to Don Muang might work but is still likely to be a pretty substantial inconvenience to passengers. The idea of having all operations for specific carriers operate out of Don Muang puts them at a disadvantage as long as Thai Airways operates out of Swampy - having all flights to/from Chiang Mai and the North operate out of Don Muang just makes no sense. Can anyone see a sensible way to divide traffic between two airports in Bangkok? And before someone suggests it, the idea of inbound flights via Swampy and outbound flights via Don Muang is probably not very practical!

[bkkdawg]

Bangkok is big enough for 2 airports and there is nothing wrong with Don Muang. For me to take a domestic flight out of Suvhanabhumi is a pain in the a&*e when Don Muang is 80 baht up the road. Keep DM open <deleted>!

[BanTamo]

Much as I miss Don Muang, there's no way the Thai domestic commercial airline industry can support another 'sanam bin' now or anytime soon.

[zzaa09]

I just wonder about IATA's reasoning when you consider that many other big cities have several airports out of necessity, such as New York, London, Berlin, Tokyo, etc.

Perhaps the beloved IATA really understands how things work here and surely could see nothing but chaos ensuing if BKK pursued the idea of two principle international portals. In practice, two int'l airports would seve all communities just. Can you imagine the problems that might occur regarding organising transfers, connectings, transport, etc?? Even the bright idea of allowing Don Muang to handle 75% of domestic flights only would create headaches.......I'm just assuming that we should expect an ajoining domestic terminal at Swampy before five years is out. Logical conclusion. As for Don Muang, the old friend. I trust many romantics miss the days of Don Muang - sure, it was falling apart, but it worked.

[givenall]

This is a no brainier. But the no brainier's built the new airport.

To much to ask to have these officials think smart and logical

[zzaa09]

This is a no brainier. But the no brainier's built the new airport.

To much to ask to have these officials think smart and logical

Smart and logical? You're are suggesting a standard for such character? A Western one, no doubt.

Edited November 14, 2009 by zzaa09

[cyb]

The london airports situation works very well. I can choose what airport i want to fly to and connecting flights from there.

Why cannot bkk do the same maybe they should do a study of london airports to see how they work.

[siam2007]

The london airports situation works very well. I can choose what airport i want to fly to and connecting flights from there.

Why cannot bkk do the same maybe they should do a study of london airports to see how they work.

what are you guys actually talking about ???

there are no "connecting flights" to and from Don Mueang !!!

it is only used by two mediocre budget airlines of minor interest, NOK and 1-2-GO, which are entirely Point-to-Point carriers.

all CONNECTING flights arrive and depart at Suvannaphum, and - with the exception of Trang - all bigger airports in Thailand can be reached from Suvannaphum.

[TAWP]

The Ram Intra road would be experiencing an increase in traffic is two airports was used. And that road has already seen a tripling of traffic in the last 10 years. Not sure how much it can take without coming to a complete standstill on the weekends.

[Mrjlh]

Whilst London does have several airports the traffic from/to those airports is not split based on in country destinations or flag carrier brand. The problem with having two airports in Bangkok is just that, how do you sensibly split traffic between the two airports - allocating all charter flights to Don Muang might work but is still likely to be a pretty substantial inconvenience to passengers. The idea of having all operations for specific carriers operate out of Don Muang puts them at a disadvantage as long as Thai Airways operates out of Swampy - having all flights to/from Chiang Mai and the North operate out of Don Muang just makes no sense. Can anyone see a sensible way to divide traffic between two airports in Bangkok? And before someone suggests it, the idea of inbound flights via Swampy and outbound flights via Don Muang is probably not very practical!

My suggestion would be tp make Don Muang strictly a cargo facility. All cargo/freight entering or moving within Thailand lands there. Create your international customs facility there too. This will reduce traffic into Swampy to allow for an increase in domestic and international flights. Also you can maybe use Don Maung for smaller inter country only prop flights so as not to mix prop and jet aircraft. This has to do with aircraft separation. You also won't need Immigration there either.

Then only passenger traffic goes in and out through Swampy. Make full use of the terminal by allowing low budget airlines to use the terminal wings instead on making them park on the tarmac and busing passengers to the terminal.

[tigerbalm]

Whilst London does have several airports the traffic from/to those airports is not split based on in country destinations or flag carrier brand. The problem with having two airports in Bangkok is just that, how do you sensibly split traffic between the two airports - allocating all charter flights to Don Muang might work but is still likely to be a pretty substantial inconvenience to passengers. The idea of having all operations for specific carriers operate out of Don Muang puts them at a disadvantage as long as Thai Airways operates out of Swampy - having all flights to/from Chiang Mai and the North operate out of Don Muang just makes no sense. Can anyone see a sensible way to divide traffic between two airports in Bangkok? And before someone suggests it, the idea of inbound flights via Swampy and outbound flights via Don Muang is probably not very practical!

