Lostmoon744 wrote:

Apologies if this was covered already, but when does PR start MNL-JFK? I've never flown PR internationally, but since live in NYC, the prospect of a non-stop flight from JFK to MNL is very intriguing, and worth a try.

Welcome back...long time no hear. According to this, August 2018.....

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1372399&hilit=PAL+A350+Strategy


They promise a better on-board experience for their A359, mainly due to the upgraded product and IFE...as well as their newly received 4-star Skytrax rating. The shorter flight time with no layover or aircraft transfer doesn't hurt either. But do check PAL's website from time to time for any changes. Happy flying!

Can anyone advise to why there was a British Airways A380 in CRK over the weekend?

Vector1 wrote:

Can anyone advise to why there was a British Airways A380 in CRK over the weekend?

The A380 (G-XLEF) just finished maintenance with LTP in MNL, and probably needed a parking space before re-positioning back to Singapore. The next A380 (G-XLEG) for maintenance at LTP arrived in MNL from Singapore within the day.

And the plot thickens...
https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... ey-airport

Announced yesterday: Starting August 14, Cebu Pacific will finally launch Melbourne! MNL-MEL will be served thrice weekly onboard the A330.

MNL06:05 - MEL15:50 Tue/Thu/Sat A330-300
MEL17:05 - MNL23:15 Tue/Thu/Sat A330-300

And such a coincidence ( ) that today, Philippine Airlines announced their first increase at Melbourne since forever.
Starting June 1, PAL will add two weekly flights for a total of five weekly MNL-MEL!

The market will go from three to eight weekly flights in no time. I always thought MNL-MEL was underserved compared to MNL-SYD, but lets see how much of this new capacity can actually be absorbed...

/Alex

carlokiii wrote:

The A380 (G-XLEF) just finished maintenance with LTP in MNL, and probably needed a parking space before re-positioning back to Singapore.

Hopefully in time, LTP would build a facility at CRK and transfer all heavy aircraft maintenance there. LTP Manila could then just do line maintenance of tenant airlines and AOG.

idp5601 wrote:

And the plot thickens...

Related to that is this piece about airport alternatives for the country.....

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... rt-options

Hopefully, they would not use the above as a reason to further delay the upgrades at NAIA. Despite declaring a united front.....

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... ts-merrier

Quote:
"Speaking of airport proposals, Joey Concepcion, the indefatigable presidential adviser on entrepreneurship, told me there would be no bickering within the super consortium for NAIA and that the group will respect the current process on unsolicited offers.

'I put all these conglomerates together to help partner with our government to improve connectivity so MSMEs will prosper. Airports are key to this as tourism is the next leg to push. All of them agreed to respect the government’s decision and no one will take this to court,' he said."

.....a chink seems to show in the Super Consortium's armor.....

https://business.inquirer.net/246618/3r ... y-says-mvp

Quote:
"Businessman Manuel V. Pangilinan appears to back the construction of a new international airport near Sangley Point, Cavite, as a future replacement for Manila’s Ninoy Aquino International Airport (Naia).

Pangilinan is chair of Metro Pacific Investments Corp., one of seven members of a consortium that partnered with Singapore’s Changi Airport Group to submit an unsolicited proposal to upgrade and expand Naia, the Philippines’ busiest air gateway.

It also wants to build new passenger terminals and a third runway as part of its longer term goal. That would fall under the so-called second phase of the plan that is estimated to cost around P250 billion, or 70 percent of the total Naia proposal, which was submitted to the Department of Transportation this month.

'The consortium believes we do have to build a third runway. The only viable option is to build a third runway, effectively a new airport,' Pangilinan said.

He said the eventual construction of a new airport would free up Naia itself for redevelopment.

'That puts the onus on the consortium to really build a new airport, and I suspect that is likely to be Sangley,' Pangilinan added.

A source with knowledge of the matter said Pangilinan was expressing his personal view. According to another source, talks were still ongoing with the DOTr on the possible location of a third runway for Naia."


A sign that too many cooks ruin the broth?



On the political front...domestic airlines get a reprieve.....

https://businessmirror.com.ph/airlines- ... -to-clark/

Quote:
"'The proposed terminal reassignment does not solve the overall capacity challenges in Miaa and, indeed, adds additional pressures to the already-limited facilities and infrastructure, requiring a significant cut to all airlines services that will be required to be implemented equitably,' it added. According to Cebu Pacific, CIA is not an alternative airport for Manila, with its distance and being a separate catchment area. The capacity of the CIA is only 2.7 million per annum, which means more than 5 million passengers would be displaced.

'Our proposal that would see the construction of a new concourse within the existing Terminal 3 area and be designated as Terminal 3 Domestic, but will leverage the common infrastructure, terminal and ramp areas of the current Terminal 3 [and which will later become Terminal 3 International]. We estimate this will increase total Terminal 3 capacity from 14 million to 28 million,' the airline said."


https://www.philstar.com/nation/2018/03 ... rminal-use



.....while the CAB announces proposed air talks.....

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... -countries

Devilfish wrote:

carlokiii wrote:

The A380 (G-XLEF) just finished maintenance with LTP in MNL, and probably needed a parking space before re-positioning back to Singapore.

