Don Muang Airport To Be Modified For Point-to-point Flights

[Jai Dee]

Don Muang Airport will be modified to accomodate point-to-point flights, after gov decided to delay 2nd phase expansion at Suvarnabhumi

The Ministry of Transport is preparing to modify Don Muang (ดอนเมือง) Airport into an airport for domestic flights and international flights that do not involve flight links, as the government plans to slow the “phase 2” expansion at the Suvarnabhumi Airport.

Transport Minister Pongsak Raktapongpaisal (พงษ์ศักดิ์ รักตพงษ์ไพศาล) has proposed that the Bangkok airport be used only for point-to-point flights in the country and in the region. The scale of the operation at the airport would be toned to be similar to that of airports in the provinces.

It had been expected that within three years, the number of passengers at Suvarnabhumi Airport would reach 45 million per annum. With the government delaying the 50-billion-baht 2nd phase construction, having a portion of flights utilize the Don Muang airport would reduce the passenger density burden at Suvarnabhumi by 6 million passengers a year.

The Airports of Thailand Plc. will modify the international passenger terminal 2 at Don Muang into an exhibition hall and the 1st to the 4th cargo buildings will be made into aircraft repair centers.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 03 Febuary 2006

[Crossy]

Being a Bear of Little Brain can someone explain exactly what this means?

By 'flight links' do they mean 'connections'? If so who will define whether a flight has connections or not?

Of course, it's friday afternoon and my brain has been well addled working in an office full of Honourable Japanese Gentlemen

[steveromagnino]

Being a Bear of Little Brain can someone explain exactly what this means?

By 'flight links' do they mean 'connections'? If so who will define whether a flight has connections or not?

Of course, it's friday afternoon and my brain has been well addled working in an office full of Honourable Japanese Gentlemen

Flying say Tokyo to BKK to Phuket = connections, like a hub and spoke system

Flying point to point is like say Phuket to Bkk without the need to change planes or anything.

Therefore, in this scenario, the new airport might have flights coming in from Japan, and flights also going to Phuket, whereas the old airport would have flights going back and forth from Phuket. For example.

Reading into this, I would guess that low cost airlines will tend to be point to point, and also some of the local flights of course.

With low landing fees, or lower landing fees, Don Muang would not be bad as the second airport for the low cost cheapo traveller.

[cdnvic]

Well, at least the passengers on those flights would know they aren't getting a cracked runway.

cv

[markuk]

Being a Bear of Little Brain can someone explain exactly what this means?

By 'flight links' do they mean 'connections'? If so who will define whether a flight has connections or not?

Of course, it's friday afternoon and my brain has been well addled working in an office full of Honourable Japanese Gentlemen

Flying say Tokyo to BKK to Phuket = connections, like a hub and spoke system

Flying point to point is like say Phuket to Bkk without the need to change planes or anything.

Therefore, in this scenario, the new airport might have flights coming in from Japan, and flights also going to Phuket, whereas the old airport would have flights going back and forth from Phuket. For example.

Reading into this, I would guess that low cost airlines will tend to be point to point, and also some of the local flights of course.

With low landing fees, or lower landing fees, Don Muang would not be bad as the second airport for the low cost cheapo traveller.

Just another stupid Thailand idea - who says what is a connection and not. Or maybe they are gearing it up so only Thai can offer proper connections through the new airport and all low cost carriers cant operate there - they wouldnt do that now would they???

How mad would you be if you flew in on BA or Thai from Europe and found that your air asia flight is away at the old airport!!

[Jai Dee]

AoT unveils options for Don Muang

Don Muang International Airport could be downgraded to a regional airport, with some space to be turned into an aircraft maintenance center and an exhibition venue, once Suvarnabhumi International Airport opens later this year, Transport Minister Pongsak Raktapongpaisal said.

The Airports of Thailand (AoT) will present at a meeting today its plans for Don Muang and updates on the anticipated opening of the new international airport.

Yesterday, Pongsak led an inspection of the two airports in preparation for the meeting.

Pongsak said Don Muang’s Terminal 1 may be used to accommodate low-cost airlines and non-connecting flights of Thai Airways International. Terminal 2 could be turned into an exhibition center for products such as automobiles and textiles, while the cargo center may be used as an aircraft maintenance center for international airlines.

“But we are not going to force airlines to move or stay at Don Muang, it’s up to them to decide,” Pongsak said.

