Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: Sime Darby gets OK for KLIA-East@Labu/KLIA2

   
   
       
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,392

    Why was KLIA2 moved to a soft soil site?



    Why was a new masterplan drawn up in 2008 for the expansion of the low-cost carrier airport (KLIA2) ,resulting in the airport being built on soft soil, when an earlier plan circumvented this problem?

    This question lies at the heart of the current outcry over the ballooning cost of the airport from an estimated RM1.7 billion to up to RM3.6 billion today.

    Referring to the KL International Airport Masterplan 1992, Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua (left) said today the move also remained the main cause of the construction deadline for KLIA2 to be extended from September 2011 to April 2013.

    “The transport minister and Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd must answer why they made a hard-to-fathom move to the new site. This is the reason the cost went up by more than RM2 billion,” Pua said.

    According to the 1992 plan, the current construction site of KLIA2 “mainly comprises saturated marine clay with an overlay of peat material, which varies in thickness from two to three metres”.

    "It has poor load bearing qualities and is not suitable for airport construction without undertaking significant engineering measures... which include improved drainage, removal of the peat layer and the introduction of fill material with good load bearing qualities (a minimum of three metres deep)," Pua said, quoting from the report.

    The earthworks required to make the site suitable, he said, cost an estimated RM1.2 billion. This could have been saved if the 1992 masterplan, drawn up by Anglo-Japanese Airport Corporation Bhd, had been followed and the KLIA2 had been built on the original hard land area marked out.

    The area marked out in the 1992 plan is a hilly area, which had already been prepared during the construction of the main terminal (KLIA) at the time.

    Double watch towers and extra runway

    The 2008 plan, drawn up by Netherlands Airport Consultants BV and KLIA Consultancy Services, led to further consequences on costs:

    • A third runway, estimated to cost RM270 million, has to be constructed as the new site would not allow KLIA and KLIA2 to share two runways. However, the third runway will also need to be built on soft soil, raising questions as to when it will be ready.
    “Airlines would not want to move to KLIA2 if they have to taxi longer in order to use KLIA’s runways,” Pua said.
    • A second control tower, estimated to cost RM500 million, needs to be constructed as KLIA’s tower would not be able to see some parts of the third runway. The 1992 plan had both terminals sharing the same tower.
    “This would make it the first modern airport, built after the 1960s, with two control towers within two kilometres of each other,” Pua said.

    While conceding that he was not an expert in the field, Pua said an engineering expert who was consulted had said the deadline of April 2013 was “iffy” at best, mainly due to the poor soil.

    In comparison, he said, the current low-cost carrier terminal (LCCT) had cost RM232 million and had taken about 15 months to construct, including upgrades.

    “Of course it’s not fair as (KLIA2) would have a third runway, etc, but it gives a comparison of contrast in cost from the new airport and the current terminal. The current one was built in budget fashion, the new one is as good as a premium terminal.

    “We are not disputing the need to move to a bigger terminal as the LCCT is close to capacity. Nor do we mind shifting the location, but not at such a ballooning cost,” Pua said.

    LCCT currently caters to 15.4 million passengers, 400,000 more than its capacity.

    py

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,392
    All players consulted before KLIA2 site moved, MAHB restates



    By Yow Hong Chieh
    January 04, 2012
    The spokesman declined to comment directly on Pua’s claim that MAHB had not informed government officials of the additional cost that would be incurred from the site shift. — Picture courtesy of MAHB

    KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 4 — Malaysia Airports (MAHB) has reiterated that the decision to shift KLIA2 to its current location was undertaken only after approval was obtained from all stakeholders.The airport operator’s statement comes after Tony Pua alleged earlier today that MAHB had failed to inform government officials that relocating the terminal from KLIA North to KLIA West would increase its construction cost by nearly two-fold to RM3.9 billion.

    The DAP publicity chief had pointed out MAHB withheld this crucial information when it first proposed the new site to Transport, Finance and Home Ministry officials at a meeting on April 15, 2008.

    This was despite the original KLIA Master Plan 1992 warning that soil to the west had “poor bearing qualities and is not suitable for airport construction without undertaking significant engineering measures”, he said.

    “Malaysia Airports stands by statements issued earlier, and information given whereby we have explained that the location of the terminal site was guided by the latest Masterplan which was dated December 2008 and would have superseded any earlier master plan referred to by Tony Pua.

