update 7pm, Sat 17 Jan: Chedet asks:-
5. Perhaps Air Asia can show documents that separations between different airport runways of 2km are permissible. Is there any example of two major airports operating separately but located 2km from each other? I don't know. Please enlighten me.
6. The problem prompting the idea of a new airport is the allegedly high charges by MAHB for the use of LCCT by Air Asia. MAHB is owned by Khazanah and it is believed Khazanah has a stake in Air Asia. Both are therefore GLCs. The Government can tell them to negotiate fair charges. Or is it the Government that wants this airport at Labu for reasons other than need?
7. Or is it that Sime Darby now wants to go into airport business?p.s. I've asked the former PM's aides if he would like to be included for the briefing on the Labu airport. I hope he's not tempted, though, cos I think Tony F should take the initiative to offer to explain Labu to Dr M. After all, the man helped make it possible for him to achieve his AA dream in the first place.
Original article:
Air Asia sent me this mail yesterday in response to my posting Labu A Rakyat's Terminal? Bloggers keen to attend the briefing and make a visit of the existing LCCT, please let me know by 5pm Monday. Leave a comment so I can get back to you or email me at rockybru@gmail.com.
Mail from Air Asia:
Dear Rocky
We have been following with obvious interest your comments on the proposed KLIA-East – The Rakyat’s Terminal – to be located in Labu, Negeri Sembilan.
We appreciate your interest in the issue and would like to respond to some of your comments in your recent posting titled “Labu a Rakyat’s Terminal?”, in particular the following paragraph:
“Whoever came up with the Terminal Rakyat campaign needs to think of more credible arguments, too. For example, saying that Air Asia needs Labu because the current LCCT is not large enough for its 100 aircraft is a joke! We are talking about an airport, NOT a PARKING LOT! Air Asia does not need an airport that can accomodate its 100 planes unless it plans to ground all of them at once!”
For AirAsia, accommodating 100 aircraft all at one time is no joke. As a no-frills low cost airline that operates point-to-point, we do not have stopovers at our destinations and this means all aircraft have to return to the base ie Kuala Lumpur, with the exception of some of AirAsia X’ long haul routes.
By 2014, when AirAsia in Malaysia takes full delivery of our 75 Airbus A320s (AirAsia) and 25 A330s (AirAsia X), allocating parking for all these planes when they return at night will be a key issue. Neither the current LCCT nor any proposed terminal by Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad (MAHB) will have the adequate number of parking bays we need.
As it is now, we are already facing parking bay shortfall at the current LCCT and there is always overcrowding on the tarmac especially during peak hours and this contributes to delays in our scheduled flights. Most nights, 6-7 aircraft have to be parked in and around our hangar.
We would be more than happy to provide you and members of All Blogs a brief to address any concerns you may have about the KLIA-East project. For your reference, I will be sending presentation slides on KLIA-East that we shared with the media recently. Or head on over to AirAsia.com, where we have a site dedicated to KLIA-East.
We also welcome you and members of All Blogs to LCCT to have a closer look at the undesirable conditions we are operating in, both at the terminal and on the tarmac. Please feel free to contact me on the numbers below or my colleague xxxxx to arrange for a briefing/ tour or to get further info/ clarification.
Best regards
From the AirAsia Communications Team
dont believe their best buy tickets. tom could be cheaper.
ReplyDeleteso, why we should trust their proposal? unless you are well versed in the airline biz, they will try to take you for a ride just as they have done with their ticket pricing.
Bangsa Malaysia
Air Asia have an excellent business model. Profits they sapu, tax no pay, cost, liabilities pass on to the people.
ReplyDeleteWe definitely need more projects like the IPP, water/utility companies, toll concessions etc. Malaysia boleh!!
Jangan nak mangarut la Air Asia. The terminal building will be able to handle 15m ppa. With the new expansion additional 6 - 8 narrow body bays + 2 No. wide body bays. That is to suit YOUR requirement for the new 3 years.
ReplyDeleteAfter that MAHB will complete the new LCCT building to suit your expansion requirement.
The need statement for the present LCCT was prepared to suit most if not all of your requirements. IF you had planned properly the arrivals of your new planes, I shouldn't think there will be a problem!
On the overcrowding at the terminal, the flight schedule is prepared by your people. Jangan salahkan MAHB pulak. Airline lain pakai SITA, Air Asia tak nak. It was made worst by you having the check-in counter also made to collect payment for excess baggage!
Then what about your no-baggage check-in? Is it managed accordingly? How passeneger friendly is it? How many passenger actually using it?
At the arrival hall, if you can ensure that your ETA's is prompt, then the issue of overcrowding, not enough conveyors etc etc will be a non-issue at all.
Come-on la Tony..we know what's on the agenda? How's the financial health of AAsia of late? Any problem(s) in getting finances to purchase your so-called "new aircraft"?
At the end of this charade, could it be that Sime Darby will buy 60% of AAsia? Was it your idea to model SD like GMR of India?
BTW, who told you that all your staff supports the idea of your Terminal Rakyat? Your Comm Team??
Come on people..Don't be fool by this Salesman! He can sell shoes to a legless man!!
Labu Labi
Dear Air Asia.
ReplyDeleteThe issue is not about the condition in which you are operating. Rhe issue is about the Labu LCCT. It is not right for Air Asia to go and build this thing.
If you want to fix the condition in which you are operating, rhen go and talk to MAHB. if they dont want to do anything, then ask your boss Tony Frenandez to talk to his friends in the govt t fire the Board of directors MAHB and the Management of MAHB.
Get into your thick heads, that building this LCCT is wrong!
So they have no planes to park - so why on earth did they order so many in the first place? why didn't they think of this problem before? why does the rakyat (yes, thru' a GLC like Sime Darby) have to pay for AirAsia's airport? and why is AirAsia not paying the outstanding airport tax to MAHB?Why does AirAsia force the Rakyat passengers to pay airport tax upfront, while it refuses to pay the oustanding airport tax?
ReplyDeleteWhy should the Rakyat sympathise, while AirAsia continues to make the Rakyat pay directly and indirectly?
I already know the conditions prevailing in LCCT so dont need to visit again. However, I strongly urge those Air Asia sceptics and non-Air Asia travellers to accept Air Asia's offer so that they can see the conditions first hand.
ReplyDeleteWhen KLIA was built to cater for so called 100 million passengers, there was no concrete plan as to how it was going to be acheived. But Air Asia is different. They have their plan and building this airport acoding to their needs. So pls give them a chance to make a difference!
Tony, Airasia might be having constrains at the LCCT but that is Airasia's problem. No need for slides, just explain to people what is a PFI? and is it true, the public sector spending liability due to PFI is extremely large, larger than the cost of developing the airport over a period of time?
ReplyDeleteUnder PFI, over a period of time, the government will pay you back the money. Tony, does that not mean, you are lying on public money not being used?
A PFI, is just a smoke screen for direct nego...if there is really a need for an airport, let the government call for an open international tender.
I read the Edge today, a comment written by Mr Shanmugam.... a friend of yours Tony? Either Mr Shan is a bit slow on the mental side or the RM had flowed.
As a former airline pilot who is very familiar with the airline operations in this region (I have flown short, medium and long haul operations to most of AA's current destinations), safety and operational considerations are a concern to me. I'm not even going to touch on the other aspects. Yes, I have seen the current LCCT's congestion. Yes MAB is not doing a good job.
ReplyDeleteI also was privy to the original plans of KLIA and there is plenty of room for expansion there. There is also supposed to be a third runway and much more infrastructure in the plans.
Fine, if Air Asia wants its own airport so that it needn't have the hassle of the lack of infrastructure, go ahead but fine a suitable site. NOT one so close to KLIA. Knowing the requirements of two airports so close together I fear for the safety of the aircraft. In fact having 2 busy airports so close together may hinder the coordination of departures and arrivals causing more delays and increased fuel burn.