Airport fees and charges at Don Muang will inevitably be cheaper than at Suvarnabhumi, he added.

The government also plans to accommodate private and chartered aircraft at the old airport.

Meanwhile, Pongsak toured the new airport and tested its baggage handling system. He visited the airport to determine if it is ready for commercial operation.

The new airport could open by the end of June or early July “depending on the situation,” he said, without elaborating.

A test run of the baggage handling system did not go smoothly yesterday, according to government officials who visited the new airport. But the AoT maintained that all work would be completed by the end of May.

Bancha Pattanaporn, AoT’s acting president, said that the company has completed 97 percent of the airport’s construction work.

Suvarnabhumi is expected to solve congestion at Don Muang, which has the capacity to handle 35 passengers annually but is accommodating up to 38 million passengers, and 276,000 flights.

Bancha said the new airport, which is expected to be the world’s biggest single-terminal airport and handle 45 million passengers a year, could generate a total revenue of 18 billion baht in the first year of operation.

In fiscal year 2005 ended September 30, AoT, a public company majority owned by the government, generated revenue of about 15 billion baht.

Net profit was 7.3 billion baht, an increase of 55 percent from 4.7 billion baht in 2004, Bancha said.

Source: ThaiDay - 3 February 2006 14:30

[Tywais]

Suvarnabhumi is expected to solve congestion at Don Muang, which has the capacity to handle 35 passengers annually but is accommodating up to 38 million passengers, and 276,000 flights.

Now that's what I call over booked.

[steveromagnino]

Just another stupid Thailand idea - who says what is a connection and not. Or maybe they are gearing it up so only Thai can offer proper connections through the new airport and all low cost carriers cant operate there - they wouldnt do that now would they???

How mad would you be if you flew in on BA or Thai from Europe and found that your air asia flight is away at the old airport!!

Well that is exactly the same as many other overseas cities; there is more than 1 airport, and low cost airlines like Southwest, Easyjet who tend to also use the point to point model have discovered that the lower landing fees and a slightly different market plus faster turn around times add up to cheaper flights.

This is hardly a 'stupid Thai idea' given that the whole basis of Southwest and airlines similar to them are predicated often on point to point using smaller airports. It is a worldwide situation.

I can only think a complete idiot would have problems figuring out that Don Muang and Suwarnabhumi are different places if this process follows the similar situations in other major cities with more than 1 airport; I certainly would not have a problem figuring out that LAX and Burbank are different places. THe whole way that low cost airlines work means you have to do more work, and that's all the more reason to provide ways in which people willing to pay for a full service airport get it, and people wanting bargain basement can get that too. Surely when someone buys their ticket nowadays, they choose between say Phuket airport, Chiang Mai or Don Muang, they don't just say, 'take me to Thailand then guv', 'oh shock! <deleted> 'eck Beryl we is in some island innit, wot we gonna do to get to our 'otel in Lard Prao, 'as you got some change for da taxi?'

Nup, can't see that.

I would expect that if the landing fees are lower in the old airport, Airasia and similar will land there mostly, to save money, and low cost airline flyers will take them up on it. Since these are mostly point to point flights, they should have reason to change onto another plane to go to say Chiang Mai or Phuket, since Airasia has direct flights to those too. This is not the hub spoke system, if they do it (and they should) then it provides more flights for tourists, and real savings for low cost airlines potentially, since Don Muang is a cheap, crappy airport.

Anyway, maybe travellers for Thailand will be up for the cracc if they come to the new airport :-)

[britmaveric]

Funny still flying into Don Muang in July - new airport is not even close to being ready. I have a feeling both will be used when new airport opens in the next few years.

[taxexile]

they don't just say, 'take me to Thailand then guv', 'oh shock! <deleted> 'eck Beryl we is in some island innit, wot we gonna do to get to our 'otel in Lard Prao, 'as you got some change for da taxi?'

a lot of the tourists that visit thailand these days would be hard pressed to even remotely achieve such levels of eloquence.

[astral]

It will be like flying into Heathrow and having a connecting flight from Gatwick............. sheer murder.

Lengthy transfers, lost baggage, what to do with people who do not qualify for

a visa to transit Thailand.....................

[Maestro]

How mad would you be if you flew in on BA or Thai from Europe and found that your air asia flight is away at the old airport!!

