Sangley International Airport

[Arianespace]

1. No. Accordingly they will get the excess traffic from NAIA. Now excess traffic is handled by Clark. Airlines are then given option to choose Clark or Bulacan in due time. If the NAIA Terminal Expansion project capped capacity to 60 million, then they will get the excess of that. If all the landing slots are full then excess would naturally come to them or Clark. NAIA almost has its landing slots all taken. And this is what is interesting. It doesn't prevent airline from relocating. So if PAL or CEB suddenly decides to consolidate operation there and be its major tenant there is nothing in the contract that prevent it from doing so. It could also potentially be an LCC airport. At least that is some of the talking points which could change as the CA is still being negotiated.

2. Yes.

3. Yes

4. Yes and No. If SMC fails to match the better offer of the other bidders they will lose the concession agreement for operating their propose airport. They would also automatically lose the land to the winner as they would also be bought by the winning bidder. In short, there should be no more dispute to land valuation because of the waiver so no more Eminent Domain. The airport project would continue.

When the land is bought by the winning bidder after the CA, it becomes "Public Property". But this applies only to the propose airport complex, not the propose town complex. I don't know if SMC also waived this stipulations. We will find out soon in the CA if they also did.

If SMC fails to reach a CA with the government, then there is no government airport to talk about. It is imperative that they should not fail because right now there are serious issues that they need to address which personally should be shut down at inception because of flaws, but the President gave them another chance.

If SMC fails there would also be no comparative bidding fondly called the swiss challenge because that is dependent on the contract to challenge in the first place. Government can go ahead with Sangley project. Should SMC decide to build the airport anyway, then it becomes a private airport just like Balesin. Still in tune with my earlier statement.

The NAIA expansion project should be up next after this. I don't want to preempt my source as instructed. Abangan nalang natin.

[idp5601]

Well if there are still zero flight allocations for Bulacan their proposal (100mppa initial capacity) really doesn't make much financial sense, especially if NAIA is expanded and there's extra airside and pax handling capacity. I honestly can't see this being economically viable for SMC unless they scale down the initial proposal and turn it into a LCC airport with initial capacity of about 18-25 mppa.

[maortega15]

Would anyone agree that Manila needs a Bangkok model type of airport? Suvarnabhumi for full-service carriers and Don Mueang for LCC? Clark is too far and no one seems to want to move there.

As much as I would like to see international and domestic under one roof, what makes things difficult is the segregation of international and domestic flights with departure immigration. In the U.S., there is no departure immigration. Does anyone know how Bangkok does it?

[Arianespace]

Bulacan is 100 mppa max capacity, not the initial you mentioned. The plan is to build it by modules, not a one time mega airport. The same plan that is implemented for Clark and Sangley project. What was shown by SMC is the general masterplan. Even if Sangley is constructed it would still follow the modular concept.

So having a 30 mppa terminal 1 does make an economic sense since they will have long concession agreement. Easy on the investor's pocket too as they will be building only 1 runway and grow it from there. Remember, they wont be building an instant mega airport.

In 5 years time NAIA is gonna hit 60 million. Landing slots however are fewer than that. Market is already there. Emirates, Qatar and some other airlines went to Clark due to slot issues. It won't prevent them from relocating to a closer airport. Now imagine, if PAL or CEB consolidates its operation there, it suddenly becomes half full.

[Arianespace]

maortega15 wrote

Would anyone agree that Manila needs a Bangkok model type of airport? Suvarnabhumi for full-service carriers and Don Mueang for LCC? Clark is too far and no one seems to want to move there.

Definitely, the original plan was for Clark to be the LCC airport while NAIA remains full service in the meantime. Unfortunately, airport policy changes from administration to administration. I have witnessed 3 shifts already. Its not gonna stop shifting until the new airport is build.

[maortega15]

Arianespace wrote

maortega15 wrote

Would anyone agree that Manila needs a Bangkok model type of airport? Suvarnabhumi for full-service carriers and Don Mueang for LCC? Clark is too far and no one seems to want to move there.

Definitely, the original plan was for Clark to be the LCC airport while NAIA remains full service in the meantime. Unfortunately, airport policy changes from administration to administration. I have witnessed 3 shifts already. Its not gonna stop shifting until the new airport is build.

If people are talking about Sangley and Bulacan, is it possible or even feasible just to do both?!

Just curious on your opinion. :)

[MG]

Hi I am new here. Your forum is very informative. It has made me realized that a lot of the noise about the new airport have been about pushing for private interests.