I personally have flown into many major cities that have airports close to each other but they were always sufficiently far apart that there were sufficient safety margins of the aircraft to depart and arrive without sacrificing safety.
I have spoken to AA pilots and they too do not support the location and close proximity of this site. Safety first!
Experienced aviator
Dear Rocky,
ReplyDeleteWe should not listen this snake talking la...lu ingat orang Malaysia ni tamak sangat ke macam lu mau semua nak untung saja dulu nak sangat Sabah and Sarawak sector bila tak untung serah balik pada MAS. Pigi jalan lah Air Asia lu ingat oragn mau sokong lu ke no way...
x-Yg Tersusur
Rocky
ReplyDeleteYou were writing aviation stories when you were with Business Times. You and I know that airlines don't make money with their planes "parked" on tarmac. It should be in the air. Every minute it is on ground costs the company money.
But Tony can still have his KLIA@East, not as an airport, but his airline's private parking lot.
I just get to know this morning that Air Asia use Kalimullah to lobby for goverment consent to construct a new Labu air port. Mr Tony has bring in Mr Kalimullah to Air Asia after he leave the NSTP. The lobbying info could be correct looking at the current goverment administration under Paklah.
ReplyDeleteFuthermore, how could the Ministry of Transport does not have the mandate to review and comment for such stupid proposal which are not benefited the masses in future?
How could the approval straight comes from Ministry of Finance without the approval / review from Ministry of Transport!
How they will handle the air traffic flow at KLIA and at Labu since they are quit close to each other.
Existing KLIA have huge reserve for future expansion. Why not Air Asia make a deal with MAHB for her future needs.
It seems that Air Asia are so greedy and so selfish. Does not want to share even a piece of cake to others.
BRAVO TO GREEDY AIR ASIA
Jaya Putra
"For AirAsia, accommodating 100 aircraft all at one time is no joke. As a no-frills low cost airline that operates point-to-point, we do not have stopovers at our destinations and this means all aircraft have to return to the base ie Kuala Lumpur, with the exception of some of AirAsia X’ long haul routes." ~ Air Asia
ReplyDeleteDear Rocky and readers,
The statement above made by Air Asia do really disturbes me as we have made to know that current airport can accomodate millions of passengers at one time. Basically, rather than Air Asia build a new airport, why don't Air Asia give funds to MAHB to build extra space to accomodate their planes - be it docking, hangar or air strip. I believe such arrangements can be done with MAHB as both are professionals and giants in commercial aviation service.
I believe the Air Asia think tank should think the unused area around current existing airport. Rather than Air Asia buy big portion of land, why don't used the funds available to expand KLIA and make the arrangements benefit both sides in a long run.
~ http://ondastreet.wordpress.com
I sent off a friend to Gold Coast, Aust on 28/12/08 from LCCT. Boy! the counters had long queue & we couldn't cut through the queue to get to counters allocated for flights to Aust. I seriously recon Air Asia deserve to have bigger place to operate as it is choking now with limited space to brathe. Air Asia cannot depend on MAHB to extend the existing facility as MAHB is slow in action (from my experience). Passengers' waiting area is getting smaller & smaller. Me & my friends used to sleep at LCCT over night for early flight next morning. However, we are not able to do now as even passengers waiting seats are outside the hall. I have never seen any other airport with such lousy facility (except maybe Solo). I support Air Asia to built its own airport but must properly link up with ERL to facilitate travellers.
ReplyDeleteAir Asia fan
As I see it the problem is AA Tony Fernandez ta sebulu dengan Bashar of MAB.
ReplyDeleteTkan kerana dua orang ini tak boleh bermuafakat mereka na belanja hingga RM1.6 billion buat airport baru? Kononnya duit tu bukan duit rakyat. Kalau begitu duit siapa? Duit Tony Fernandez? Dia ada sampai RM1billion. Tentunya duit dari Sime Darby akan datang dari EPF. Bukankah ini duit rakyat?
We should always be wary of high flyers. Remember Mohd Abdullah Ang and the exMCA guy Tan Khoon Swan and his PanEl debacle?
So in the final analysis who have to bear the brunt if not the rakyat?
These people don't care for the rakyat. What is important is their 'temolok' and their ego. To hell with the rakyat.
MahmudBa
To all critics,
ReplyDeleteDon't just critic at your whim and fancy. Now the invitation has been extended, why don't all of you spend some time and ask Tony himself to address all your concern.
Only after that your critics will become credible.
Air Asia asked for it.
ReplyDeleteJust sell majority shares to Khairy..all problems solved..very fast.
UMNO is very good to support growing companies...and frustrate them...when it becomes a gold mine...to surrender to their big arms of robbers.
I will 3 times a year overseas..and will not travel by Air Asia...as stuffs sold in duty free shops are not cheap nor have choices to choose like KLIA.
Few times with old planes and long hours delays with no hospitality...food or drinks....I have enough!
Dear Tony,
ReplyDeleteIf you think that MAHB is useless, u can ask Pak Lah n KJ to sack their CEO 24Hrs.
If you think that u want to please SIME Darby to get a new project. You can lobby to Pak Lah to give Sime Darby a project to upgrade the current LCCT so that it can cater with AA standard and specification.
As far as I know AA-X is for international flight, then why does this AA-X cannot be used in the KLIA instead of in the LCCT.
I know that current LCCT is suck but actually it can be improved. So Tony dont waste ppl money, at the end Sime, AA, MAHB, PNB, MAS, KLIA, LCCT are the RAKYAT PROPERTY.
Tony pls concentrate on AA flight n tune hotel not the airport, once u can beat MAS, SIA, Thai Airway, definitely government will force MAS to merge with AA n you become the CEO and the chairman of that company.
Bru,
ReplyDeleteThis is not about parking it planes.... It is about airport tax, duty free and shopping concessions, BIG MONEY and who gets to keep it.
Basically, Air Asia wants a BIG slice of MAB's revenues since they believe they deserve it as they are the one's generating the traffic and passengers.
So, all this talk about operations and parking is really a smokescreen to grab cash flows at the expense of us the citizens as MAB belongs to us too.
Skeptic
There's no doubt that Air Asia is an unique Malaysian achievement and whose pioneers deserves our accoladation and congratulations.
ReplyDeleteToday we have clones which with helpful backing should not find any problem posting winners also.
However any genuine first hand winner deserves what it needs to further take Malaysia's name to greater heights for the sake of tomorrow.
2020
take the offer, rocky. And, we will wait for your updates on this issue...
ReplyDeleterakyat biasa
if they can proove that they use 0% rakyat money.. why not let they buid it/.
ReplyDeleteAir Asia Team,
ReplyDeleteI got a better suggestion to name the Labu LCCT terminal...
Let's call it "SCREW THE RAKYAT TERMINAL."
From,
The RakyatCommTeam
The LABU airport should not be in the picture in the first place. I agree with one of the earlier commentators. Talk to MAB, and the MOT. Don't try to go direct to what's left of the Fourth Floor to get your way done. We know you used Zaki to get the paper into the Cabinet at the last minute. We know what you did in the last few weeks. It's not right.
ReplyDeleteAnd don't go and say the conditions in the current terminal is `undesirable', when:
1. It was Air Asia that wanted the terminal and helped designed the terminal in the first place
2. It was Air Asia that limit the number of check in counters and baggage handlers.
You guys suck, and we've had enough of your lies.
Cukup la tu Tony.
Red card to Air Asia!
Tony gets what tony wants !!
ReplyDeleteBut not anymore. This time tony can get lost (together with the sleepwalker, kali et al)
Lets do a poll. Does rakyat really want the terminal at Labu ?