This is hardly a 'stupid Thai idea'

Right you are!

New York: JFK airport, Newark airport

Tokyo: Narita, Haneda

London: Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton, Stanstead

Paris: Charles-de-Gaulle, Orly

Milan: Malpensa, Linate, Bergamo

etc.

And where are you from, steveromagnino? Rome, perhaps?

Rome: Fiumincino, Ciampino

--------------

Maestro

[steveromagnino]

How mad would you be if you flew in on BA or Thai from Europe and found that your air asia flight is away at the old airport!!

This is hardly a 'stupid Thai idea'

Right you are!

New York: JFK airport, Newark airport

Tokyo: Narita, Haneda

London: Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton, Stanstead

Paris: Charles-de-Gaulle, Orly

Milan: Malpensa, Linate, Bergamo

etc.

And where are you from, steveromagnino? Rome, perhaps?

Rome: Fiumincino, Ciampino

--------------

Maestro

Thanks for that; I am sadly not from any of ther cities you mention, so could not recall any direct examples off hand other than LAX, Burbank! Your list is far more extensive

Actually I am born and raised from Auckland, so even then, we have Aardmore, Auckland, Hobsonville; not sure if they use the 2 little ones for many commercial flights; the first low cost airline used to fly out of Hamilton which is an hour drive from Auckland, then stop in Auckland for fuel not surprisingly, they didn't last very long for various reasons including this bizarre approach.

[Maestro]

Having to move from one airport to another to change flights can be a nuisance, and quite often is. Bangkok, probably more so than the other places I listed, would appear to have more leisure tourists being thus inconvenienced.

A direct express train link between the two airports would be helpful, but it may take years to see it, if it ever happens.

------------

Maestro

[shotover]

AoT unveils options for Don Muang

In fiscal year 2005 ended September 30, AoT, a public company majority owned by the government, generated revenue of about 15 billion baht.

Net profit was 7.3 billion baht, an increase of 55 percent from 4.7 billion baht in 2004, Bancha said.

Source: ThaiDay - 3 February 2006 14:30

Net profit of 7.3 billion baht on revenues totaling 15 billion baht. Quite a profit margin (nearly 50 percent) for a govt. owned enterprise, which usually operate on a non-profit basis. Wonder where these profits go?

[steveromagnino]

they don't just say, 'take me to Thailand then guv', 'oh shock! <deleted> 'eck Beryl we is in some island innit, wot we gonna do to get to our 'otel in Lard Prao, 'as you got some change for da taxi?'

a lot of the tourists that visit thailand these days would be hard pressed to even remotely achieve such levels of eloquence.

Indeed

fanks guv.

[Maestro]

Lengthy transfers, lost baggage, what to do with people who do not qualify for

a visa to transit Thailand.....................

You mean a tourist form a country not entitled to visa-free 30-day stamp on arrival, flying into Suvarnabhumi airport and continuing on a flight of a budget airline out of Don Muang, to a regional destination outside Thailand. Wouldn’t for such itinerary a flight from an airport outside Thailand directly to the intended final destination be cheaper?

Alternatively, Singapore and Hong Kong will be happy to serve as the hub for the required flight connection. Serves the Airports of Thailand Plc. right.

---------------

Maestro

[xbusman]

READY!!!!!!!!!

FIRE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

AIM???????????????????

[sajal]

Lengthy transfers, lost baggage, what to do with people who do not qualify for

a visa to transit Thailand.....................

You mean a tourist form a country not entitled to visa-free 30-day stamp on arrival, flying into Suvarnabhumi airport and continuing on a flight of a budget airline out of Don Muang, to a regional destination outside Thailand. Wouldn’t for such itinerary a flight from an airport outside Thailand directly to the intended final destination be cheaper?

Alternatively, Singapore and Hong Kong will be happy to serve as the hub for the required flight connection. Serves the Airports of Thailand Plc. right.

---------------

Maestro

I think what hong kong does for such passengers (airport <--> ferry terminals) is they carry the passengers by bus under supervision of customs or imigrations...

they dont get a stamp...

thats what i understood from the video they play on the ferry between maccau and HK...

[h90]

suuuuper: I remember to go Heathrow and having the next flight from Stanstead.

But OK I can speak english.