Hopefully in time, LTP would build a facility at CRK and transfer all heavy aircraft maintenance there. LTP Manila could then just do line maintenance of tenant airlines and AOG.

idp5601 wrote:

And the plot thickens...

Related to that is this piece about airport alternatives for the country.....

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... rt-options

Hopefully, they would not use the above as a reason to further delay the upgrades at NAIA. Despite declaring a united front.....

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... ts-merrier

Quote:
"Speaking of airport proposals, Joey Concepcion, the indefatigable presidential adviser on entrepreneurship, told me there would be no bickering within the super consortium for NAIA and that the group will respect the current process on unsolicited offers.

'I put all these conglomerates together to help partner with our government to improve connectivity so MSMEs will prosper. Airports are key to this as tourism is the next leg to push. All of them agreed to respect the government’s decision and no one will take this to court,' he said."

.....a chink seems to show in the Super Consortium's armor.....

https://business.inquirer.net/246618/3r ... y-says-mvp

Quote:
"Businessman Manuel V. Pangilinan appears to back the construction of a new international airport near Sangley Point, Cavite, as a future replacement for Manila’s Ninoy Aquino International Airport (Naia).

Pangilinan is chair of Metro Pacific Investments Corp., one of seven members of a consortium that partnered with Singapore’s Changi Airport Group to submit an unsolicited proposal to upgrade and expand Naia, the Philippines’ busiest air gateway.

It also wants to build new passenger terminals and a third runway as part of its longer term goal. That would fall under the so-called second phase of the plan that is estimated to cost around P250 billion, or 70 percent of the total Naia proposal, which was submitted to the Department of Transportation this month.

'The consortium believes we do have to build a third runway. The only viable option is to build a third runway, effectively a new airport,' Pangilinan said.

He said the eventual construction of a new airport would free up Naia itself for redevelopment.

'That puts the onus on the consortium to really build a new airport, and I suspect that is likely to be Sangley,' Pangilinan added.

A source with knowledge of the matter said Pangilinan was expressing his personal view. According to another source, talks were still ongoing with the DOTr on the possible location of a third runway for Naia."


A sign that too many cooks ruin the broth?



On the political front...domestic airlines get a reprieve.....

https://businessmirror.com.ph/airlines- ... -to-clark/

Quote:
"'The proposed terminal reassignment does not solve the overall capacity challenges in Miaa and, indeed, adds additional pressures to the already-limited facilities and infrastructure, requiring a significant cut to all airlines services that will be required to be implemented equitably,' it added. According to Cebu Pacific, CIA is not an alternative airport for Manila, with its distance and being a separate catchment area. The capacity of the CIA is only 2.7 million per annum, which means more than 5 million passengers would be displaced.

'Our proposal that would see the construction of a new concourse within the existing Terminal 3 area and be designated as Terminal 3 Domestic, but will leverage the common infrastructure, terminal and ramp areas of the current Terminal 3 [and which will later become Terminal 3 International]. We estimate this will increase total Terminal 3 capacity from 14 million to 28 million,' the airline said."


https://www.philstar.com/nation/2018/03 ... rminal-use



.....while the CAB announces proposed air talks.....

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... -countries

Shouldn't 5J's T3 Domestic proposal be rolled over to the super consortium's plans, given that their parent company is a part of it?

Sent from my F3115 using Tapatalk

In other news, Congress has extended its 45-day deadline for 5J to split its flights between T2 and CRK to 6 months, as was the recommendation of the MIAA.
https://businessmirror.com.ph/airlines- ... -to-clark/

The leadership of the House of Representatives on Wednesday has extended to six months—from the original 45 days—the deadline for airlines to transfer some of their flights to Clark International Airport (CIA) to decongest the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (Naia).

However, Cebu Pacific said the plan would lead to the cancellation of thousands of flights, aside from displacing millions of passengers.

We also have a clearer picture on as to how the authorities will handle the terminal rationalization plan, which was one of the main reasons as to why the deadline was extended.

The rationalization plan seeks to transfer some domestic flights to the CIA. Under the plan, Terminals 1 and 3 would be used for international flights, while Terminals 2 and 4 would be allocated to domestic flights.

With this, Miaa General Manager Ed V. Monreal said all of Philippine Airlines’s (PAL) international flights to Terminal 1 will be removed. Etihad Airways, Japan Airlines, Thai Airways and Saudia Airlines, however, will continue to operate in Terminal 1.

Terminal 2 would be for domestic flights of PAL, PAL Express and Cebu Pacific. The international flights of 27 foreign carriers would be transferred to Terminal 3.

Monreal said Terminal 4 would still be used by Air Asia, Cebgo, Sky Jet and Air Swift.

Also, according to Bloomberg PH earlier this morning, Megawide has submitted its US$3-billion unsolicited proposal for NAIA. GMR as expected will still remain as technical partner.

Sent from my F3115 using Tapatalk

More info about the Megawide proposal:
http://business.inquirer.net/246759/meg ... tate-naia/


Sent from my F3115 using Tapatalk

idp5601 wrote:

Shouldn't 5J's T3 Domestic proposal be rolled over to the super consortium's plans, given that their parent company is a part of it?

