Manila International Airport

[Gustavo J Oppenheimer]

Are you talking about an NSCR Spur Line or an MRT7 Airport Express?

[ewh1]

Will the NAIA Connectors make the terminals accessible to ALL passengers or will they have to set up immigration checkpoints underground?

at T2 & T3, everything is sanitized between dom/intl so i can see how consolidating all international flights at T3 might make sense if they need to build additional immigration checkpoints. Regardless if they do that or not, the BoI would still need to have the proper manpower in order to staff new checkpoints. Do they have the budget to do that? or will they rely more on e-checkpoints?

I'm very curious to see how the transfer system will work since we will have for the first time, an operator who will at least have it in their interests to make connections as seamless as possible and up to industry standards. MNL will hopefully start to feel like a "real" hub and not a series of separate airport terminals and procedures that have no cohesiveness and thought about user experience for the connecting passenger.

[Arianespace]

Gustavo J Oppenheimer wrote

Are you talking about an NSCR Spur Line or an MRT7 Airport Express?

NSCR Airport Express Spur line. Generally, for passengers between two airports. More expensive too.

ewh1 wrote

Will the NAIA Connectors make the terminals accessible to ALL passengers or will they have to set up immigration checkpoints underground?

at T2 & T3, everything is sanitized between dom/intl so i can see how consolidating all international flights at T3 might make sense if they need to build additional immigration checkpoints. Regardless if they do that or not, the BoI would still need to have the proper manpower in order to staff new checkpoints. Do they have the budget to do that? or will they rely more on e-checkpoints?

I'm very curious to see how the transfer system will work since we will have for the first time, an operator who will at least have it in their interests to make connections as seamless as possible and up to industry standards.

No immigration checks at connectors. It will be at both ends T1 and T3. Basically, you don't step out of the terminal. If you are at T2 arrivals you proceed west for T1 and proceed east for T3. Once you step out you can't come back. You need to redo security checks again. The trend now is e-checks, so it would be seamless for non-OFW as they will still have to go through the final security checks. But then that is not SMC anymore.

As to the state of connectors, it will be the airport operators call.

MNL will hopefully start to feel like a "real" hub and not a series of separate airport terminals and procedures that have no cohesiveness and thought about user experience for the connecting passenger.

Please understand MNL is an old airport. It was never meant to be a hub in the first place. SIN, BKK, ICN and HKG are "new" airport in comparison. Services will improve but it will never be like BKK or HKG. NMIA will.

[Solblanc]

SIN is a nice example of how “old” terminals can be made functional. SIN has nice new landside facilities like Jewel and newer check-in areas but their airside still has the traces of a 70’s airport. The difference is that they made provisions to make it well-maintained and accessible.

The funny thing about the contract provisions given to SMC is that clearly, government has always known what needs to be done to make NAIA more efficient; they just chose not to.

[ewh1]

My expectations aren't high per se, yet I still know everything will be better than it is now especially if there's the ability to transfer between terminals seamlessly. This is assuming SMC creates a seamless transfer between all 3 terminals.

As long as there's new areas to eat, shop, relax, the experience will still improve a lot. If someone has status, for example, they can now go to the T3 lounges and vice versa or just get up and walk to get some real exercise before their flight. That already will be a big plus in my eyes and provides a lot more benefits than is obvious at first glance.

Architecture can be important but at the end of the day, it's what's inside that counts which Solblanc perfectly describes. SIN is a great example of that. I also really like ZRH for this as well. There's lot to do as a passenger and non-passenger and they're great airports for the services they provide, especially when you transit there.

NMIA of course will be a game changer but at the end of the day, that's my real hope with SMC that they turn NAIA Into a service oriented airport that's interesting to be in whether for a couple hours or a day.

[airline_builder]

ewh1 wrote

My expectations aren't high per se, yet I still know everything will be better than it is now especially if there's the ability to transfer between terminals seamlessly. This is assuming SMC creates a seamless transfer between all 3 terminals.

As long as there's new areas to eat, shop, relax, the experience will still improve a lot. If someone has status, for example, they can now go to the T3 lounges and vice versa or just get up and walk to get some real exercise before their flight. That already will be a big plus in my eyes and provides a lot more benefits than is obvious at first glance.