Just to somehow echo maortega15, I saw a video for Changi that talks about the number of air travellers will go up to about a billion in Asia, would that merit 3 main airports (Clark, Bulacan, and Naia/Sangley)? Thank you

[Arianespace]

Your question depends upon government policy and whether it involves NAIA closing down. Even government planners has difficulty addressing your question because there is no certainty on what would be the thrust of the next government.

Personally, they can do both Sangley and Bulacan provided NAIA is shut down. It is not however possible if NAIA would still be operating. It simply is not feasible at this point in time.

[Arianespace]

By the way, the Sangley proposal of the Sangley government is a new one, as reported in the inquirer. It is still JICA design. It has nothing to do with the other Sangley proponent though, so they claim, but to me its still the same dog.

In effect, they will still bid for the airport. Question now is will Cavite have the financial muscle to get this through? Note that loans of the LGU will still be loans for the National Government, so why would the national government give it to them than say Taguig which is so much richer and more capable than them? There is a reason why Mega project stays with the national government. If only someone could figure.

[maortega15]

Arianespace wrote

Your question depends upon government policy and whether it involves NAIA closing down. Even government planners has difficulty addressing your question because there is no certainty on what would be the thrust of the next government.

Personally, they can do both Sangley and Bulacan provided NAIA is shut down. It is not however possible if NAIA would still be operating. It simply is not feasible at this point in time.

I'm all for closing down RPLL. Just convert that area to something like a BGC.

Sangley can be like ICN or BKK and Bulacan can be like GMP or DMK.

But my opinion only, Cebu and other LCCs should have their own airport. PH is flooded not only with LCCs, but also FSCs and with the possible return of BA, LH, AF and even new service by AY and NZ, PH skies will be congested even more.

[idp5601]

Wait, I'm confused. Didn't you say that the SMC airport had a no-competition clause? Or did I misread what you posted?

[Arianespace]

maortega15 was merely soliciting a personal opinion and so happen that we have the same thought, both of which really doesn't matter to the government's policy as implemented by DOTr.

[idp5601]

Arianespace wrote

maortega15 was merely soliciting a personal opinion and so happen that we have the same thought, both of which really doesn't matter to the government's policy as implemented by DOTr.

No, I was talking about the new Sangley proposal by the Cavite government. I thought the Bulacan airport had a no-competition clause? Or is it because the contract hasn't been finalised yet, that means anyone is still free to submit/propose their own airport projects?

[Arianespace]

Yes that would be correct. Nothing is cast in stone just yet.

[idp5601]

Looking at the picture of their proposal, I wonder how they plan to segregate the international and domestic areas in the main terminal building. The middle part of the MTB doesn't seem wide enough to comfortably have seating areas, shops, walkalators, and at the same time have enough space for a partition.

[maortega15]

idp5601 wrote

Looking at the picture of their proposal, I wonder how they plan to segregate the international and domestic areas in the main terminal building. The middle part of the MTB doesn't seem wide enough to comfortably have seating areas, shops, walkalators, and at the same time have enough space for a partition.

That's why I asked a few questions above how BKK does it.

How about just international departures go through immigration and combine all passengers after immigration? For duty free, they can either check boarding pass when purchasing or just like in the U.S., put all purchases on a cart to be picked up at the gate.

[Arianespace]

Both Sangley and Bulacan renders assumes NAIA closure. That's why they are presented to be a mega airport. In fact, ADP renders of Clark are also originally presented that way in the previous administration. The amended plan was for it to be an LCC airport with 30mppa, and LCC airlines to move there in order to decongest NAIA. It was also what the Arab investors wanted, LCC operations to relocate to Clark. But I guess that is history now.

[MG]

An article from Businessworld quotes Secretary Pernia saying that the identification of the future main gateway will depend on future governnments - the next next administration according to him. How can they even proceed with Bulacan if this is their stand. Kind of frustrating that there is still no clear stand.

[idp5601]

Also, there's another article about him saying that the Sangley project might have a tough time getting past the government, as he discourages reclamation.
http://business.inquirer.net/250797/duterte-reclamation-projects-says-neda-head

So, what is the government's policy? Are they going all in on Bulacan? Do they want to keep NAIA around for much longer than the shorter concession periods the NAIA Consortium is proposing? Arianespace, do you have any developments regarding this?

The fact that this government has no clear policy regarding MM's airports is so frustratingly annoying.

[idp5601]

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/05/14/1814910/sangley-airport-devt-not-priority-duterte-admin-pernia

This is obviously not helping to clear the confusion.