    “It is clearly explained that the site had taken into consideration all aspects including soil conditions, and had involved all stakeholders including the government and all airlines,” an MAHB spokesman told The Malaysian Insider.

    The spokesman, however, declined to comment directly on Pua’s claim that MAHB had not informed government officials of the additional cost that would be incurred from the site shift:

    “We can’t be responding to every allegation. That’s just what he says.”

    MAHB has said the inflated cost of KLIA2, which has nearly doubled to RM3.9 billion from RM2 billion, was due to its decision to increase the terminal’s capacity to 45 million passengers per annum (PPA) from 30 million.

    This was done to accommodate budget carrier AirAsia’s projections that 45.3 million passengers would be using the new low-cost carrier terminal by 2020, it said.

    The airport operator also blamed the latest six-month delay on a change in the baggage handling system (BHS), which it said was requested by AirAsia.

    But AirAsia has denied asking for a more powerful BHS or a larger terminal, noting that it had only asked MAHB to ensure KLIA2 could be expanded if needed.

    KLIA2 will be the world’s largest low-cost carrier terminal when it is completed in April 2013

    Comments (11)

    Sort by: Date Rating Last Activity



    +10
    2 CLOZE· 2 hours ago


    2 airports, 2 contol tower....too close! Mark my word, when there is a minor lapse in communication...expect the worse





    py

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,392
    Tee Keat backs DAP claim on KLIA2



    By Yow Hong Chieh
    January 05, 2012

    KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 5 — Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat has backed DAP publicity chief Tony Pua’s claim that Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB) did not inform the government that shifting KLIA2 to its current site would lead to higher construction costs.

    Ong, who was transport minister when MAHB first mooted the change, said he did not recall being told by the airport operator that additional costs would be incurred if the low-cost carrier terminal was moved from KLIA North to KLIA West.

    Ong claims he was in the dark over the higher costs for KLIA2. — File pic

    “(When it comes to) earthworks, I feel I should be alert because normally I’m quite sensitive to that.“What I can remember is that it wasn’t highlighted,” he told The Malaysian Insider last night.

    Yesterday, Pua alleged that MAHB had failed to inform government officials that moving the terminal to the west of the existing KLIA building would push construction costs up by RM1.9 billion to RM3.9 billion.

    He pointed out MAHB withheld this information when it first proposed the new site to Transport, Finance and Home Ministry officials at a meeting on April 15, 2008, even though it had endorsed KLIA North as the best possible site as late as July 6, 2007.

    This was despite the original KLIA Master Plan 1992 warning that soil to the west had “poor bearing qualities and is not suitable for airport construction without undertaking significant engineering measures”, he said.

    Ong said the plans for KLIA2 were still preliminary after he took over the transport portfolio in March 2008, adding that the KLIA West site was presented to him in “introductory” fashion.

    “Certain things presented to me as a new minister may not be linked to some of the older proposals. Certain things may not be resurrected,” he said, in reference to the 1992 KLIA Master Plan.

    MAHB has denied withholding crucial information from government officials, stressing that the terminal was only shifted upon approval from all stakeholders.

    The airport operator previously said the inflated cost of KLIA2, which has nearly doubled to RM3.9 billion from RM2 billion, was due to its decision to increase the terminal’s capacity to 45 million passengers per annum from 30 million.

    This was done to accommodate budget carrier AirAsia’s projections that 45.3 million passengers would be using the new low-cost carrier terminal by 2020, it said.

    MAHB also blamed the latest six-month delay to a change in the baggage handling system (BHS) which, it said, had been requested by AirAsia.

    But AirAsia has denied asking for a more powerful BHS or a larger terminal, noting that it had only asked MAHB to ensure KLIA2 could be expanded if needed.

    KLIA2 will be the world’s largest low-cost carrier terminal when it is completed in April 2013.
    py

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,392
    hursday, 05 July 2012 08:25 Time is running out: Fernandes tells MAHB





    http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/in...-mahb&Itemid=3

    KUALA LUMPUR,-- AirAsia Chief Executive Officer Tan Sri Tony Fernandes has urged Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB) to beef up its readiness to face the competition, saying most Asean countries are competing against each other to persuade greater involvement of low-cost carriers.


    The aviation supremo said MAHB must act fast to complete the new low-cost carrier terminal, Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) 2.