- Loony Tune
C'mon, Tony, if the problem is with MAB, then solve it through the proper channels, and not say things like "we have exhausted all options". Start a campaign to kick the butt of MAB and the Transport Minister, and the rakyat will be behind you.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, I think you should be allowed to build a TERMINAL at KLIA or even take over the existing LCCT terminal so that you can expand it to your needs. Just like the JFK terminals which are operated by each major airline. However, you don't go around duplicating runways, ATC, CIQ and all sorts of connecting infrastructure which will haunt the rakyat and the nation's prestige.
Yes, take over the LCCT terminal now, and force the government to build underground connections to the KLIA main terminal. Force the government to pay for the ERL extension.
Everything else in just pure bullshit.
Godfather
I live in Seremban and the idea of an airport at Labu fills me with excitement. At least there will be a lot more development. I support MB Mohd. Hassan on this. Only problem s logic dictates that KLIA is already there and still have much capacity. Even to meet AA's needs. I understand AA's and SD's nose for profits but the nearness of the propose KLIA East Labu poses aviational danger.
ReplyDeleteAt the end of it, all things considered, the right decision would still be one airport. It wold be irrational otherwise if I were a Public Policy maker.
Assalamualaiku Saudara Rocky,
ReplyDeleteApa khabar? Semoga hidup saudara sentiasa dalam berkah dan Rahmat Allah swt.
Saudara,
Secara Ikhlas saya katakan bahawa saya hairan mengapa saudara Rocky yang terkenal ini tidak mahu sokong projeck Labu atau Tembikai ini.
Saya serik ke LCCT. Kalau boleh tak akan naik Air Asia walau pun murah. Baru baru ini kami menghantar seorang rakan yang hendak pulang ke Sarawak.
Ya Allah, keadaannya lebih parah dari Stesyen Bas Pudu Raya.
Saudara boleh komen dan adakan apa apa kempen pun tapi saya rasa yang ini Saudara dan geng geng saudara tersilap KOT.
Saya rasa Airport ini PATUT di adakan. Apa yang saudara dan geng geng yang bijaksana semua akan RUGI dengan adanya PROJECT ini? Adakah Saudara dan para Mak dan Pak Bijak semua akan terpaksa bayar Income Tax lebih jika project ini dijalankan???
Jika project ini berjaya, rakyat juga yang mendapat faedah jangka masa pendek dan panjang darinya. Bukan project Ternak Babi oleh Khalid Ibrahim dan Teresa Kok tu lainlah ceritanya.
Saya rasa sudah tiba Saudara patut lebih rational dalam apa apa pun yang hendak dikempenkan.
Come on, go lah to LCCT. Stay there for a few hours and observe the situation. That also IF you can last a few hours there..opps dont forget bring your friends along.
1. They bought Air Asia from DRB with RM1 - No problem with that
ReplyDelete2. They wanted special treatment from govt as what MAS received.
3. They've turned down non-profits route and gave back to MAS
4. They wanted SIN-KL route. They've got it
5. They wanted new LCCT built for them in exchange to Subang Airport proposal. They've got it
6. They wanted to maximise profits from all corners.
7. They dont pay MAB eventhough that's what they've agreed before - Shame on you Tony
8. Now they must have their own AIRPORT close to KLIA.
This airline I tell you, really a no FRILL entity. Sam goes to IPP and TOLL business. And PRIVATE FUND only will be using to finance the AIRPORT? Sime Darby is not PRIVATE Tony oiii.. Sime Darby own by the GOVT and GOVT means MALAYSIAN PEOPLE the public. Dont shit on us with your excuses. And would you care to share your 700 millions shares with ME as a public ?
Hail KING TONY!!!
dear all
ReplyDelete1. There goes another masterplan. Under the original KLIA masterplan, the present main terminal building can be extended and another satellite terminal can be buit to the west of the current sat terminal. Passengers taking the aerotrain can see the vacant over there. Another vacant area were reserved for a main terminal and 2 sat terminal to the north of the control tower. KLIA have the concrete plan to achieve the projected 100 mil passenger per year. MAHB has revised the masterplan where an LCCT will be built to the northen area to cater for LCC business. You may see the model at klia main terminal. At first Airasia wanted the LCCT built to the east of runway 1, between the runway and jalan pekeliling klia that leads to F1 track, which is not practical because of the ERL track and the swampy land.
2. Remember the domestic route rationalisation process when airasia were given the right to operate at all domestic airports with condition that they have to run the rural air services in Sabah and Sarawak. airasia were given RM200 mil grant to start RAS through FAX and later FAX screwed the RAS. The gov have to fork out millions of RM to restore the RAS fokker and twin otters planes before handing over back to MAS through MASwing. The shareholders of FAX are the people behind Airasia.
3. I watched the news where Airasia CEO mentioned that KLIA is located very far 78km from KL City, whereas Labu is located 50km from city. In reality Labu is located southeast of KLIA, how can Labu be nearer to KL than KLIA? What a load of bull. 50km from which which city? maybe Seremban?
4. If Airasia really wanted to develope and own their own terminal, they should talk to the Ministry of Transport and utilise KLIA instead of misleading the rakyat by announcing a new LCCT whereas the intention is to built a new airport.
My 2 cent worth
For those who are so pessimist about the plan, have you bother to attend the briefing ??
ReplyDeleteGo ahead AirAsia.
Make the impossible possible. Win over Changi.
Concerned Citizen
Why should the bloggers go all the way to LCCT to listen to their bullshit story...lets face it, call it Terminal Rakyat, Tony - Zubir Airport or Labu Labi Airport, DO NOT waste the Tax Paying Rakyat's money......
ReplyDeleteSupport MAB (Rakyat's Airport Operator) and MAS (The ONLY National Airline)........
Malaysian in Malaysia
Same old story, call everyone for a press conference, make some stupid jokes and hope people will forget in the next few days...Listen here Tony, don't think we are stupid, look at Tune Money, do a press conference saying that every things "ok" after Zafrul left,and make profit in 2008, Why the vendors are not been paid??? the worse part is that the employees are being denied of their share money...care to explain Tony Fernandes..
ReplyDeleteTM Employee
Rakyat say NO!.
ReplyDeleteScrew the thick heads in AA.
to new york ( tony),
ReplyDeleteyou becoming so arrogant now you do not want to deal with MAHB you only want to deal with PakLah through Kali
If you sit down with MAHB settle the money you owed them you do not have this Labu problem
If this Labu issue prolong Rakyat will not have a good feeling factor and support AA anymore
Talk with Ali Rastam give Batu Berendam Airport good service..do not wait until Ali becoming TPM
Times up for that Air Asia thamby. Enough of nonsense. Rakyat have been fooled by your marketing gimmicks.
ReplyDeleteThis is a case of no problem , create one!!
Why don't he say they have bought 1,000 planes, so that the govt can give him the entire state of Melaka to park the 1000 planes!
Don't try to justify the project, tell us HONESTLY the ultimate benefits to the benefitors of the project for eg the recipent of commission, the contrators, the schemmers .
Air Asia wants to take the easy way out. And in so doing tries to hoodwink the people.
ReplyDeleteAgain, Air Asia misses the point. The overwhelming majority that are against LCCT Labu do understand that the current LCCT need to be upgraded to resolve current congestion and future needs. But the solution is not LCCT Labu. Heathrow London is one of the world's world most congested airport and their solution is to upgrade or build new facilities within Heathrow.
I recall Air Asia argument for LCCT Labu was because MAHB will not be able to complete their new LCCT at KLIA at the scheduled date. And they also claim that LCCT Labu will be operational 1 year ahead of MAHB's LCCT. If Air Asia discusses back with MAHB, I am confident that the upgraded LCCT KLIA can be made available on schedule.