Architecture can be important but at the end of the day, it's what's inside that counts which Solblanc perfectly describes. SIN is a great example of that. I also really like ZRH for this as well. There's lot to do as a passenger and non-passenger and they're great airports for the services they provide, especially when you transit there.

NMIA of course will be a game changer but at the end of the day, that's my real hope with SMC that they turn NAIA Into a service oriented airport that's interesting to be in whether for a couple hours or a day.

a monorail people mover is the answer to all these - the same one they are building for the guadalupe to bgc commute.

it is technically faster to build, it is the push carts of elevated trains - entry trivial level so I do not understand why there is no mention of it by the "brilliant engineers and architects of SMC" as RSA bloated bragged about.

#justsaying

[Arianespace]

ewh1 wrote

Architecture can be important but at the end of the day, it's what's inside that counts which Solblanc perfectly describes. SIN is a great example of that. I also really like ZRH for this as well. There's lot to do as a passenger and non-passenger and they're great airports for the services they provide, especially when you transit there.

Zurich is a nice airport. I've been there once. Also on transit. While they have crossing runway, they also have two other runways to use. What I noticed about ZRH is they fly in the wind while arriving against the wind.  You don't usually see that in MNL. Another thing, in ZRH they use two runway, one for take off, one for landing.

airline_builder wrote

a monorail people mover is the answer to all these - the same one they are building for the guadalupe to bgc commute.

it is technically faster to build, it is the push carts of elevated trains - entry trivial level so I do not understand why there is no mention of it by the "brilliant engineers and architects of SMC" as RSA bloated bragged about.

#justsaying

One simple reason. Ownership. You cannot give what you do not owned.
MIAA does not owned the road with which you propose the monorail. In fact, MIAA pays BCDA for use of Terminal 3. Nayong Pilipino is owned by GSIS.

[airline_builder]

Arianespace wrote

ewh1 wrote

Architecture can be important but at the end of the day, it's what's inside that counts which Solblanc perfectly describes. SIN is a great example of that. I also really like ZRH for this as well. There's lot to do as a passenger and non-passenger and they're great airports for the services they provide, especially when you transit there.

Zurich is a nice airport. I've been there once. Also on transit. While they have crossing runway, they also have two other runways to use. What I noticed about ZRH is they fly in the wind while arriving against the wind.  You don't usually see that in MNL. Another thing, in ZRH they use two runway, one for take off, one for landing.

airline_builder wrote

a monorail people mover is the answer to all these - the same one they are building for the guadalupe to bgc commute.

it is technically faster to build, it is the push carts of elevated trains - entry trivial level so I do not understand why there is no mention of it by the "brilliant engineers and architects of SMC" as RSA bloated bragged about.

#justsaying

One simple reason. Ownership. You cannot give what you do not owned.
MIAA does not owned the road with which you propose the monorail. In fact, MIAA pays BCDA for use of Terminal 3. Nayong Pilipino is owned by GSIS.

Power of Eminent Domain as a necessity can be implemented by the DOTr if they want to. The monorail can be by the parameter of what is MIAA land complex a government owned complex

[Arianespace]

Immediate necessity that is. A monorail does not qualify such, as it benefits only a particular class of person. Unlike the LRT or the MRT, or the subway which benefits everyone. That is the reason why it took Makati, one of the richest city in the country, 20 years to plan its monorail. And to this date remains a plan.

A billion pesos project need to benefit the majority of the commuters, not the particular few. In this case, the airport passengers. It simply isn't justifiable. That is the main reason why it isn't even included in the CA. Because its not an immediate necessity. There is the normal road, and there is the expressway. Cheaper alternatives.

[airline_builder]

Arianespace wrote

Immediate necessity that is. A monorail does not qualify such, as it benefits only a particular class of person. Unlike the LRT or the MRT, or the subway which benefits everyone. That is the reason why it took Makati, one of the richest city in the country, 20 years to plan its monorail. And to this date remains a plan.

A billion pesos project need to benefit the majority of the commuters, not the particular few. In this case, the airport passengers. It simply isn't justifiable. That is the main reason why it isn't even included in the CA. Because its not an immediate necessity. There is the normal road, and there is the expressway. Cheaper alternatives.