If you'd examine the second photo in post #119 on Page 3 carefully, there is a mirror image structure (albeit with a shorter concourse) of the existing T3 at the farther end of the building. I assume it is the T3 Domestic 5J was referring to which will be changed to international once 5J transfers.

idp5601 wrote:

We also have a clearer picture on as to how the authorities will handle the terminal rationalization plan, which was one of the main reasons as to why the deadline was extended.

"With this, Miaa General Manager Ed V. Monreal said all of Philippine Airlines’s (PAL) international flights to Terminal 1 will be removed."

So where will PAL operate its international flights from.....T3

idp5601 wrote:

Also, according to Bloomberg PH earlier this morning, Megawide has submitted its US$3-billion unsolicited proposal for NAIA. GMR as expected will still remain as technical partner.

The Inquirer had the story too...unfortunately, no picture of their proposed $3B concept for an 18-year concession was included..... .....


Wary of comments from the peanut gallery

Devilfish wrote:

So where will PAL operate its international flights from.....T3

Could be a typo? Philippine newspapers are well-known for shoddy proofreading.

Renders for the Megawide-GMR NAIA proposal is out!





from SSC/@miguelrcamusINQ

Notice the glaring lack of LTP and the satellite concourse (which looks like a T4 replacement).

idp5601 wrote:

Renders for the Megawide-GMR NAIA proposal is out!

Wow That's what I would call redevelopment! If it is what $3B would buy, then give me two orders of this "curry-kare" please! How much would Phase 2 cost again The rumors are true...it leaves the Super Consortium's proposal with much to be desired. I see Megawide/GMR had studied their proposal very well and the result bears this out. They have cleared up the GenAv and Maintenance areas and left some space for RON parking. These now allow the extension of Rwy 13/31 as much as it could go under ICAO/FAA regs though it's not clear if RESAs are provided for at both ends. I wonder too where the new cargo facilities and fuel storage/docks would be They have also preserved the NE aircraft parking apron at T1 and kudos for the new ATCM tower. Of course, maximum benefit from all of these additional gates could only be realized with a new parallel runway which is a very expensive and long-term value proposition so I guess we'll just have to content ourselves with a widened, reconstructed Rwy 6-24 with new RETs.

idp5601 wrote:

Notice the glaring lack of LTP and the satellite concourse (which looks like a T4 replacement).

LTP could in all likelihood be thinking of moving to CRK though I suspect they would make the winner or the Government pay dearly for that. Just the same, some maintenance/repair capability must remain at MNL.

The satellite concourse may suffer a little by being remote from the check-in, arrival and departure halls. However, the most notable for their absence are adequate parking facilities and access to same. Ditto with the airport's connectivity to existing mass transport systems. Inter-terminal transfers have mostly been mitigated by the expansions...but this now means quite long walks through the concourses. I just have one request...enough of the rustic 'glulam' look please! Now, the question is in which terminal(s) would PAL be?

I suppose they're going to build a Presidential Lounge in the new terminal expansion at the PAF hangars' location and that the military has agreed to this in principle and willing to transfer their operations to Sangley perhaps

Devilfish wrote:

I just have one request...enough of the rustic 'glulam' look please! Now, the question is in which terminal(s) would PAL be?

Looks like MGMR aren't going to use the tropical theme they have for CRK + CEB T2, which is a very welcome change.

As for PAL's new terminal, they could probably split up their flights between the satellite concourse (which I assume is going to be the new domestic terminal) and the much bigger T3 for international flights; that way they could cooperate with their partners more easily. 5J could also move their international operations to T1-T2. I'm also expecting them to move their turboprop flights back to MNL once the runway/taxiway adjustments and improvements are finished.


Sent from my F3115 using Tapatalk

idp5601 wrote:

As for PAL's new terminal, they could probably split up their flights between the satellite concourse (which I assume is going to be the new domestic terminal) and the much bigger T3 for international flights; that way they could cooperate with their partners more easily.

It's not certain when and which alliance PAL will join and which terminal potential partners will use. If the Satellite Concourse would indeed be the replacement for T4, then they would be better off consolidating their international and domestic flights at the expanded and modernized T2 instead of having a split operation. This way, PR could get feed from other local carriers (I assume via a new underground tunnel to the SC and at the same time afford international passengers from T1 easy connections to their domestic network at T2's extended wing. Other pax from the expanded T3 could use the Shuttle or whatever APM is planned for Phase 2 of this project. Of course, PR will have their own ideas.

idp5601 wrote:

5J could also move their international operations to T1-T2. I'm also expecting them to move their turboprop flights back to MNL once the runway/taxiway adjustments and improvements are finished.

I still believe 5J would prefer to stay at the farther end of T3 as shown in Megawide/GMR's master plan.


Now for something refreshing from the Airbus P&D thread.....


https://imagr.eu/up/qJfv7_DXP8NWBU8AAlq5k.jpg

idp5601 wrote:

Renders for the Megawide-GMR NAIA proposal is out!

Have to agree that is impressive! Only thing I noticed was that the shorter runway does not have rapid exit taxiways.

Other than that, looks very modern!

Devilfish wrote:

idp5601 wrote:

As for PAL's new terminal, they could probably split up their flights between the satellite concourse (which I assume is going to be the new domestic terminal) and the much bigger T3 for international flights; that way they could cooperate with their partners more easily.