My suggestion would be tp make Don Muang strictly a cargo facility. All cargo/freight entering or moving within Thailand lands there. Create your international customs facility there too. This will reduce traffic into Swampy to allow for an increase in domestic and international flights. Also you can maybe use Don Maung for smaller inter country only prop flights so as not to mix prop and jet aircraft. This has to do with aircraft separation. You also won't need Immigration there either.

Then only passenger traffic goes in and out through Swampy. Make full use of the terminal by allowing low budget airlines to use the terminal wings instead on making them park on the tarmac and busing passengers to the terminal.

Now their is a good idear their must be a heck of a lot of freight going and coming in to Thailand by air, i remember the Thai post office saying once that they have to shift 10 tons out every day.

I am not sure if the budget carriers who were opperating both prop and Jet aircraft would want the additional costs of splitting their opperations between two airports.

I was going to suggest a Helicopter link between the two could be used to service the passengers that say land at Don Muangand and need to get to Swampy for a conecting flight, but thinking about it it would be empty on the way back so costs would be high for the transfer

[chiang mai]

Whilst London does have several airports the traffic from/to those airports is not split based on in country destinations or flag carrier brand. The problem with having two airports in Bangkok is just that, how do you sensibly split traffic between the two airports - allocating all charter flights to Don Muang might work but is still likely to be a pretty substantial inconvenience to passengers. The idea of having all operations for specific carriers operate out of Don Muang puts them at a disadvantage as long as Thai Airways operates out of Swampy - having all flights to/from Chiang Mai and the North operate out of Don Muang just makes no sense. Can anyone see a sensible way to divide traffic between two airports in Bangkok? And before someone suggests it, the idea of inbound flights via Swampy and outbound flights via Don Muang is probably not very practical!

My suggestion would be tp make Don Muang strictly a cargo facility. All cargo/freight entering or moving within Thailand lands there. Create your international customs facility there too. This will reduce traffic into Swampy to allow for an increase in domestic and international flights. Also you can maybe use Don Maung for smaller inter country only prop flights so as not to mix prop and jet aircraft. This has to do with aircraft separation. You also won't need Immigration there either.

Then only passenger traffic goes in and out through Swampy. Make full use of the terminal by allowing low budget airlines to use the terminal wings instead on making them park on the tarmac and busing passengers to the terminal.

Now their is a good idear their must be a heck of a lot of freight going and coming in to Thailand by air, i remember the Thai post office saying once that they have to shift 10 tons out every day.

I am not sure if the budget carriers who were opperating both prop and Jet aircraft would want the additional costs of splitting their opperations between two airports.

I was going to suggest a Helicopter link between the two could be used to service the passengers that say land at Don Muangand and need to get to Swampy for a conecting flight, but thinking about it it would be empty on the way back so costs would be high for the transfer

The problem is that there is already an awful lot of new infrastructure already in place at Swampy to manage cargo including some fairly spacious cargo customs facilities - the other problem is that the source /destination for much cargo is in the Samut Prakan area which is much closer to Swampy than to Don Muang.

[catmac]

The problem is that there is already an awful lot of new infrastructure already in place at Swampy to manage cargo including some fairly spacious cargo customs facilities - the other problem is that the source /destination for much cargo is in the Samut Prakan area which is much closer to Swampy than to Don Muang.

And of course, don't forget that every long-haul jet carries a huge quantity of freight in its lower deck, so this would just cause the present chaotic mess to happen with freight rather than passengers!

[laxman1960]

Whilst London does have several airports the traffic from/to those airports is not split based on in country destinations or flag carrier brand. The problem with having two airports in Bangkok is just that, how do you sensibly split traffic between the two airports - allocating all charter flights to Don Muang might work but is still likely to be a pretty substantial inconvenience to passengers. The idea of having all operations for specific carriers operate out of Don Muang puts them at a disadvantage as long as Thai Airways operates out of Swampy - having all flights to/from Chiang Mai and the North operate out of Don Muang just makes no sense. Can anyone see a sensible way to divide traffic between two airports in Bangkok? And before someone suggests it, the idea of inbound flights via Swampy and outbound flights via Don Muang is probably not very practical!

My suggestion would be tp make Don Muang strictly a cargo facility. All cargo/freight entering or moving within Thailand lands there. Create your international customs facility there too. This will reduce traffic into Swampy to allow for an increase in domestic and international flights. Also you can maybe use Don Maung for smaller inter country only prop flights so as not to mix prop and jet aircraft. This has to do with aircraft separation. You also won't need Immigration there either.

Then only passenger traffic goes in and out through Swampy. Make full use of the terminal by allowing low budget airlines to use the terminal wings instead on making them park on the tarmac and busing passengers to the terminal.

Now their is a good idear their must be a heck of a lot of freight going and coming in to Thailand by air, i remember the Thai post office saying once that they have to shift 10 tons out every day.

I am not sure if the budget carriers who were opperating both prop and Jet aircraft would want the additional costs of splitting their opperations between two airports.