Yes and all the negative impression that comes with it why they tagged flight transfers in the Philippines via NAIA as traumatic and by statistics we are truly expensive place to fly in and out of so making it into a transit point not being confused with being a hub because of the physical limitations nonetheless it will lift NAIA to be convenient since the airport complex are relatively small so what is missing - people mover.

[Gustavo J Oppenheimer]

https://www.philstar.com/business/2024/07/30/2373925/naia-fee-hike-signed-turnover

[JNC03]

MIAA General Manager Eric Ines told the Philippine News Agency he is eyeing the NAIA Terminal 4 in Pasay City as site for general aviation processing, where all arriving and departing VIP passengers would be processed.

"Definitely we could not do this overnight as we are looking at many possible loopholes. But we will have this soon, probably by mid next week," Ines said in an exclusive interview.

https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1230896

[Gustavo J Oppenheimer]

P789 Billion in Revenue, I expect NAIA's O&M will boost SMCs revenue in 2H


https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/money/companies/916806/san-miguel-h1-net-income-up-66/story/

[Gustavo J Oppenheimer]

https://insiderph.com/insider-insight-ramon-ang-outlines-sweeping-naia-changes-for-1st-year-under-smc

[Gustavo J Oppenheimer]

https://www.manilatimes.net/2024/08/20/business/corporate-news/smc-unit-set-to-take-over-naia-operations/1965034


Possible Terminal Scheme by November 1

Terminal 1: Cebu Pacific - Intl/Dom
Terminal 2: PAL - Intl/Dom
Terminal 3 All Airlines

This is from another forum:

"Part of this is to make widebody arrivals more efficient so theres less bunching of widebody aircraft arrivals and better efficiency of slots. I think the idea is that it will help open up more opportunities for better airline times coming into NAIA thus, be able to accomodate some of these new airlines better, especially if they are all at NAIA 3

PAL looks to be supportive of whatever happens which is interesting especially since they literally just built a new Mabuhay Lounge in NAIA 1"

[JNC03]

SMC is making PAL nervous🤣

T1 cannot be a 5J terminal specially they have a lot of domestic flights. T2 is the best for 5J while T1 should be PAL exclusive.

[airline_builder]

Gustavo J Oppenheimer wrote

https://www.manilatimes.net/2024/08/20/business/corporate-news/smc-unit-set-to-take-over-naia-operations/1965034


Possible Terminal Scheme by November 1

Terminal 1: Cebu Pacific - Intl/Dom
Terminal 2: PAL - Intl/Dom
Terminal 3 All Airlines

This is from another forum:

"Part of this is to make widebody arrivals more efficient so theres less bunching of widebody aircraft arrivals and better efficiency of slots. I think the idea is that it will help open up more opportunities for better airline times coming into NAIA thus, be able to accomodate some of these new airlines better, especially if they are all at NAIA 3

PAL looks to be supportive of whatever happens which is interesting especially since they literally just built a new Mabuhay Lounge in NAIA 1"

It will be more effective for better connectivity considering proximity and number of flights mounted by one carrier (5J) would be

T1 all Intl flights 5J & PR (buses can transfer transit pax airside to domestic and vv)
T2 all Domestic flights 5J PR APP
T3 all International Airlines

[Arianespace]

JNC03 wrote

SMC is making PAL nervous🤣

T1 cannot be a 5J terminal specially they have a lot of domestic flights. T2 is the best for 5J while T1 should be PAL exclusive

Haha. They are actually in the right place right now. 5J domestic carried 12.8 million in 2023, about the same size of T3 original capacity. As we all know, T3 is about 18 miliion right now going 20 million.

PAL, Air Asia and Royal are likewise in the best place, as far as we are concerned considering their current number of passengers. T2 is originally 7 million but is now handling 14 million in 2023.

T4 has about 5 million with SRQ getting more than 3 million.

Excess capacity will need to come from the new terminal 2 annex. Source from grapevine reveals it to be for domestic use only with CEB domestic relocated there.

[Gustavo J Oppenheimer]

Is the annex the so called Terminal 5 as what RSA stated?

[Arianespace]

The answer to this question is in the previous page.