It's not certain when and which alliance PAL will join and which terminal potential partners will use. If the Satellite Concourse would indeed be the replacement for T4, then they would be better off consolidating their international and domestic flights at the expanded and modernized T2 instead of having a split operation. This way, PR could get feed from other local carriers (I assume via a new underground tunnel to the SC and at the same time afford international passengers from T1 easy connections to their domestic network at T2's extended wing. Other pax from the expanded T3 could use the Shuttle or whatever APM is planned for Phase 2 of this project. Of course, PR will have their own ideas.

Now that I think about it, the biggest question about this plan is whether GMR| would go (or rather, be forced to go) with terminal segregation. If they are, then looking at the Satellite Concourse's proposed size (which looks roughly like the size of T3 now), it could maybe handle about 11-13 million ppa - much too small for the combined domestic ops of PR, 2P, 5J, DG, Z2/PQ, and M8. A combined T1-T2 purely for domestic would probably be the most plausible, because if my estimates are correct it would probably be able to handle 20-25 million ppa. This, again, is if they decide not to go with mixed use terminals.

airlineaddict wrote:

idp5601 wrote:

Renders for the Megawide-GMR NAIA proposal is out!

Have to agree that is impressive! Only thing I noticed was that the shorter runway does not have rapid exit taxiways.

Other than that, looks very modern!

13/31 is rarely used for landings, usually when 6/24 has to be closed.

idp5601 wrote:

Now that I think about it, the biggest question about this plan is whether GMR| would go (or rather, be forced to go) with terminal segregation. If they are, then looking at the Satellite Concourse's proposed size (which looks roughly like the size of T3 now), it could maybe handle about 11-13 million ppa - much too small for the combined domestic ops of PR, 2P, 5J, DG, Z2/PQ, and M8.

Actually, the Satellite Concourse being double-loaded (gates both sides) means passengers have to check in at T2 as there'll be hardly any space left for such functions unless M/GMR makes it a multi-level operation. In which case waiting areas have to be much larger, baggage handling expanded and where vehicle parking and access are vital. These will then complicate landside/airside security. The SC may have more narrowbody gates but T3 is bigger physically. Remember too that the plan is to transfer LCCs to CRK.

Philippine747 wrote:

13/31 is rarely used for landings, usually when 6/24 has to be closed.

Looks like that will change once M/GMR's proposal is selected and they also win the O&M contract.


Meanwhile, an interesting development at the NAIA.....

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/972556/mia ... s-contract

I'm actually surprised that runway 31 meets ICAO regulations. The extended centreline runs perilously close to the T4 parking stands.

Looking at the renderings for the Megawide proposal, I note that they show 2 taxiways to the end of 06, but there is only one on Google maps. Nothing else seems to have moved, so I wonder how they have fitted it in.

As someone who remembers LHR's nickname of Thiefrow, MIASCOR have probably suffered for Pres Duterte's desire to do something, and not being affiliated to one of the big conglomerates. Do any of the local contributors know what happened to the people implicated in the bullet planting scam, other than a few reassignments ?

Devilfish wrote:

Lostmoon744 wrote:

Apologies if this was covered already, but when does PR start MNL-JFK? I've never flown PR internationally, but since live in NYC, the prospect of a non-stop flight from JFK to MNL is very intriguing, and worth a try.

Welcome back...long time no hear. According to this, August 2018.....

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1372399&hilit=PAL+A350+Strategy


They promise a better on-board experience for their A359, mainly due to the upgraded product and IFE...as well as their newly received 4-star Skytrax rating. The shorter flight time with no layover or aircraft transfer doesn't hurt either. But do check PAL's website from time to time for any changes. Happy flying!

Salamat, Devilfish for the information. Depending on the pricing on J, I'd be interested in this flight!

The Tieng-Sy consortium has submitted its proposal for the Sangley International Airport.
http://www.manilatimes.net/sangley-airp ... ed/384137/

The Sangley plan could complement the GMR-Megawide NAIA plan, because if our economy continues to develop we could max out the 72 mppa they want in a matter of years, so being prepared is always good.
The only problem I see with this is that they don't seem to have a technical partner, which could be a problem because neither SM nor Solar know anything about running an airport. Hope they get Changi for this.

They don't have any renders yet as well, although we may see them later today
or tomorrow.

Sent from my F3115 using Tapatalk

idp5601 wrote:

In other news, Congress has extended its 45-day deadline for 5J to split its flights between T2 and CRK to 6 months, as was the recommendation of the MIAA.

Here is another view of that order.....

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... /naia-mess

idp5601 wrote:

The Tieng-Sy consortium has submitted its proposal for the Sangley International Airport.

The Inquirer also has the story. There seems to be nothing new added to their proposal from when they floated it before.....

http://business.inquirer.net/247066/gro ... irport-bid


It's the same thinly-veiled, 50-year concession scheme to control development in the bay. Don't we have enough casino projects to go around for decades

Devilfish wrote:

idp5601 wrote:

The Tieng-Sy consortium has submitted its proposal for the Sangley International Airport.