LCCT Labu is purely a wasteful project as it goes against the KLIA Masterplan and thus against national interest. It should be stopped.
JBK
A problem becomes a business opportunity to others.
ReplyDeleteCongestion in LCCT KLIA is just mere excuses. To Tony it is all about commercial consideration. If it goes against national interest or contrary to KLIA masterplan so be it. Imagine when LCCT Labu is owned by Air Asia. It becomes a goldmine. Spaces to rent out at high fee to retailers, corporate, travel agencies, tourism related companies, F & B, etc..etc. Air Asia can charge airport tax and pocket it.
JBK
A problem becomes a business opportunity to others.
ReplyDeleteCongestion in LCCT KLIA is just mere excuses. To Tony it is all about commercial consideration. If it goes against national interest or contrary to KLIA masterplan so be it. Imagine when LCCT Labu is owned by Air Asia. It becomes a goldmine. Spaces to rent out at high fee to retailers, corporate, travel agencies, tourism related companies, F & B, etc..etc. Air Asia can charge airport tax and pocket it.
JBK
Think what AIR ASIA can do for MALAYSIA than what MALAYSIA can do for Air Asia. The interest of Malaysia is more important than Tony F and Air Asia.
ReplyDeleteEven IATA is against the building of Labu which is so close to KLIA. Don't make Malaysia the laughing stock of the World by having two airport so close to each other.
Need the rakyat to say more??????
Why don't you people give AA a chance to do what many here in bolehland cannot, as long as it can bring benefits to our country in the long run and it does not take too much of our taxpayers money in building this terminal.
ReplyDeleteJust look, before AA came into the picture, we have only MAS but now, with a little bit of competition we are seeing some improvements in them and everyone have a choice now.
So what if later on the government have to put in
personnel to maintain this terminal but if the returns is far greater than the expenses I don't see any wrong in it.As it is now here in our country we have many projects that are being built and not giving any returns except to the pockets of a selected few.
So I say, give AA a chance for a home-grown airline to hopefully make our country proud for once instead of building more white elephants that do not benefit anyone.
KLIA was designed for 100 million passengers a year. The traffic now reaches only a quarter of its capacity. Are we to believe that provision has not been made to park the required number of airliners, which should have been the critical issue, when KLIA was designed for that capacity? If parking is the issue, surely land can be found adjacent to KLIA for that purpose, and it is not logical to go 10 kilometers away to build parking lots assuming new runway is not built.
ReplyDeletedear Air Asia Fan,
ReplyDeleteThey must use the areas surrounding the KLIA now instead la...
apa la bengap sangat ko ni???!!
AIR AISHAH
Initially AirAsia wanted to use Subang airport as their own base, but TDM would not allow it as he wanted his KLIA to achieve the projected 100 mil passegers as soon as possible.
ReplyDeleteNow, even if there is no space whatsoever to accommodate AA's 100 aircraft at KLIA, they could easily use Subang as their overnite parking place, and fly into LCCT or KLIA every mornings.
Why is the need to have another major airport so close by? There are a lot of issues to consider, from safety of aircraft taking off and landing, grounds trasportation, and etc.
Tony asked to see the current LCCT undesirable conditions. Yes it is terrible, but can be resolved at a much better way than building the Labu terminal.
- MZA
Tony,
ReplyDelete1) Please answer anon 3.33pm comment above
"Listen here Tony, don't think we are stupid, look at Tune Money, do a press conference saying that every things "ok" after Zafrul left,and make profit in 2008, Why the vendors are not been paid??? the worse part is that the employees are being denied of their share money...care to explain Tony Fernandes..
TM Employee
2. If you can't handle the undesirable condition, then what is the hype you protray as a great CEO all this while?
3. Have you paid up all dues to MAB?
Why should intelligent Rakyat waste time listening to snake talk?
ReplyDeleteWe don't buy your reasons and justification for the Labu project. Try harder, do it more intelligently please.
We accept nothing but truth.
Tony, u smarter than Tun M?
ReplyDeletehttp://chedet.co.cc/chedetblog/2009/01/labu-airport.html
LABU AIRPORT
By Dr. Mahathir Mohamad on January 17, 2009 3:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
1. Air Asia has done well to explain the justification for the so-called KLIA-East in Labu.
2. Not having the facilities and personnel I can only give my very unprofessional view on the justification:
a) Passenger Capacity
I must congratulate Air Asia on its very remarkable success. By 2014 it will handle 26 million passengers. Present terminal at KLIA is handling about 25 million passengers.
KLIA is planned to handle 125 million passengers. It has 25,000 acres of land to build another terminal and four satellites. It can even duplicate these terminals and satellites. But Air Asia wants low-cost terminals with no aero-bridge, no luxury interiors. This is not a problem for KLIA.
There is enough space in the 25,000 acres of reserved land to build the low-cost terminal to accommodate the 60 million Air Asia passengers in the distant future. MAHB (Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad) can do this. (Incidentally Putrajaya has only 10,000 acres of land). However, by 2014 the total number of Air Asia passengers would only be 27 million. Accommodating this number should be no big deal for MAHB.
b) Runway capacity
By 2014 Air Asia will have 77 aircrafts. LCCT capacity will still be for 33 aircrafts. Does Air Asia expect all its aircrafts to be on the ground in LCCT all the time?
Usually some would be in the air and many would be at other airports. Expanding the parking area would not be too difficult. There would still be enough land at KLIA.
As for the runways Times Online reports that Heathrow will now build its third runway to be completed in 2020. Presently Heathrow has only two runways and it still handles almost 70 million passengers.
As stated above, KLIA can build another three runways to handle 125 million passengers. If passengers and aircrafts increase to more than presently handled by Heathrow, a third runway can quickly be built.
If KLIA LCCT is not connected by rail and bus, the thing to do is to provide all these. Extension to the Express Rail Link line can be built. Terrain is no problem. We have sliced through higher hills to build roads.
If the waiting time for taxis has increased due to the huge airport layout (I don't understand this), whatever solution for this problem is proposed for Labu, the same solution can also be applied to KLIA LCCT.
c) Number of Gates
Since Air Asia will not be using the main terminal why should the small number of gates there be of concern to Air Asia?
If Air Asia will be putting more than 55 Gates at Labu to cater for its large number of aircrafts and movements, why cannot LCCT at KLIA be expanded to have maybe 100 Gates to avoid any shortages? Will Labu be provided with 100 Gates? If so, when? Again, why be bothered about KLIA Terminal being equipped with aero-bridges etc when Air Asia does not want to use it?
3. The comparison with Dubai and Jackson Atlanta International Airport is misleading.
4. The picture shows four runways (no indication which airport). Multiple runways is common but they are operated by one airport with one control tower. The picture and the layout does not suggest separate towers for different runways. You cannot have multiple runways close to each other but controlled by different towers.
5. Perhaps Air Asia can show documents that separations between different airport runways of 2km are permissible. Is there any example of two major airports operating separately but located 2km from each other? I don't know. Please enlighten me.
6. The problem prompting the idea of a new airport is the allegedly high charges by MAHB for the use of LCCT by Air Asia. MAHB is owned by Khazanah and it is believed Khazanah has a stake in Air Asia. Both are therefore GLCs. The Government can tell them to negotiate fair charges. Or is it the Government that wants this airport at Labu for reasons other than need?
7. Or is it that Sime Darby now wants to go into airport business?
oh shoot.
ReplyDeletei like tony. i like the fact that we have air asia because everyone can now fly....great tagline. and not just a tagline.
but...the labi in labu is a bit dicey. fishy. ratty.
sorry. gotta say no to labulabi.
the condition of the LCCT?
not beyond anyone's scope to urgently improve or rectify it.
dai,
ReplyDeletearrogant must mitigate measured greed...dont.