    Fernandes said Thailand has made Don Mueang the low-cost hub for Bangkok and the Philippines has designated Clark as the gateway for no-frills carriers, while Singapore is building a new budget terminal to more than double capacity to 16 million passengers a year from seven million.

    "It's clear the world won't wait for MAHB to get its act together. Time is running out," he said in his latest update in Tony Fernandes CEO Blog.

    Fernandes said when KLIA2 was first proposed, MAHB said it would cost RM2 billion, a figure that was later revised to RM2.6 billion.

    Then came news that the terminal would cost RM4 billion, double the original estimate, and now there is talk that the bill could go as high as RM5 billion, he said.

    "That makes no sense -- the low-cost terminal will now cost much more than KLIA. Yes, I asked for a new terminal but one that has simple facilities.

    "These overruns are matched by delays in the completion date from originally up and running by September 2011, to the first, and later, the second quarter of 2012.

    "Well, here we are and construction is only half done. We have been told the terminal will only be operational by the first quarter of next year at the earliest or possibly early 2014, but I wouldn't hold my breath," Fernandes said

    in an article entitled "What's with the new terminal?" Fernandes also countered those who attack him for questioning MAHB, saying:

    "This is not the attitude, it's about not settling for second place and challenging things that are not right.

    "Corporate Malaysia has to tell our leaders what's wrong, neither is this about government-linked companies versus private ones. It's about being the best, period."

    -Bernama
    py

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,392
    Pakatan reps demand answers for latest ‘indefinite’ deadline of KLIA2

    BY CLARA CHOOI
    ASSISTANT NEWS EDITOR
    MAY 27, 2013

    An aerial view of KLIA2 that was photographed in the first week of May this year.KUALA LUMPUR, May 27 — Pakatan Rakyat (PR) lawmakers cast another spotlight today on the host of uncertainties surrounding the final cost and completion date of KLIA2, which has been delayed “indefinitely” this time, after being postponed at least eight times since 2009.

    DAP’\s Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua and PKR’s Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar said the entire project was being run by an “incompetent team of liars” whom they accused of conveniently changing their tune before and after the May 5 polls to “save Najib’s face”.

    The duo listed four demands on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his new government, including the final bill from Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB) for the cost of KLIA2, the true deadline for the project, a meeting with the new acting Transport Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein and an independent audit on the entire project.




    “We have our doubts whether the airport can even be completed by the end of this year. We wouldn’t be surprised if it only gets launched on June 28, 2014, the 16th anniversary of KLIA, instead of the original deadline on June 28 this year, the 15th anniversary,” Pua said.

    At the press conference, the lawmakers showed photographs of the airport site in Sepang taken in the first week of May this year, a little under a week before polls were held, which appeared to show that the project was still far from completion.

    Najib had announced in January this year that the KLIA2 terminal would be completed by May but this was subsequently delayed to June 28.

    Pua and Nurul Izzah flayed MAHB for the perpetual delays to the date of the airport’s completion, noting that as a company listed on the stock exchange, it should provide accurate information to the investing public.
    “They can be sued for misleading the public, who are trading on the shares of MAHB,” Pua pointed out.
    MORE TO COME
    py

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,392
    Design, poor soil conditions blight KL’s new budget airport


    JUNE 21, 2013
    Poor building design and soil conditions is the cause of repeated delays for Kuala Lumpur's new RM4 billion budget airport, which has doubled in cost and is now only expected to be open in May 2014, according to The Edge Review.


    The regional digital magazine's June 21 edition reported that construction industry executives now estimate that the cost of the KL International Airport 2 (KLIA2) project could exceed RM4.5 billion by the time it is completed next to KLIA, which opened for business in 1998.


    It said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak's close aides and transport ministry officials acknowledge that the repeated delays and the cost overruns will heap additional pressure on the government.





    It also represents a personal setback to Najib, who visited the construction site in January and declared that it would be opened before the end of this month.


    “The government is looking to what went wrong and we will investigate if need be,” one government official tracking the project told The Edge Review. He declined further comment.


    KLIA2 is the latest in a long list of policy fiascos that have plagued government infrastructure projects over the last three decades, the report said.


    Opposition politicians, who are touting KLIA2 as the biggest policy debacle to hit Malaysia since Najib took over the premiership in April 2009, plan to turn the scandal into a central issue in its campaign against state corruption when Parliament sits for the first time next week under the government’s new five-year term. it added.