The Inquirer also has the story. There seems to be nothing new added to their proposal from when they floated it before.....

http://business.inquirer.net/247066/gro ... irport-bid


It's the same thinly-veiled, 50-year concession scheme to control development in the bay. Don't we have enough casino projects to go around for decades

I honestly couldn't care less about the proposed casino projects around the area, to put it bluntly. I mean, private corporations running and controlling vast swaths of land in the Philippines isn't exactly new (*cough* BGC *cough* Nuvali *cough* Cebu Business Park). This aerotropolis wouldn't be any different, perhaps with the exception of multiple casinos. As long as they construct a world-class, future-proofed airport it doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

Sent from my F3115 using Tapatalk

Possible renders for the revised Sangley bid, as posted by a certain Cavite councilor:

UPDATE: the above render isn't actually the render for the Tieng-Sy project. Rather, this seems to be the render for the Remulla counter-proposal, because apparently they want to develop Manila's next airport as well.


The DOTr should junk the Remulla proposal and keep them as far away from Sangley Airport as possible. There is no way the Remullas could develop a property of this magnitude.

Just saw a blurb on Instagram that Qatar has announced new service to Davao, among other places. Excellent! Fly Philly to Davao on one airline!

idp5601 wrote:

I honestly couldn't care less about the proposed casino projects around the area, to put it bluntly. I mean, private corporations running and controlling vast swaths of land in the Philippines isn't exactly new (*cough* BGC *cough* Nuvali *cough* Cebu Business Park). This aerotropolis wouldn't be any different, perhaps with the exception of multiple casinos. As long as they construct a world-class, future-proofed airport it doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

Maybe you should...those other projects do not involve land/space with airport potential. Tieng-Sy were proposing to reclaim land for their gaming resorts first...could be the reason the Ramboll concept prominently showing the airport, seaport and that wide empty space in the middle was set aside. If they were selected, authorities could be pressured to negate existing legislation prescribing approach patterns and building height limits in the vicinity to suit their plans. It may turn out there isn't an airport in the end. And it's not hard to imagine with politicians in the mix.

This Philstar opinion piece on the subject merits serious consideration.....

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... ppens-next

Quote:
"On the other hand, Megawide Construction and its partner GMR of India submitted a more modest proposal that addresses current deficiencies of NAIA and run the facility over 18 years.

Louie Ferrer of Megawide, in an e-mailed response to my questions, dismisses the need for another runway. He said Gatwick Airport, one of several airports servicing London, operates 57 movements per hour with a single runway, a point I have raised in this column for years.

NAIA, on the other hand, with two cross sectional runways only operates about 40. Ferrer thinks fixing the deficiencies in NAIA operations will produce dramatic improvements without a new runway.

Ferrer said that by fixing deficiencies in landside, terminal and airside, they will progressively increase air traffic movements to 60 per hour by the end of Phase 1c, which is six years from start of the project.

It is interesting that the Megawide proposal talks of fast delivery of improvements and a shorter concession period. We all know we can use quick relief from NAIA’s problems.

The fact that MIAA officials and Sec. Art Tugade succumbed to the Speaker’s demand to 'rationalize' terminal assignments is worrisome. If they know their business, they shouldn’t have agreed to such a separation because it is clear the facilities available right now make that impractical and inconvenient for passengers.

So we ought to manage our expectations. The proposals of Megawide and the super consortium may make us hopeful. But in the end, we still don’t have a bureaucracy capable of picking one proposal from among the four in a way that will benefit us all."


So far, only Megawide/GMR have presented a realistic, functional, workable and convincing modernization concept for NAIA


BTW, things have been very quiet on the new terminal project at CRK ever since the unsolicited MNL proposals came out.



In another development, this photo of PR's A321N(?) sans GTFs was uploaded on SkyscraperCity. Still am not a fan of the offset title.... .....


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXd6piyWsAA-pCo.jpg

https://twitter.com/scramble_nl/stat...79124425576448


Based on discussion in the LH A321LR thread, it still does not have the range for MNL-AKL.....

Devilfish wrote:

idp5601 wrote:

I honestly couldn't care less about the proposed casino projects around the area, to put it bluntly. I mean, private corporations running and controlling vast swaths of land in the Philippines isn't exactly new (*cough* BGC *cough* Nuvali *cough* Cebu Business Park). This aerotropolis wouldn't be any different, perhaps with the exception of multiple casinos. As long as they construct a world-class, future-proofed airport it doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

Maybe you should...those other projects do not involve land/space with airport potential. Tieng-Sy were proposing to reclaim land for their gaming resorts first...could be the reason the Ramboll concept prominently showing the airport, seaport and that wide empty space in the middle was set aside. If they were selected, authorities could be pressured to negate existing legislation prescribing approach patterns and building height limits in the vicinity to suit their plans. It may turn out there isn't an airport in the end. And it's not hard to imagine with politicians in the mix.

This Philstar opinion piece on the subject merits serious consideration.....

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... ppens-next

Quote:
"On the other hand, Megawide Construction and its partner GMR of India submitted a more modest proposal that addresses current deficiencies of NAIA and run the facility over 18 years.

Louie Ferrer of Megawide, in an e-mailed response to my questions, dismisses the need for another runway. He said Gatwick Airport, one of several airports servicing London, operates 57 movements per hour with a single runway, a point I have raised in this column for years.