Now the same in Thailand. When I think my older parents fly to Thailand, in the travel agency they get some missleading informations (for example the flight to Nakhon Si Thammarat, you better book direct at the airport thats not a problem (but a different airport than), than they speak the Thai words a bit wrong and have problems understanding the Thai english (themself they are not native english speaker, and don't hear perfect anymore).

If there is not a fast mass transit system (not a bus!!!) you are doomed.....

Thats not a stupid Thai idea, it is just a stupid idea like many other countries did before. Flights should be concentrated at one airport, thats also the main reason for a new large airport.....

[steveromagnino]

suuuuper: I remember to go Heathrow and having the next flight from Stanstead.

But OK I can speak english.

Now the same in Thailand. When I think my older parents fly to Thailand, in the travel agency they get some missleading informations (for example the flight to Nakhon Si Thammarat, you better book direct at the airport thats not a problem (but a different airport than), than they speak the Thai words a bit wrong and have problems understanding the Thai english (themself they are not native english speaker, and don't hear perfect anymore).

If there is not a fast mass transit system (not a bus!!!) you are doomed.....

Thats not a stupid Thai idea, it is just a stupid idea like many other countries did before. Flights should be concentrated at one airport, thats also the main reason for a new large airport.....

well since the point of Don Muang would be as a point to point airport, I would not think that this sort of thing is happening; I mean they said they are talking about regional connections and the like; if your parents' travel agent is not up to scratch and can't get that right they they might need to find anuffa agent innit.

In the case of NY, the landing fees vary, and with low cost airlines some people would rather save costs so hence more than one airport. Plus with more traffic comes delays and so on.... so long as they really are separated as piont to point vs. hub and spoke, I cannot see the problem

Plus I live in Lard Prao, and generally don't fly overseas too often, so I prefer not having to drive to Bang Na ;-)

[h90]

yes but how can you guarantee that people use the point to point airplain as point to point airplane?

Therefore I made the example with the BKK to Nakhon Si Thammarat flight, which should be a point to point flight. But when just for example my parents from Austria want to visit their daughter in law coming from Vienna, it is for them not a point to point flight.....

I got already told that it is easy and not far from Hethrow to Stanstead (in the middle of the night).

I find it terrible specially if it is night and you don't know anything about the local situation (never been in Asia before)

suuuuper: I remember to go Heathrow and having the next flight from Stanstead.

But OK I can speak english.

Now the same in Thailand. When I think my older parents fly to Thailand, in the travel agency they get some missleading informations (for example the flight to Nakhon Si Thammarat, you better book direct at the airport thats not a problem (but a different airport than), than they speak the Thai words a bit wrong and have problems understanding the Thai english (themself they are not native english speaker, and don't hear perfect anymore).

If there is not a fast mass transit system (not a bus!!!) you are doomed.....

Thats not a stupid Thai idea, it is just a stupid idea like many other countries did before. Flights should be concentrated at one airport, thats also the main reason for a new large airport.....

well since the point of Don Muang would be as a point to point airport, I would not think that this sort of thing is happening; I mean they said they are talking about regional connections and the like; if your parents' travel agent is not up to scratch and can't get that right they they might need to find anuffa agent innit.

In the case of NY, the landing fees vary, and with low cost airlines some people would rather save costs so hence more than one airport. Plus with more traffic comes delays and so on.... so long as they really are separated as piont to point vs. hub and spoke, I cannot see the problem

Plus I live in Lard Prao, and generally don't fly overseas too often, so I prefer not having to drive to Bang Na ;-)

[bluebear]

It is a supremely stupid idea not to have all Thai flights not going to the new airport. Thats the point of a "world airline" isnt it? To be able to go from one point in a country and going ( sometimes though another airport ) to an airport in another country.

Ie Udon to Bangkok to USA, UK wherever.

Otherwise why not just have all the domestic flights going to Don Muang and international to the new one.

All it takes is one person to want to do that and the great master plan falls apart and I would imagine there are quite a few connecting flights to Krabi & Chiang Mai & Udon & ..............

If someone like BA said to me yes we will fly you from Aberdeen to Bangkok BUT you had to get off at Gatwick and transfer to Heathrow, I would tell them where to go and fly with somone else. Thai might find the same thing happening to them. After all, if you have to transfer airport, you might as well transfer airlines as well.

[steveromagnino]

Lengthy transfers, lost baggage, what to do with people who do not qualify for

a visa to transit Thailand.....................