    Najib has repeatedly pledged to deal with the poor management of infrastructure undertakings. But contract awards continue to be plagued by allegations of political favouritism and the corruption in public works projects is starting to show up in the delivery of shoddy construction work, and building and bridge collapses, the magazine said.


    State-controlled Malaysian Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB), the sole operator of the country’s airports and owner of KLIA2, has blamed the project’s delay on its contractors, and have slapped them for late delivery charges.


    But the problems associated with KLIA2 also go beyond the political mudslinging that is set to dominate Parliament in coming weeks. Tourism is a major component of the Malaysian economy, which has received a major boost from the pioneering role Malaysia’s AirAsia has played in making no-frills air travel a major growth industry for the region, it added.


    Global consultants Frost & Sullivan believe that passenger numbers for airports in Southeast Asia will hit 233 million in 2014, up from 211.3 million in 2011.


    Countries in the region will also be spending a whopping US$295 billion to upgrade and build new airports between now and 2017. The new infrastructure is vital for the regional air travel business to keep growing, and airline operators say the delays at KLIA2 will only dull Malaysia’s tourism potential.


    The development of Malaysia’s low-cost terminal is a story of how a series of government reversals and missteps turned into a very costly scandal, The Edge Reviewsaid.


    The government spent RM9 billion to build the current international airport, which was designed to cater for future expansions, but the planners did not take into account the growth of budget air travel and its different terminal requirements.


    “KLIA is designed for expansions, but low-cost terminals operate under different design conditions,” says one Malaysian building consultant. In Malaysia’s case, KLIA’s cross-shaped satellite terminal design was not built for the so-called linear blueprint required for low-cost air terminals.


    To meet the growing demand for budget airline operators, Malaysia hastily built a low-cost terminal about 20 kilometres from KLIA. By 2008, that airport could no longer cater to AirAsia’s overwhelming growth. In response, AirAsia and conglomerate Sime Darby Bhd proposed to build a new terminal with private funds close to KLIA.


    But that plan came under heavy opposition from airport operator MAHB, which wanted to build an airport on its own. After much haggling, the Malaysian government decided to scrap the AsiaAsia-Sime Darby airport plan, which at the time was estimated to cost roughly RM1.7 billion, in favour of MAHB’s plan.


    Aviation industry executives and opposition politicians said that the troubles at KLIA2 stem from poor soil conditions where the new terminal is located and an airport design that is not practical for budget airlines.


    They note that the peat soil conditions around the new airport required expensive earthworks, which accounted for more than half of the additional cost of the airport’s construction, the magazine reported.


    What’s more, the ground had to settle for some 24 months, leading to additional cost overruns and construction delays.


    Aviation experts say that low cost terminals are typically single storey buildings, and in its purest form consist of a single passenger processing area and a common holding room. Those areas are usually located adjacent to the aircraft parking zones that are connected by gates that lead the passengers to their planes.


    “Low cost terminal are no frills, but KLIA2 is simply over the top and it is all because the owners are trying to fix the problems around the wrong design,” one chief executive of a construction company that was involved in the development of KLIA told the magazine.


    The size of the terminal was increased to 257,000 square metres from the original design of 150,000 square metres. What’s more, the low-cost terminal will feature 68 gates and 80 aerobridges. There is also a 93-metre control tower, which aviation analysts say is a safety risk because it is located so close to the control tower of the nearby international airport.


    All of these expensive frills are raising questions whether the airport will be commercially viable.
    “The budget (airline) business is all about keeping cost low. Unless the government is prepared to subsidise the operations of KLIA2, budget carriers may have to consider other options,” one aviation industry analyst told The Edge Review.
    py

  7. #17

    :) :) klia

    i would like to say that KLIA is being very good, i have visited KLIA and LCCT both are look good. now i wantto see more changes in KLIA and LCCT.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,392
    Runway in delayed KLIA2 airport won’t sink, assures Hishamuddin

    BY YISWAREE PALANSAMY
    OCTOBER 07, 2013

    A Malindo Air plane makes a succesful trial landing on runway 3 at KLIA2 in Sepang, this morning. – The Malaysian Insider pic by Nazir Sufari, October 7, 2013.
    Acting Transport Minister Datuk Seri Hishamuddin Hussein today gave assurance that the new runway at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport 2 (KLIA 2) will not sink.