NAIA, on the other hand, with two cross sectional runways only operates about 40. Ferrer thinks fixing the deficiencies in NAIA operations will produce dramatic improvements without a new runway.

Ferrer said that by fixing deficiencies in landside, terminal and airside, they will progressively increase air traffic movements to 60 per hour by the end of Phase 1c, which is six years from start of the project.

It is interesting that the Megawide proposal talks of fast delivery of improvements and a shorter concession period. We all know we can use quick relief from NAIA’s problems.

The fact that MIAA officials and Sec. Art Tugade succumbed to the Speaker’s demand to 'rationalize' terminal assignments is worrisome. If they know their business, they shouldn’t have agreed to such a separation because it is clear the facilities available right now make that impractical and inconvenient for passengers.

So we ought to manage our expectations. The proposals of Megawide and the super consortium may make us hopeful. But in the end, we still don’t have a bureaucracy capable of picking one proposal from among the four in a way that will benefit us all."


So far, only Megawide/GMR have presented a realistic, functional, workable and convincing modernization concept for NAIA


BTW, things have been very quiet on the new terminal project at CRK ever since the unsolicited MNL proposals came out.



In another development, this photo of PR's A321N(?) sans GTFs was uploaded on SkyscraperCity. Still am not a fan of the offset title.... .....


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXd6piyWsAA-pCo.jpg

https://twitter.com/scramble_nl/stat...79124425576448


Based on discussion in the LH A321LR thread, it still does not have the range for MNL-AKL.....

We will see regarding Sangley, but I am not as pessimistic about it. Hopefully in the end common sense rules and the Tieng-Sy consortium would either adjust the height of their planned development or move it somewhere else.

And regarding the A321LR doing MNL-AKL, it's not like they even need it for that, right? Didnt PAL say that the loads on said route were great and they could switch the equipment to a tri-class A330 later this year?

[twoid][/twoid]

APettyJ wrote:

Just saw a blurb on Instagram that Qatar has announced new service to Davao, among other places. Excellent! Fly Philly to Davao on one airline!

According to the blurb QR will be returning to CEB as well, which makes me think whether they're going to do a triangular CEB-DVO-DOH/DVO-CEB-DOH route like EK's CEB-CRK-DXB, a fifth freedom route, or a direct route.

As for aircraft of choice, expect it to be the 788, although it could be upgauged to the A359 if loads improve.

I wish Pal will go with the Thompson Solo seat on their A321neo ulr.any updates about their cabins (A321neo)?

Mnl has enormous potential to be a hub.never allow singapore to take that stake at naia,because they will never let mnl to be the best airport.never.mnl will be then 2nd priority and singapore their first.philippines will overtake singapore in gdp,that is why they see potential here.2 side face,the typical asia.

The777Man wrote:

Devilfish wrote:

idp5601 wrote:

I honestly couldn't care less about the proposed casino projects around the area, to put it bluntly. I mean, private corporations running and controlling vast swaths of land in the Philippines isn't exactly new (*cough* BGC *cough* Nuvali *cough* Cebu Business Park). This aerotropolis wouldn't be any different, perhaps with the exception of multiple casinos. As long as they construct a world-class, future-proofed airport it doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

Maybe you should...those other projects do not involve land/space with airport potential. Tieng-Sy were proposing to reclaim land for their gaming resorts first...could be the reason the Ramboll concept prominently showing the airport, seaport and that wide empty space in the middle was set aside. If they were selected, authorities could be pressured to negate existing legislation prescribing approach patterns and building height limits in the vicinity to suit their plans. It may turn out there isn't an airport in the end. And it's not hard to imagine with politicians in the mix.

This Philstar opinion piece on the subject merits serious consideration.....

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... ppens-next

Quote:
"On the other hand, Megawide Construction and its partner GMR of India submitted a more modest proposal that addresses current deficiencies of NAIA and run the facility over 18 years.

Louie Ferrer of Megawide, in an e-mailed response to my questions, dismisses the need for another runway. He said Gatwick Airport, one of several airports servicing London, operates 57 movements per hour with a single runway, a point I have raised in this column for years.

NAIA, on the other hand, with two cross sectional runways only operates about 40. Ferrer thinks fixing the deficiencies in NAIA operations will produce dramatic improvements without a new runway.

Ferrer said that by fixing deficiencies in landside, terminal and airside, they will progressively increase air traffic movements to 60 per hour by the end of Phase 1c, which is six years from start of the project.

It is interesting that the Megawide proposal talks of fast delivery of improvements and a shorter concession period. We all know we can use quick relief from NAIA’s problems.

The fact that MIAA officials and Sec. Art Tugade succumbed to the Speaker’s demand to 'rationalize' terminal assignments is worrisome. If they know their business, they shouldn’t have agreed to such a separation because it is clear the facilities available right now make that impractical and inconvenient for passengers.

So we ought to manage our expectations. The proposals of Megawide and the super consortium may make us hopeful. But in the end, we still don’t have a bureaucracy capable of picking one proposal from among the four in a way that will benefit us all."


So far, only Megawide/GMR have presented a realistic, functional, workable and convincing modernization concept for NAIA


BTW, things have been very quiet on the new terminal project at CRK ever since the unsolicited MNL proposals came out.