I was going to suggest a Helicopter link between the two could be used to service the passengers that say land at Don Muangand and need to get to Swampy for a conecting flight, but thinking about it it would be empty on the way back so costs would be high for the transfer

The problem is that there is already an awful lot of new infrastructure already in place at Swampy to manage cargo including some fairly spacious cargo customs facilities - the other problem is that the source /destination for much cargo is in the Samut Prakan area which is much closer to Swampy than to Don Muang.

And the other not so minor issue is that fact that a significant amount of cargo is carried in the belly of passenger aircraft, so how do you guys propose to deal with that?

D

[chiang mai]

Right then, that seems to pretty much see off the idea of having Don Muang as the cargo terminal. That kind of leaves using DM for charters as the only sensible remaining idea and I kinda like that, it's nearly the Heathrow/Gatwick model in the Uk and it also models what Singapore has done also. Anyone?

[animatic]

I just wonder about IATA's reasoning when you consider that many other big cities have several airports out of necessity, such as New York, London, Berlin, Tokyo, etc.

That was what I was thinking as well

Paris also has two airports and needs them both.

Bangkok is a huge place and local carriers should fly routes from BOTH airports,

and Thais should have some flights go to both also.

This is not hard to do. Everything is in place, a few staff would suffice.

I wonder who dropped a cake box in Mr. Bisignani's office slot?

Edited November 14, 2009 by animatic

[zink]

I just wonder about IATA's reasoning when you consider that many other big cities have several airports out of necessity, such as New York, London, Berlin, Tokyo, etc.

Yes, out of necessity. In these citites either is no room to build a large enough airport, or the new large airport has been built too far away from the center of the city.

This of course does not apply to Bangkok, the new airport is as close to city center as Don Muang, and its capacity can be easily doubled by building additional runways and terminals. There is no practical reason why Bangkok needs two airports. Having a single airport would simplify things and reduce costs.

Edited November 14, 2009 by zink

[slapout]

If the advice put forth by IATA is followed by the 'powers That Be' I would be surprised. Taking the advice of non Thai organizations in making decisions in/about Thailand "is just not done. Don't you see?"

[Ricardo]

My suggestion would be tp make Don Muang strictly a cargo facility. All cargo/freight entering or moving within Thailand lands there. Create your international customs facility there too. This will reduce traffic into Swampy to allow for an increase in domestic and international flights.

And all international flights could land at DM, to off-load their cargo, before hopping across to Swampy, to offload passengers, thus generating impressive levels of business for both airports !

From the OP, which I cannot quote, does Bangkok really need a Domestic-Terminal with a capacity of 65 million by 2013 ? I doubt it ! Perhaps he meant to say, build a new Domestic/Low-Cost-Carrier terminal with a capacity of 20 million, thus increasing total-capacity to 65 million ?

Commencement of a new low-cost terminal has been announced a few times previously, initially by then-PM Thaksin, and it does make sense, perhaps they might finally get on with it !

[cyb]

The london airports situation works very well. I can choose what airport i want to fly to and connecting flights from there.

Why cannot bkk do the same maybe they should do a study of london airports to see how they work.

what are you guys actually talking about ???

there are no "connecting flights" to and from Don Mueang !!!

it is only used by two mediocre budget airlines of minor interest, NOK and 1-2-GO, which are entirely Point-to-Point carriers.

all CONNECTING flights arrive and depart at Suvannaphum, and - with the exception of Trang - all bigger airports in Thailand can be reached from Suvannaphum.

Regarding connecting flights i was talking about london, I can see no reason for the two bkk airport not to work together just like the london airports.

Edited November 14, 2009 by cyb

[cyb]

I just wonder about IATA's reasoning when you consider that many other big cities have several airports out of necessity, such as New York, London, Berlin, Tokyo, etc.

That was what I was thinking as well

Paris also has two airports and needs them both.

Bangkok is a huge place and local carriers should fly routes from BOTH airports,

and Thais should have some flights go to both also.

This is not hard to do. Everything is in place, a few staff would suffice.

I wonder who dropped a cake box in Mr. Bisignani's office slot?

That is more or less what i have being saying all along. There is no reason why the two airports cannot run together

[chiang mai]

Work at this a little bit harder Cyb, how would YOU divide air traffic between the two places, from a customer AND a business profitably point of view.

[bwalker1973]

To cut through traffic problems of operating between two airports, it would be sensible to have an underground train system, which goes to don mueang, and vice versa, were your luggage automatically goes as well, instead of checking in/out. This is the most viable and reliable source of transport between the 2 airports, like trains run every 5 minutes or so.

[cyb]

Work at this a little bit harder Cyb, how would YOU divide air traffic between the two places, from a customer AND a business profitably point of view.

Not for me to decide that, London has done it so maybe they should ask them.

[zzaa09]

To cut through traffic problems of operating between two airports, it would be sensible to have an underground train system, which goes to don mueang, and vice versa, were your luggage automatically goes as well, instead of checking in/out. This is the most viable and reliable source of transport between the 2 airports, like trains run every 5 minutes or so.

Sensible. Indeed.