    "We know we are not perfect, but we are on track," he said.


    The third runway project at the new terminal for low-cost carriers has been shrouded in controversy after several members of the opposition alleged that the runway risked sinking due to shoddy work.


    "There is always cynicism in what we do, especially from the alternative media," Hishamuddin, who is also the Defence Minister, said.


    He added such remarks do not do justice "to people who worked hard to show probably something unique in the region".


    "If our runways sink, we would not have retained our seat in the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) for our professionalism.


    "It is not an easy feat to accomplish," he told a press conference after witnessing the trial landing of the first commercial aircraft Malindo Air Boeing 737-900ER on the third runway.


    However, Hishamuddin did not say when KLIA 2 would start operations.


    "I see that those involved in this are taking their tasks seriously and I hope the project can be completed in May at no additional cost," he said, noting that there is more work to be done.


    "I do not want to talk about the vision for KLIA 2 until what we hope for is completed. There are many challenges ahead and it is important to not put vision first until we complete this," he added.


    In September last year, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) said it would look into Khazanah Nasional Berhad's role in the delays and rising costs of the KLIA 2 project, as well as in the share swap involving Malaysia Airlines (MAS) and AirAsia led to a RM20 million anti-trust fine.


    PAC chairman Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed said the committee would investigate the roles of consultants and merchant bankers in these deals although both MAS and Malaysia Airports Holding Berhad (MAHB) are public-listed companies, with state asset manager Khazanah as the main shareholder.


    The KLIA 2 project was initially budgeted at RM1.6 billion but the cost ballooned to RM4 billion after several amendments.


    The new airport was initially slated to open in September 2011 but the date has since been delayed five times. It is now expected to be ready in May next year.


    According to media reports, MAHB received 230 non-compliance reports for the new terminal, including cracks in the buildings as well as ceilings which were built too low, requiring them to be torn down and rebuilt. - October 7, 2013.
    py

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,392
    5:17PM Apr 11, 2014

    More questions than answers at KLIA2


    QUESTION TIME There are some interesting questions about KLIA2, the new high-cost RM4-billion-plus terminal for low-cost airlines. First, why does it cost so much and is it really cost efficient? How much does Malaysia Airport Holdings Bhd or MAHB depend on low-cost carriers and especially AirAsia and its long-haul sister AirAsiaX, for its earnings?

    How come the cost of the KLIA2 was so expensive compared to the old low-cost carrier terminal or LCCT? And could not the cost have been kept down by the construction of a similar structure?

    And how is it that a simple shed with a roof that many liken the LCCT to be is able to move as many passengers as the very expensive main terminal of the KL International Airport or KLIA of which the LCCT terminal is a part?

    Let’s first take a look at some interesting facts about KLIA, the LCCT about to be put into cold storage and the brand new KLIA2.

    MAHB, which operates most airports in Malaysia, says that KLIA is one of South-East Asia’s major aviation hubs.

    That’s about right even though MAHB figures show that at 47.5 million passengers in 2013, KLIA handled the least number of passengers compared to Bangkok (67.8 million), Hong Kong (59.9 million), Jakarta (59.5) and Singapore (48.6 million).

    But still, KLIA stands poised to overtake Singapore. But before we stand up and clap our hands, let’s remember that without the LCCT, we would not be close. More on that in just a bit.

    The main terminal of the KLIA (sometimes wrongly referred to as the international terminal - there are many international flights at the LCCT) was built at a massive cost of RM10 billion or half the RM20 billion initial cost of Putrajaya.

    It began operations in June 1998, some 16 years ago. KLIA is capable of handling 35 million passengers and 1.2 million tonnes of cargo a year in its current phase - and it handles full service carriers (FSCs).

    The current low-cost carrier terminal or (LCCT) was specifically built at KLIA to cater to the growing number of passengers for low-cost airlines, especially the passengers of Malaysia’s first ‘no-frills’ airline, AirAsia, MAHB says on its website.

    It is located 20km away from KLIA’s main terminal building but shares the airport. Construction of the LCCT was done on a fast-track basis beginning June 2005 and it was completed in 2006. The LCCT is considered to be part of KLIA and its passenger figures are amalgamated into those of KLIA.

    The 35,000 square metres of terminal, MAHB says, is designed and built to suit the low-cost carrier (LCC) and facilitate passenger movement within a single floor. Thus it doesn’t require travellators, escalators and aerobridges.