In another development, this photo of PR's A321N(?) sans GTFs was uploaded on SkyscraperCity. Still am not a fan of the offset title.... .....


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXd6piyWsAA-pCo.jpg

https://twitter.com/scramble_nl/stat...79124425576448


Based on discussion in the LH A321LR thread, it still does not have the range for MNL-AKL.....

It's possible to modernize NAIA but in the end there's a need for a new airport with two parallel runways to begin with and room to add more later. Putting more money into NAIA is wasting time and effort into something that badly needs replacing in the long run anyway.

The777Man

Normally I'd agree with you there, but it sadly is too late for inaction. Doing nothing with NAIA while a new airport is being built would've been fine in, say, 2010, but it's 2018 now. Delays are getting worse, airlines based out of MNL are growing at unprecedented rates, and more people are deciding to connect at NAIA despite the set-up not being conducive for transit. Time is money, and we cannot afford to do anything while we wait for a new international gateway.

Also, take note that both proposals are essentially private projects; the government pays nothing to to rehabilitate NAIA. Let the corporations burn through their cash if they want.

SleeplessInZh wrote:

Mnl has enormous potential to be a hub.never allow singapore to take that stake at naia,because they will never let mnl to be the best airport.never.mnl will be then 2nd priority and singapore their first.philippines will overtake singapore in gdp,that is why they see potential here.2 side face,the typical asia.

This is just conspiratorial bullcrap.

Changi Airports International is in the business of making money, and is not interested in petty nationalism. Why would they otherwise be interested in a project if they just want to sabotage it? Where's the profit in that?

Some nice, new interior photos of MCIA T2 from SkyscraperCity..... .....



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYE5n96VAAAN0sv.jpg


http://www.iluvcebu.com/wp-content/uplo ... MCIA-1.jpg


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYE6zZAVwAAtQ2D.jpg


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYE5n96U8AAF9YH.jpg


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYE5n-BU0AACnfW.jpg


What I like most about CEB T2 is the judicious, creative and tasteful use and interplay of stone, wood, metal and glass into a harmonious whole.

And now for the remaining work before the drop-dead date.....


https://scontent.fruh4-4.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5B3D5980


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYFGTISVwAEqGOg.jpg


https://scontent.fruh4-4.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5B3ED301


https://scontent.fruh4-4.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5B31C4A5


http://www.iluvcebu.com/wp-content/uplo ... MCIA-3.jpg


Kudos to MEGAWIDE/GMR for their outstanding work so far.

I'm out of the loop on this entirely, but does anyone have an update on the A330 cabin reconfiguration announced by PAL last year? I'll most likely be flying PAL from Honolulu to Manila in September and I'm considering Premium Economy. I'd like to get an idea if I'll experience their new product or the old product.

roadrunner165 wrote:

I'm out of the loop on this entirely, but does anyone have an update on the A330 cabin reconfiguration announced by PAL last year? I'll most likely be flying PAL from Honolulu to Manila in September and I'm considering Premium Economy. I'd like to get an idea if I'll experience their new product or the old product.

PR sometimes uses the A343 for the route, so best check the type of aircraft you're getting for a particular flight.

As for Premium Economy, since they sometimes use the A330s with the previous config for some of their HNL flights, check the seat map for the flight you want to pick. Remember that their PE config is 2-3-2, while PE on the old A330s (which is basically extra legroom Y) has a 3-3-3 config.

idp5601 wrote:

PR sometimes uses the A343 for the route, so best check the type of aircraft you're getting for a particular flight.

As for Premium Economy, since they sometimes use the A330s with the previous config for some of their HNL flights, check the seat map for the flight you want to pick. Remember that their PE config is 2-3-2, while PE on the old A330s (which is basically extra legroom Y) has a 3-3-3 config.

To expand on this a bit further, if I go with the cheapest economy super saver fare then add-on choice seats (emergency exit row for extra leg room) I'm spending about $1,100 round trip (HNL-MNL-CEB returning DVO-MNL-HNL). If I go with Premium Economy I'm at about $1400 for the same exact itinerary. So if I get the old configuration A330 I'm basically paying $300 more for small perks such higher mileage accrual (125% vs 10%) 2 x 55lbs of luggage instead of 50lb, and according to their website, priority check in and boarding. At this point I'm inclined to spend the extra $300 to fly premium economy just for the trip report I can write after -- but I have to get this past the wife first!

Adam

Devilfish wrote:

Some nice, new interior photos of MCIA T2 from SkyscraperCity..... .....

And now for the remaining work before the drop-dead date.....

Megawide/GMR has really done a great job with the terminal. 111 days until opening seems fairly daunting. It feels like there's 6+ months of work ahead to get to completion... but the wait will be well worth it.

idp5601 wrote:

And regarding the A321LR doing MNL-AKL, it's not like they even need it for that, right? Didnt PAL say that the loads on said route were great and they could switch the equipment to a tri-class A330 later this year?