Bro,
ReplyDeleteDia tak boleh untung as airline. So perlu compensate as airline operator with keep all those profits which would otherwise go to MAHB.
Then sucker some GLC atau "investor" to build airport and infra for AA to operate.
Now getting employees to fight the cyber war (if they want to keep their jobs!)
Desperate feller!
NoToLabu
"Anonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete"Why the vendors are not been paid??? the worse part is that the employees are being denied of their share money...care to explain Tony Fernandes..
TM Employee
3:33 PM"
Here we go again. A company so called a profitable airline and FOR RAKYAT again playing with the BULUH KASAP business model by not paying the vendors. And the most important part was, the money that they owed MAB. Why this fat ass doesnt want to pay MAB? And I am very sure the figures owed was initially agreed by both parties. Shame on you again Tony.
Deiii Tony, MAB is a public company. Own by Malaysian. If you dont pay MAB means you dont pay us. And how would you expect that we can trust you anymore with your nice tagline " TERMINAL RAKYAT" or whatever crap.
If AA so profitable, dont run away with the money. Please pay MAB accordingly. Your integrity at stake Tony.
You want everything for free i guess. Then ask the Singapore Govt to abolish the Airport charges on you. Or maybe you can try the same tactic as what you did to MAB.
And surely, you will be kicked out from Changi Airport.
Here's a new greeting for Tony Fernandes ...
ReplyDeleteKaniLabu you, Tony!
Still will not take no for and answer issit! Of course lah. AirAsia is on the way down and you need a bailout. That's why this and that. You will use rakyat's money in the end fatso.
No bailout for AirAsia!
KaniLabu you, Tony!
-No Flend Of AirDisaster-
It is about time the Ministry Of Transpot put a stop to all this stupied idea of Air Asia. If Malaysia Airlines can nite-stop their aircraft at other airport, why cannot Air Asia. Why park all aircraft in one airport. More likely a private airport for Tony
ReplyDeleteTony ,Are you a Minister of Transport ? Then why sibuk sibuk ... why not extend the KLIA..has a lot of space ..Only 25% used .
ReplyDelete..or is it you dont want to pay your hutang at MAB ?
If he can convince the old man, guess no need for the Rakyat attend any brief or slide presention at all.
ReplyDeletehttp://chedet.co.cc/chedetblog/2009/01/labu-airport.html
go see Tun M
It is very obvious that the limiting factor to AirAsia's growth is MAHB, which does not appear to have a viable strategic plan for its future expansion which suits AA's type of operation (including an acceptable cost recovery structure).
ReplyDeleteAnd no one at MAHB appears to have the vision or brave enough to articulate one which meet the future needs of a major customer.
A very sorry state of affairs for Malaysia, if this is how business is conducted. Or is this an opportunistic scheme to make money from the construction contracts as insinuated by some here.
Pax.
i used to have high regards for tony and air asia.
ReplyDeletebut the latest developments with KLIA-East and Sime Darby gave me a second thought.
sime darby showed their traits of evil incorporated ever since they tried to takeover ijn. air asia is no different after all.
Don't trust this Airasia. They say RM9.90 - WHEN it's actually RM215!
ReplyDeleteThis is another way Tony can milk more money from us. There is no problem with another LCCT at the existing KLIA.
I can't see any reason why I should support AirAsia on this. It's bullshit.
If and when he gets 100 aircraft, will there ever be a time when all 100 aircraft will at the tarmac??!!
ReplyDeleteIf such situation ever arise, then he is not operating an airline...that would be like having a showroom of Airbuses!!
Get real lah....
There is one easy solution. Make Tony Fernandez Chairman of MAHB.
ReplyDeleteTony,
ReplyDeleteaddress concerns of people before the need to invite us. Undesirable conditions due to YOUR own fault for not wanting to spend a single sen of YOUR money but rather want MAHB to cough up on your behalf!
You say that Labu hub could be used for trains and ERL could extend to Labu. And that Labu would complement KL as a travel hub! Why?! This will just enrich you and your cronies and will not benefit the nation as a whole! If and when MALAYSIA owns 90% of Airasia then thats a different story. You talk about vison for Malaysia and all but ultimately its all about Airasia might go bust in 2 years and you and Kam will be losing millions in profits. Sort out missing/lost luggages, recurring delays, long queues first. All the people see if you sapuing the profits not wanting to pay MAHB, using the taxpayers money either directly or via a GLC to enrich yourselves! I have travelled on Easyjet, Ryanair, Flybmi and they have never been as bad as my few experience with AA. Build the new LCCT somewhere else and at YOUR OWN expense. No GLC or taxpayers money!!!
Zool
Congestion at LCCT was a lame excuse. If the China could managed their overlly congested railway stations, eg in Guangzhou, Beijing, Shanghai and more super efficiently... what congestion are you talking about in LCCT?
ReplyDeleteLike Cedet said, "Or is it the Government that wants this airport at Labu for reasons other than need?" Which means Tony & AirAsia is a pawn to the whole ball-game!
So in the end, who are the main beneficaries of the whole hoohar?
Yes! I still remembered clearly when KLIA was proposed to be built, projections was made to accomodate much, much more than the presence.
And how come out of the many low cost carriers in the world, nobody make noise like our AA do?
What if? Say, the LCCT-LabuLabi tak jadi in the end? SO? CLOSE SHOP eh? Then I think your excuse is to close-shop cos everything is not in your favour and cos AA munkin sudah ada problem ke?
Cactus400D
Ahoy Tony
ReplyDeleteThis is Pirate of Straits of Malacca speaking. We don't need yr communication team to provide slides or briefing to bloggers(This is is very much like the 4th floor boys methodology)
Common Tony you are good man but don't spoil your legacy for some greedy idiots.
You still want to show slides or talk to bloggers... I appoint only Dr M to be my proxy to listen to yr blah blah blah....
The LCCT is "cramped and so uncomfortable" because Air Asia do not want to spend any money to build it in the first place. Instead they want the government (read: rakyat's money) to build it for them. And stupid PM only too happy to oblige.
ReplyDeleteMR
(heha) : HEY ! confusing lah ;
ReplyDelete1st, LCCT ?
2nd, LART ( labu a rakyat terminal),
then, STRT (screw the rakyat terminal).......!?
i no masalah one = scared of height !
better still, NOW the 'fantasy pulau' in-charged is gone ;
'the plane, the plane ...' long gone oredi !
KT by/buy/bye-election also gone !
# btw, rocky, the difference is 2631 & not 2636 ... masalah now : which number to hentam & which one :toto,kuda or mag !? )...SIGH !!( CANT TIDUR LAH !)
Haiyah, what's the fuss? Just boycott Air Asia, like the call to boycott US/Israeli products.
ReplyDeleteThat will surely bring them down to their knees. ( Pun Intended ).
A GOOD MAN DOES NOTHING.
AirAsia is a con job which survives with government assistance through the SLeepy Head and Tan Sri Nor Yakop.
ReplyDeleteEPF has been forced into buying AirAsia shares disposed by foreign companies. EPF supposed to investing in blue chip shares and yet Tan Nor Yakop allow EPF to invest in AirAsia, which is counting its days.
Tony Fernandes thought he has got a gift of the gap. By the look of things, he could not convince at least 2 MPs namely YB Wee Choo Keong and YB Jeff Ooi.
Trust me, AirAsia is working on a bailout by exanding it so fast that the Badawi's government will have to pump in money to help.
So please think many times when booking months ahead. You may end up loosing all your money.
anonymous
So, they need a parking lot. Just build a PARKING LOT!!!! Why build a whole new airport?
ReplyDeleteThe air asia and KLIA East conundrum is classic Malaysian government at work.