You mean a tourist form a country not entitled to visa-free 30-day stamp on arrival, flying into Suvarnabhumi airport and continuing on a flight of a budget airline out of Don Muang, to a regional destination outside Thailand. Wouldn’t for such itinerary a flight from an airport outside Thailand directly to the intended final destination be cheaper?

Alternatively, Singapore and Hong Kong will be happy to serve as the hub for the required flight connection. Serves the Airports of Thailand Plc. right.

---------------

Maestro

except that you've missed the point a bit; landing fees at Don Muang could be much cheaper, and for a low cost carrier flying say BKK Singapore back and forth, they might prefer to use Don Muang with a quick turnaround and lower fees. They might also run another flight to Suvarnabhumi IF there was demand, but are you telling me that someone is going to fly to BKK from London then get on a low cost airline to Singapore? That is not using a hub system, it is trying to link to point to point flights, and the whole purpose of low cost airlines is the point to point bit. I suspect the number of people in the situation you are suggesting is VERY low. And of course, if there is demand for hub style operations, then the airlines (NOT AOT) will use it for that.

And do a search on Airasia and singapore, and you will find a whole host of claims that Singapore are NOT that happy to serve as a hub for AirAsia ' "From our experience, they are very closed and we want to tell the whole world about it," said Fernandes, their CEO, and he is not happy that he feels they are favouring the 3 local low cost carriers.

"We don't need to come to Singapore," Fernandes said at the Asia-Pacific and Middle-East Aviation and Tourism Outlook conference in Singapore recently. "If we're not welcome, we will find alternative routes. Our patience is surely not endless."

Airasia is a big player in the low cost market....and they are also suggesting that Malaysia start up its old airport to reduce fees as well; so we have the low cost regional leader AFAIK advocating most of what AOT is trying to do.... hmmmmm. If the airlines don't like it, well they do not have to land at Don Muang once the new airport is complete, unless i am missing something.

In fact, the new Malaysia low cost carrier terminal is 20km from KLIA and opens next month...so that kind of undoes the point about Malaysia completely.

Singapore is so small there isn't room to build another airport.

Of course the point is domestic should be at Suvarnabhumi, but if low cost regional point to point carriers want to fly to Don Muang.....what is the big problem?!!!!

Edited February 7, 2006 by steveromagnino

[thedude]

i'd rather stick to don muang for short regional trips on cheaper flights. its just more convenient to get to. no complaints from me.

the ongoing fued between airasia and singapore as noted by steve has taken an interesting turn with the shin corp purchase. i mentioned recently in another thread to watch out what happens because shin corp owns 51% of thai airasia, and temasek's purchase includes a 'double play' on airasia too. today's news reveals that apparently thai airasia will now loose its license because with singapore ownership, more than 49% of the company will be in foreign hands. expect airasia to seek a new thai partner soon.

[wowpow]

If Bangkok's aim is to become/retain it's position as the prime S E Asian airport it has some stiff opposition. Singapore is opening a budget airline terminal at Changi in March and a little before that Kuala Lumphur will open a budget airline airport 20 km from the present airport with a bus link.

It does seem fairly crazy to be making these decisions for Bangkok's Dom Muang 6 months after the new airport was due to open.I read that it will only take 30 minutes by road between the airports. It will be an unattractive nuisance for tourists.

[steveromagnino]

If Bangkok's aim is to become/retain it's position as the prime S E Asian airport it has some stiff opposition. Singapore is opening a budget airline terminal at Changi in March and a little before that Kuala Lumphur will open a budget airline airport 20 km from the present airport with a bus link.

It does seem fairly crazy to be making these decisions for Bangkok's Dom Muang 6 months after the new airport was due to open.I read that it will only take 30 minutes by road between the airports. It will be an unattractive nuisance for tourists.

Well... it is the same in Malaysia... they shut the old one down, and then with the new growth in low cost point to point (far less in this region when the airport project started) Malaysia have had to start a new airport basically.

Changi haven't got the luxury of space, hence the new terminal.

There is a complete lack of transparency regarding our airport, but what we are hearing has been discussed for years, it is simply that they have not yet made a decision. The decision to keep Don Muang going is not that tough, since it is almost like a turn key operation.

Thedude - Like you, I am very interested to see what happens with the AirAsia 'piece'; I am guessing there will be some sort of private investor stepping in and buying it back, they would having to be ample rich though to afford that hmmmmmmm