Yes...and as noted, the high load factors were during peak season. So while the A321LR still does not have the range for MNL-AKL nonstop with a profitable payload, I do wonder if PR were thinking of increasing frequency to AKL by downgauging to a notional A321LR+ as they did for higher demand Oz routes like SYD and MEL.

idp5601 wrote:

Normally I'd agree with you there, but it sadly is too late for inaction. Doing nothing with NAIA while a new airport is being built would've been fine in, say, 2010, but it's 2018 now.

Very true. This opinion piece stresses the importance of expeditious completion of the country's main airport project.....

https://www.philstar.com/business/2018/ ... e-delivery

airlineaddict wrote:

Megawide/GMR has really done a great job with the terminal.

They're up to the challenge. If not for charges of unfair competition and being biased, I'd say let Megawide-GMR do the NAIA Redevelopment now and leave CRK T2 and its O&M to others so M-GMR could concentrate on and finish NAIA soonest... for the traveling public to have their most pleasant airport experience yet in MNL much earlier Unfortunately, the authorities will still deliberate on the proposals for two months (at least) before they can decide.


Meanwhile, 5J appears to be earning a pretty penny from its ancillary cargo business (subscribers only).....

https://centreforaviation.com/insights/ ... pay-404110

What are the new airlines in the pipeline for Manila?

flyingqueen wrote:

What are the new airlines in the pipeline for Manila?

No news as of now yet, but there have been some unconfirmed rumours of GA thinking about relaunching CGK-MNL this year. LH are also interested in restarting flights from FRA but I doubt we'll see that this year; possibly mid-2019 at the earliest.

On a different level...browsing through another thread piqued my interest about a startup carrier to follow from where the likes of Asian Spirit and Seair left off. The Cessna SkyCourier could be a well-adapted replacement for the unlamented Let-410s..... .....


http://cessna.txtav.com/-/media/cessna/ ... eople.ashx


http://txtav.com//-/media/textron-aviat ... 1-216.ashx


It would make a great inter-island hopper to sundry leisure destinations and a rugged commuter for otherwise barely accessible small airfields.

Just saw this video link at SkyscraperCity of Cebu Daily News' media tour of MCIA T2..... .....

https://www.facebook.com/cebudailynews/ ... 589/?t=684

Plenty of interior work to be completed still.....



Over at Caticlan (MPH)...the erected steel framework of the new terminal building can now be seen..... .....


https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4744/267 ... 8614_b.jpg


Quite a departure from the more 'cubic' glass enclosure in the winning concept...though there may be hope yet if those vertical trusses were to be the curtain wall supports. Otherwise, the 'brewery' comments online may be justified...they would just need to slap the company's logo on the facade.

Perhaps they got wind of the warning to close Boracay

https://www.flightradar24.com/RPC4111/10bd8c5a

5J's first A321ceo is on the way to Manila, stopping through AAN, HAN.

A potential operator of the SkyCourier among the locals.....

http://philippineairspace.blogspot.com/ ... lands.html


http://www.gcmap.com/map?P=MNL-BAG/BSO/ ... 0x540&PM=*

Here's one airport it could fly to that's so 'new' there's no airport code assigned yet....


https://dbinders.files.wordpress.com/20 ... .jpg?w=736.


http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/files/2018 ... 20x235.jpg


Looks like a Philippine flag on the tail...did the Government quietly acquire a business jet .....


https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/imag ... QDgJ7BTPPA

Philippine747 wrote:

5J's first A321ceo is on the way to Manila, stopping through AAN, HAN.

Banner photo in the database..... .....




The rebuilt and expanded Tacloban City (TAC) airport terminal.....

http://bworldonline.com/dotr-unveils-ex ... -terminal/


http://bworldonline.com/wp-content/uplo ... irport.jpg


https://scontent.fmnl7-1.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5B3DC870

http://philippineairspace.blogspot.com/ ... inals.html

Proposed new passenger terminal building for TAC.....


https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/97456008 ... me=600x314

Hope they build up the apron and runway and raise the terminal ground floor level substantially so those could immediately drain after a flood.

The aircraft above looks very much like this one..... .....


http://cnnphilippines.com/incoming/m3gl ... _CNNPH.jpg


Over at Panglao, SkyscraperCity has some construction update pictures of the new Bohol International Airport...(many thanks to the photographers)..... .....


https://scontent.fcrk2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5B42461A


https://scontent.fceb1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5AE5247C


https://scontent.fceb1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5B2340BE


https://scontent.fceb1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5AEC3E92


https://scontent.fceb1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5ADA5F93


https://scontent.fceb1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5AF03FEB


So far, so good.....

MCIA T2 access ramp to the departure level is shown in this latest photo from SkyscraperCity...bright and sunny day..... .....


https://scontent.fruh4-2.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=5B29BFA3

Just a little more patience.....



BTW, has anyone noticed that the conceptual image of the Super Consortium's proposal for the NAIA Rehab project in posts #117 and #119 has been pulled? Are their 'cooks' in the kitchen now?

PALs Wifi box seems very big and high-end quality compared to ana.
Here some pictures from Hamburg:

http://www.aviation-friends-hamburg-for ... ?tid=12821

NAIA Super Consortium presents their proposal for NAIA rehab.
WARNING: MASSIVE WALL OF IMAGES BELOW
















EDIT: I have no idea why but for some reason the pictures double-posted. Can't seem to get rid of the duplicates.