ReplyDeleteThe MAB "efficiency" is a well known issue for years. There is no doubt, AirAsia massive growth is the cause of the present condition @ LCCT.
So what is the government solution? instead of beating MAB to buck up, the government choose the easy way out. Build another airport (be it private or public funded).
All this duplication of resources should and MUST stop. We don't do it now, out future generation will suffer. We already have a pour in so much money into a 125mil airport for generation to come. why build another 10km away?
Go to the present LCCT and see the condition. seat placed on the tarmac outside the terminal. cars parked along the road side. its more like a market than an airport. does low cost mean we all have to live like such condition? This is an airport where foreign guest arrive in our beloved country. Do we want them to see us in such condition?
why can't the government just whip MAB until the improve? why rather than make MAB better we decide to build another airport? this is just 1 airport, MAB manage many more.
I do not agree with AirAsia all the time. I don't agree with some of their method too but i do understand what Tony is so adamant to move away for doing business with MAB. However, i pray for our future, that good men and women will prevail in this matter.
Chin, PJ.
Tony,
ReplyDeleteWhy so quite, trying to figure out what to goreng is it??
1) Please answer anon 3.33pm comment above
"Listen here Tony, don't think we are stupid, look at Tune Money, do a press conference saying that every things "ok" after Zafrul left,and make profit in 2008, Why the vendors are not been paid??? the worse part is that the employees are being denied of their share money...care to explain Tony Fernandes..
Heard that he trying to screw Zafrul....
2. If you can't handle the undesirable condition, then what is the hype you protray as a great CEO all this while?
3. Have you paid up all dues to MAB?
Bro Rocky,
ReplyDeleteCan I suggest that you post all question from the comments to Tony, lets hear what he has to say...or these questions are "irrelevant" to him.
Knsh
To All Bloggers,
ReplyDeleteThe IJN-Sime case showed that m'sian bloggers are influential to effect change for the betterment of the nation & rakyat. Will m'sian bloggers take up & champion the issue of AP Extension (http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/1/13/business/3004577&sec=business) ostensibly requested by a few bumi fatcats to enrich themselves at the expense of the majority of rakyat ? Such policy is outdated & is a net cost to the nation. PLEASE champion this issue bloggers, u are our only hope !! Thank you.
- bumi marhaen
.. i still believe this is a negotiation tactic by AA for a lower cost to use KLIA... the runway looked a little short for your wide body aircraft. Is this 'artist impression' or cost savings?
ReplyDeleteChedet's response
ReplyDeleteI have been following the air transport industry for over 40 years, ever since when I was a teenager in Malaysia and even until now when I am living in London. Never have I seen so much turmoil , or potential turmoil , in the Malaysian air industry. I know Mr Tony F. has been referring that KLIA East@Labu will not be much further, if any, from Terminal 5 and Terminal 1 in London Heathrow Airport, but the big difference is both terminals in London Heathrow use the same runway and control tower , same train and road highway connecting systems, and KLIA East and KLIA do not. Also, whenever I mentioned to my British friends in London about what Air Asia plans to do, they shook their heads almost saying , "What is Air Asia doing? It is incredibly unreasonable." In other words, it is "Plane Crazy". However, it is without doubt the Mr Tony F. cares deeply for his airline and he does have real concerns on how to manage his airline given his dissatisfaction with
ReplyDeleteKLIA and MAHB in accommodating his airline's growing needs.
As I have no vested interests in either parties, my views are objective and I do not take sides. For what's it's worth, here are my comments:
1) There are two main parties who are not in good terms with each other - Malaysian Airports Holdings Bhd (MAHB) and Air Asia.
2) Air Asia moves away because it claims to be dissatisfied with what was being offered , and what may be offered in the future,
by MAHB.
3) It is not unusual that the airport operator and the airlines that uses the airport do not always see eye-to-eye. It is evident even here in London between some British/UK airlines and BAA, the owner and managers of London's Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted airports. Some of the complaints are similar, the airlines accused the airport operators of not providing the standard of service they were paid to do, and that service charges are too high, etc.
4) If Air Asia has all it wants from the government and builds KLIA East, it will affect the entire future of aviation in Malaysia, not just in the short term but for many years to come.
The Malaysian govt. should dictate the National Transport Infrastructure, not Air Asia. THE DOG SHOULD WAG THE TAIL, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND !
5) KLIA, which is already under utilised especially in terms of its runway, will become even more under utilised if Air Asia moves away. It will suffer greatly even in the longer term if connectivity, eg the number of cities it serves so that passengers can connect from one flight to another to fly to another city, will be significantly reduced.
KLIA, as the main airport of Kuala Lumpur and indeed Malaysia, as a hub will be affected. It is competing with other strong contenders in the region, eg Singapore Changi, Bangkok Suvarnabhumi, Hong Kong Chep Lok Kok airports. The Malaysian govt. should support KLIA, and certainly, it is really unwise to allow KLIA East to be built as this has the effect of making KLIA even more uncompetitive.
AIR ASIA IS A COMPANY TO MAKE PROFITS, IT IS NOT A CHARITY.
6) The ordinary person on the street in Malaysia should realise that one of the first priorities of any commercial airline is to make as much profit for their company and share holders as possible, at least in the long term. Air Asia is no exception
If Air Asia ever finds itself in a near monopoly situation on some routes, by "chasing away" routes from MAS, you can almost bet that it will raise its air fares to the level that it will make maximum profit. "Peanut" fares will go out of the window. In the short term, Air Asia may reduce prices to attract customers, what can be termed as "lose leaders", but when the market picks up, it will recoup it by raising fares. If it does not raise fares, it will raise profits by making other "stealth" or "hidden" charges. Malaysians should not be hoodwinked that Air Asia is all good. It is , after all, a trading company, it is
not a Charity ! It looks after itself and its shareholders before it looks after you, the travelling public !
6) Another big concern is Air Asia and Air Asia X try to grow too quickly and it may encounter problems with great expansion. Air Asia's regional expansion may not be so worrying but Air Asia X's growth long haul may have more risks . In the relatively recent past, similar long haul low cost airlines using similar business model which goes it alone have gone bust - Oasis Hong Kong , and Zoom Airlines. Air Asia , or Air Asia X will be very fortunate to defy that trend. Examples of airlines in the past that grew too quickly and gone "bust" include Braniff Airlines (USA), Air Europe (from the UK), People's Express of the USA (Yes, "People"as in "Rakyat"!), and recently Zoom airlines (Canada/UK) . So, let's say, what happens if Air Asia X is not successful - say what if oil prices rises yet again or demand for long haul flights fall due to the Credit Crunch or SAR comes back, etcs? Where would that leave Air Asia Holdings's grand plan? What would Air Asia do with the problem of filling its acquired or soon-to-be-acquired 20 or so big Airbus 330 long haul aircraft . No airline is totally immune from risks. And God forbid, what if Air Asia goes bust because of that? What will happen to the new airport if Air Asia is the only airline using it?
The Malaysian government ought to take note because Air Asia is now a very important part of the Malaysian transport structure, and it should not be allowed to go "solo" and leave the other parts of the elements and parties that make up the Malaysian national transport infrastructure. Air Asia's powers should be clipped and its independence reined back so that it works in coordination with the National Transport objectives and in the national interest.
A SOLUTION?
7) One possible solution for this debacle to be resolved (between MAHB and Air Asia) may be to have a strong mediator. The government has to appoint this mediator. Maybe it can appoint an all-powerful "Transport Czar" with a strong team that has powers to decide in the interest of the nation . He will report directly to the Prime Minister. The Transport Czar must have a clear National Air Transport strategy and objectives.
He believes that MALAYSIA'S NATIONAL INTERESTS COME FIRST. Not individual parties like Air Asia or MAHB.