    Main terminal cost 92 times more

    And here’s the interesting part: although it has a capacity of 10 million passengers a year or close to 30 percent of the international airport’s current capacity, it was built at an approximate cost of a mere RM108 million, or 1.1 percent of the cost of the main terminal at KLIA. Put it another way, the main terminal cost 92 times more.

    Barely a year after it opened, passenger numbers at the LCCT were hitting seven million a year, necessitating an expansion in capacity to 15 million passengers.

    In 2009, barely three years after the LCCT was opened, it was already hitting about 15 million passengers, accounting for half of the total KLIA traffic of nearly 30 million passengers, almost all of the passengers at the LCCT being from AirAsia.

    Imagine that, a terminal costing a mere RM108 million and an extension costing RM124 million to make in all RM231 million, accounted for the same number of passengers in three years as the RM10 billion main terminal which opened 11 years earlier!

    MAHB certainly owed a lot to AirAsia as without the airline and the passenger traffic brought in, its earnings would have been severely crimped. For a small investment, MAHB was getting big returns from the LCCT.

    The LCCT exceeded its original capacity in two years, and a year later even reached its new capacity of 15 million. But the main terminal, the expensive one which cost over 40 times the LCCT, including the extension, had reached only 40 percent of its capacity 11 years after operations.

    Fast forward to 2013 and the KLIA cleared 48.6 million passengers of which 21.8 million went through the LCCT and 25.7 million used the main terminal. Capacity utilisation at the LCCT was 145 percent - it was handling 45 percent more passengers than what it was designed for!

    And 16 years later, the main terminal was still operating at below 75 percent of its initial design capacity of 35 million passengers. What an utter waste of money the main terminal proved to be be, investing RM10 billion in capacity which is still not fully utilised 16 years later. And what an utter under-investment at the LCCT.

    Why? Especially when the congestion at LCCT was apparent already in 2007 and low-cost traffic was far exceeding the growth in full-service traffic?

    But as far back as 2009, AirAsia itself proposed a new low-cost airport costing RM1.6 billion to be called KLIA East@Labu, a proposed joint venture with Sime Darby which owns the land. Sime Darby would build the terminal for RM1.6 billion and sell to AirAsia or consortium led by AirAsia. It was to be completed by 2011.

    Among the questions then was why RM1.6 billion when the current LCCT cost a mere RM232 million for a capacity of 15 million passengers a year. Apparently, the facilities are much better and there are new runways, etc.

    Why so expensive?

    The new airport never came to pass and instead MAHB moved in promising a new airport but by the time this was proposed, the cost had already gone up to RM2 billion and then onwards until the current RM4 billion plus to date. Why so expensive? It’s a whole lot of reasons again which we won’t go into here as it has been written about many times. Go here for some of the latest issues KLIA2 and links to earlier articles.

    Our airport planning has been really, really bad. First we build an expensive, showpiece airport which is still underused 16 years later. Second as low-cost travel boomed, we delayed building a proper airport for it while costs ballooned as low-cost facilities were upgraded.

    Now the airport is finally about to be ready and slated to open on May 2 while the LCCT will close on May 9. And it is capable of handling 45 million passengers a year, some two-and-a-half times 2013 traffic. Is that too much? And even if all things are taken into account, is the airport too costly?

    And why can’t MAHB and its main customer at KLIA2, AirAsia, agree on as simple a thing as a move date? Haven’t things been already delayed long enough?

    As is becoming more and more usual in Malaysia, this is yet another issue where there are many more questions than answers.
    py

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Visitors found this page by searching for:

klia2 skyscrapercity

negeri sembilan vision city

sime darby labu

klia2 tender

malaysia airport police

Tan Sri Anthony Francis Fernandes

KLIA2 NEW GOOGLE IMAGE

lcct drawings

sime darby vision valley

klia project proposal

new klia2 location

malaysia airbus a380 at klia

vision city sime darby

development plan in negeri sembilan

klia 2 location

sime darby property vision city project

baggage handling system in SUBANG SKY PARK airports

picture of KLIA 2 tower 2012

klia2 labunew kliaMalaysia Airports Holding Berhad (MAHB) Mohd Zaifuddin Idrissime darby forumsime darby golf labuproperty watch KLIA2klia2 project
SEO Blog

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •