Part 1: Labu@East
Several years ago, when Google Map makes it to the internet, A bunch of politician was browsing the google map and zoomed in particularly into the small island called Singapore. Zooming into the reclaimed sea outside of Changi Airport, there shows an extension of the airport which consist of a new runway build on reclaimed land.
The story ensue with one of them planning for a new LCCT in Sepang. One of which local airlines would love to be operating out of Subang as per Airasia request.
It was then with political intervention that a decision was made to build Labu@East into the new LCCT! What was more surprising was the building of a third runway.
At present, KLIA has two runways, both with clearing specification for 747 and only 32L has clearing good enough for A380. All these cost money to modify to suite. rasi
The change now has made KLIA the second airport in Malaysia to be within the specification for A380 after Kuching International Airport. It is within the wonders of people was to why there is the need to puff in a third runway as questioned by AirAsia boss here.
Back to what Airasia wants years ago, as stated here,Â Â Airasia clearly wanted to use Subang as the hub of it’s operation. This was overruled overnight by the government decisionÂ and subsequently ended up with being the better option for AirasiaÂ which leads to the whole charade. I find it funny that in the third story, it seems to insinuate that Airasia wanted Labu and not Subang, but I am sure it was just the work of editors back then trying to make things sound better.
Still something is amiss here. Back then when the project was announced, the construction and cost was said to be privately funded and Sime Darby seems to be part of it. I was wondering how it will ended up with MAHB being the owner of the Labu@east and not Sime Darby or Airasia?
Part 2: KLIA2
All those charades was shoved up when the decision was then quietly die off. And then, came KLIA2.
b) Now back to the floor area, 242,000 (sq meters) = 2 604 866.32 sq feetÂ or 350,000 sq ft?
c) Cost of Aerobridge which was factored into the RM 2bil initial cost, to build and not to build, the cost will stay. It is only in Bolehland that if you don’t need to deliver something in a project, you are to keep the cost of it. Several news has indicated that the cost will be above RM 2bil.
d) Charged separately for Aerobridge as indicated in one of the article that each use of the brodge is charged at RM 85 on a per use basis.
e) How much more will it cost from the RM 2bil? So far, RM 530.8mil for integrated building (Under BOT model with borrowings from ……), RM 269mil for Runway 3, RM 388mil for Electrification, RMÂ 997.22mil for MTB2 and etc. (listed total above is RM 2,165.02mil)
Still missing from the equation is the ERL extension, Public Road System, CIQ and etc.
f) The numbers game. with 16mil passengers in 2010, It could easily drop 10mil passengers should Airasia moves out of KLIA. What is the rate of increase if the KLIA2 is made less accessible than the current LCCT?
g) the psc cost as charged by MAHB seems to be higher than those if Changi. I must agreed that the LCCT is really a sardine cane like. Hopefully the new KLIA2 will be more spacious. Question remains with that amount of floor area, will it all be used by Airasia or most of it will be taken up by retails lot?
** Disclaimer: Personal opinion expressed. Reader discretion is advised.