He aims to make KLIA a strong hub as one of his objectives, not weakens it. He should encourage competition between airports in the neighbouring countries, not within the same country especially when they are just 8 kilometres of so apart serving the same city.
8) The Transport Czar should see that KLIA be similar Singapore Changi, London Heathrow, Frankfurt (Main) , New York JFK airports, where they add new terminals but using the existing runways, etc. KLIA will become an "aero-tropolis". It is also very important that he ought to address the issues which is of concern from both parties, Air Asia and MAHB. He has to be a diplomat, but a strong one. He will be a good listener too. He will not be bullied by any side.
The Transport Czar may also be flexible and inventive.
If the present "marsh" land for the new LCCT at KLIA is of concern to Air Asia, and the Transport Czar is absolutely certain this cannot be fixed in tiime to build the terminal, perhaps he could suggest building additional new "satellite" buildiings that radiates from the main terminal....perhaps one satellite for Air Asia, one for MAS and the existing one for all the other airlines. The Main KLIA terminal may only need slight extension. .
Another possibility is to built another terminal for Air Asia not on the "marsh" land that concerns Air Asia but on another part of land within the peripheral of KLIA. Different ideas can be thrashed out and a solution can be found but the Transport Czar but the option of building another airport at KLIA East should not be an option.
To encourage Air Asia to come back into the fold , there should be in place , better , cheaper and faster links created between the different terminals in KLIA to improve connectivity (if the building of new terminals is the option selected) . Maybe a special bus service either with low fares, or even free transfer, can be created, to link between the terminals. Later on, the monorail can be extended to cover all the terminals. MAHB may need to have a kick up the backside (!) and whipped into shape, to improve its performance. There ought to be, if there is not already, regular meetings between MAHB and Air Asia.
9) In addition Air Asia could perhaps be given restricted access to Subang as MAS has with Firefly. It can have a fixed number of domestic routes from Subang but the bulk of its routes still ought to fly from KLIA. This will immediately ease Air Asia's concern about not having enough airport terminal capacity at KLIA.
10) It would be good if the Transport Czar has the power to recommend to Parliament to rescind the permission for Air Asia and Sime Darby to build an airport so close to KLIA.
11) To discourage Air Asia from moving to KLIA East, the Transport Czar could also say to Air Asia that he would advise the government in not providiing the highways and rail links with the new airport KLIA East should ever it be built (if he does not have the authority to rescind permission to build it).
The Czar may also have another card up his sleeve. In addition, he may say to Air Asia he may advise the government to ask civil servants to use MAS rather than Air Asia . If the Malaysian govt. removes its support for Air Asia, the airline will soon realise that it should start listening to the government. This may get Air Asia to get back work as a team with other parties that make up the Malaysian national infrastructure
Yet, another card for the Transport Czar is he may liase with Malaysia Airlines. If Air Asia is reluctant to cooperate with the country's national policy, (as I think the govt still is a big shareholder in MAS) he may encourage Malaysia Airlines to create its own Low Cost Airlines, as Singapore Airlines, Thai Airways, Qantas etc have done. MAS already have FireFly, all it needs is to "beef up" Firefly, give it a few more aircraft including a few Boeing 737s and it can compete quite well with Air Asia. Air Asia may not like to swallow this "bitter pill" and may change its mind.
12) The Transport Czar should also not ignore the well-being of Malaysia Airlines, the national airline. He should encourage Air Asia to be successful as well as that of Malaysia Airlines. At the moment, it appears Air Asia sometimes is benefitting at the expense of MAS - eg Singapore-KL routes, domestic routes, etc. Both companies should thrive, not one at the expense of the other.
13)It might be difficult but it would be clearly advisable , and better, if Air Asia and Malaysia Airlines work together, and the Transport Czar should encourage that. MAS could provide the long haul passengers to feed into Air Asia's short and medium haul routes. MAS and Air Asia, could also coordinate their schedules so that one flight from one airline can smoothly transfer to another. Or transit passengers from Air Asia does not have to check-in again if they fly MAS flights. MAHB, at KLIA, could provide much connection between terminals served by Air Asia and MAS.
14) The Transport Czar, should also advise the government to agree, if it is not in place already that any airport projects should go through a thorough consultation so that the people of the country have a say. Enviromental issues should also be considered for any major airport development.
WRITING TO MPS, AND CHOOSE WHO YOU WANT TO FLY WITH
15) Malaysians citizens, who feel that Air Asia should remain in KLIA , they can also write to their MPs to express their views. In addition, the FLYING PUBLIC CAN VOTE WITH THEIR WALLET. They can choose to fly other airlines, if only in the short term - and better still write and inform Air Asia too . One of the things that Air Asia listens to is MONEY and PROFITS. If it hurts in their wallets, they will take note of the feelings of their customers. It is all within the rights of people to choose who to fly with as they please.
16) Air Asia can be a great airline. But it should not be acting alone. It should cooperate with other transport parties within Malaysia. It can be a "win-win" situation if everyone cooperates. Otherwise, it can be a very unsatisfactory situation for Malaysia's air transport future as a whole. The nation cannot afford that.
A MALAYSIAN TRANSPORT
ENTHUSIAST,
London, UK
Firdaus Abdullah, who had started the "Save IJN" group at Facebook last December, has started a new group yesterday: SAVE KLIA & OUR MONEY'
ReplyDeleteThere are already some 50-plus members. Hope Facebook users can give it the same support as you all did with the "Save IJN" group previously.
For all it's worth, AA and Tony F, and his Communications team have no credibility. They have been bullsh*tting and lying to the people long enough with their misleading advertisements and poor customer services. And now this?
ReplyDeleteTime to kick this scoundrel into the bucket! And let other aspiring entreprenuers have their turn to be helped. String-pulling for Tony F and AA should be over by now. Let him earn or lose his money the honest way. Like everyone else.
questions for tun dr mahathir:
ReplyDelete- why was it decided to site klia at sepang? was there a proper feasibility study done on this by impartial consultants? will the results of this study (if any) be made public?
- does malaysia have a national aviation policy?
- if it does, what is the role envisaged for klia?
- how do you expect klia to be able to compete with changi airport, hong kong international airport and bangkok international airport?
- in your opinion, was malaysia airports bhd the best choice to run klia? why was foreign expertise and participation in the management of klia not considered?
- airasia came into being during your administration. what were your intentions for airasia when you approved its set-up?
questions for airasia/tony fernandes:
- some of the best-managed airlines in the asia-pacific region, such as sia, cathay pacific and qantas, are cutting capacity and removing flights from their schedules to cope with the drastic downturn in passenger and cargo loads. why should airasia (and other low-cost carriers) be immune from these same negative factors?
- is there any low-cost carrier anywhere in the world that owns and operates its own terminal or airport? ryanair? southwest airlines? jetstar? virgin blue? lion air? tiger airways?
- if the intention is to maximise the use of aircraft for short-haul and medium-haul routes (i.e. aircraft turnaround the same day), is it practical, given the numbers of aircraft that airasia has taken delivery of and has on firm order?
- will all of airasia's airbus a320s have to be parked overnight at klia? what about the a320s used by your thai and indonesian units? these aircraft will be parked overnight at their own home airports, right?
- with regard to the a330s to be operated by airasia x, how many of these aircraft will be on the ground at klia on any given evening, given the fact that they will be used on long-haul flights and will have to have basing facilities at other airports overseas?
- and, to cut to the chase, why can't airasia and malaysia airports get together to work out a mutually beneficial solution that would address airasia's long-term requirements and klia's aspirations to be a regional airhub a la changi, hong kong and bangkok?
as a regular user of changi airport, i am not convinced that there is a sound business case to build the proposed klia east@labu. even the hard-headed singaporeans are sticking with changi and its planned expansion with a 4th terminal.
Allow me to go straight to the point through few references.
ReplyDeleteFirst, on Subang.
Please note that Subang airport is for turbo-prop aircraft commercial flights.
AirAsia is welcome to operate out of Subang if it has turbo-prop aircraft. But I doubt it can manage this type of aircraft operations.
The last time it did a 'fantastic' job with turbo-prop aircraft in East Malaysia, which to date has gone down in the history of Malaysian Commercial aviation annals as a significant era that Sabahans and Sarawakians cherish for many generations.
Anyway, Tony used the Subang airport issue a number of times, to get:
a. An LCCT built in KLIA which he proudly called his 'Red Fort'
b. Approvals to fly KL-Singapore vv route much earlier that the original 'open skies' date that was agreed by ASEAN nations
c. Huge discounts to finally make settlement to MAHB.
I believe the Labu proposal is now just the reverse - to get back to Subang. Some of the land around Subang is also owned by Sime Darby - coincidence?
Ever noticed how Tony whines about a turboprop operator 'Firefly' that operates into and out of Subang?
Why still 'whine' about a turbo prop operator when the LCC is 'progressing' from single aisle jets to wide body jets? No more other 'modal' to whine about?
Assuming the 'magic girls' are used to charm the weaklings in the 'executive' to overturn the earlier Subang 'turbo-prop' decision, then we should also ask - can AirAsia park all 100 aircraft in Subang every night?
(The magic fairer gender have always flown many oversea official trips involving reps of the 'executive' arm of the people calling the shots who were invited as VIP guests)
By the way - if you all have been receiving Tony's e-mail saying that AirAsia will soon have a state-of-art Call Centre to serve passengers better, take note that AirAsia is not owning and operating this facility.
It has outsourced to a third party .
Was the airline honest about this to us? I never saw the word 'outsourced' in the e-mail from Tony.
God bless this third party, for it does not know what kind of paymaster this airline is.
Otherwise it would not have accepted such contract.
And.....rest assured...when you start complaining about this new set up....you will then be told that this service has been outsourced and ..bla...bla...bla.
(In short - passing the buck to the outsourced company - and who knows, that may be used by AirAsia as a reason not to pay up to the company managing its Call Centre).
And you fans are still buying up the 'incredible' offers to London and back?
If thats the case, have you noticed the qualifier "Flight to London (Stansted Airport) commences 11 March 2009 and is subject to regulatory approval" in such promo info on the LCC's website.
How come-lah fares are offered when regulatory approvals are not in place?
You guys better buy Go-Insure when signing up for 'subject to regulatory approval' fares. And hopefully such insurance policy has provisions for compensation if flights do not take off on 111 March 2009.
As a precaution, Google for Oasis Airline of Hong Kong, to check how this carrier started its non-stop flights between Hong Kong and London and what happended after that. This airline also started selling tickets in advance with regulatory approvals pending. In particular, check what happended to its inaugural flight ex-Hong Kong.
ANOTHER MALAYSIAN
Dear Rocky
ReplyDeleteThis is my reponse to Chedet's query about the 2 kilometer separation of runways.
AirAsia has been dishing out a number of misleading information to bolster its case for Labu. This fiasco about the 2 kilometer is worrying because we do not know whether AirAsia and Sime Darby knows what they are doing. we need a credidle organisation to carry out a study whether the proposal makes sense, technical and operational. Most important the study should answer the question whether flight safety will be compromised by having KLIA anhd Labu so close together. Below is my reponse to Chedet:
YAB Tun Dr. Mathathir in his Blog posed the request to AirAsia as shown below.
“Perhaps Air Asia can show documents that separations between different airport runways of 2km are permissible. Is there any example of two major airports operating separately but located 2km from each other? I don't know. Please enlighten me”
The 2 kilometer distance between runways mentioned by Air Asia refers to the separation of parallel runways of an airport to allow the runways to be operated independently for Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) flights. Otherwise the two runway will be treated as a single runway.
The runway at Labu belongs to another airport and therefore falls outside the scope of this definition. So with regard to the Labu runway, we should be taking about separation of airports rather than runway separation. While talking about separation, there is this requirement to provide a separation of 3 nautical miles or about 5.5 kilometers until the aircraft gets established on the localizer beams. This requirement is also for two aircraft making landings on parallel runways at the same airport.
I am not sure whether a third aircraft on a glide path of another airport, about 4.4 kilometers away is exempted from this separation standard. Also, I understand that major airports must have controlled airspace around it for safety reasons. With Labu and KLIA sitting next to each other, would the controlled airspace of Labu airport and KLIA overlap or intrude into the flight paths of the respective airports and would this be acceptable by airport international certification authorities? The views of our Air Traffic Control professionals are greatly appreciated.
Can the people in Air Asia communication team get this into their thick heads. The rakyat do not want this labu labi.
ReplyDeleteTONY,
ReplyDeleteREDUCE ALL THE EXPENSES OF AA ON THE PARTY AND BOOZING AND WITH IT YOU WILL BE ABLE TO USE IT TO FINANCE YOUR OWN AIRPORT.
PLEASE LAH DON'T USE SIME'S MONEY.
TOO MUCH LAH YOU TONY. IF LIKE THIS I ALSO CAN BE AA CEO.
LET'S PARTY GUY
I just wonder how did other bigger budget airline such as Ryan Air does not need their own airport but still success in business. Wake up Tony. Now is 2009, Malaysian are getting brilliant and brilliant each day
ReplyDeleteRamlee
Dublin
This my take on the overcrowding at the LCCT Sepang. If one looks at the on-time departure performance of AirAsia flights, it is below 80 percent in the last two days. It is not an impressive performance. I am not sure of the average number of delays that Air Asia is experiencing per day and the duration. But these delayed flights contributes to the overcrowding at the LCCT. If 2 out of 10 departures are delayed for an extended length of time and if each delayed flight involves 150 passengers, then you have 300 extra people hanging around at the terminal unnecessarily. Perhaps regular users of AirAsia can share their experiences.
ReplyDeleteJanuary 19, 2009 22:36 PM
ReplyDeleteKhazanah Reports Decline In Investment Portfolio
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsindex.php?id=384752
'....Speaking to reporters later, when asked to comment on Sime Darby's plan to build a permanent low-cost carrier terminal (LCCT) in Labu, Negeri Sembilan, Azman said Khazanah was not supportive of the idea...."
He said in any case, the company that wished to build the airport should refer to the Airport Masterplan.
-- BERNAMA
Since when Amok jump ship:)))
Tony Fernandez. Sack your AA communication team. They do nothing but spin a bad story.
ReplyDeleteJust come out and be sincere and transparent. You dont need these people. Just waste of your money.
The whole proposal by AA, SD and other Companies in the consortium is to milk the public; to a create a demand, a need where there was none before. Imagine interconnecting flights travellers now have to pay for transport and other services to KLIAEast@Labu! Not to mention other services charges. It's nothing more than another hugh typical public scam modus operandi. How could the PM's Department approve such anti-public decision? Why have they hijack the job of the Transport and other specialised Government departments?
ReplyDeleteIf this does not smell of corrupt and crony management practice, pray tell me what is?
May I add to what "Experienced Avaitor" - a former pilot said.
ReplyDeleteA recent National Geographic documentary on Air Controllers indicate that aeroplanes are kept 5 miles apart in the air. In aviation terms that is considered as cutting to the close as much as is possible. In safety reaction time terms, that is only about 10 mins if not less! How close is the proposed KLIA East@Labu to KLIA?
Right Mr Spock. It is not logical for Tony F's communications team to say it is safe to fly once KLIA EAst@Labu is built.
ReplyDelete