Suvarnabhumi Terminal 2

[DivineMadman]

Without getting involved in the debate over how original/derivative the design is, here's a video posted on Facebook showing the new terminal at Swampy, scheduled for 2020 completion.  

 

https://goo.gl/toZwbQ

[Guest]

Design looks fine although a little over complicated.   

 

All I want from a terminal is good access, no delays anywhere in the process and some corners with quiet coffee shops to relax whilst waiting for a flight, AFTER security.  

 

A coffee stand in the middle of an enormous hall doesn't do it.       I hope they get the third runway done as well.

 

 

Finally, 2020 completion would be good going.    Incidentally, the same year that Berlin Brandenburg airport is now due to open....... (that one is 9 years late and has looked complete for years).      

I imagine the Thais will do better.

[a447a]

I imagine the Thais will do better.

Mmmm....if I recall correctly, a day or so after Suvannaphumi first opened one of the runways was closed down because of cracks in one of the runways, caused by sub-standard concrete.

[DivineMadman]

A few photos

 

 

 

[TMax]

I may be behind the times here, is terminal 2 going to be just Thai airways or other international airlines as well? I've seen other cities elsewhere that built a terminal for their own national carriers so just wondering if it's the same here.

[PeterRS]

My first thought? What a waste of space! Not within the terminal, but access for planes. Surely the point of a terminal is to permit as many planes as possible to park at its bays. So there should be bays on as many sides as possible. Most newish oblong shaped terminals that I have seen permit planes to park on both of the long sides. DMK and LHR Terminal 5 are two exceptions, although one has aisles jutting out from one long side and the other has two two long-sided satellites. It seems to me a design like this one will inevitably mean a lot of bus gates. 

[Guest]

It seems to me a design like this one will inevitably mean a lot of bus gates. 

 

You are probably right.  That is unfortunate as it means a slower & less pleasant process for embarking and disembarking.  With these low cost carriers, the preferred solution it go get a seat near the front and be off the plane to immigration as fast as possible.

 

If there is a bus, it means waiting for half the plane to unload before moving.

[ChristianPFC]

Buses from terminal to airplane are the worst part of flying. A human rights violation!

 

In Don Mueang, I once (2014?) spent half an hour on bus to airplane for a 45 min flight to Phom Penh. I was beginning to think they will take me there by bus instead of airplane.

[vinapu]

Buses from terminal to airplane are the worst part of flying. A human rights violation!

 

if lower  price is  reflecting that violation I will go for it. I often make connection in Shanghai when taking China Eastern and they use buses to the plane but price hardly can be beat so I suffer in silence 

[fedssocr]

looks like a big expensive building to add only 15 gates. Too many pillars. No people movers. Basically just another luxury mall with a "rainforest" in the middle? Is that all wood? Hard to imagine such a project could be done in 2 years

[fedssocr]

Buses from terminal to airplane are the worst part of flying. A human rights violation!

 

In Don Mueang, I once (2014?) spent half an hour on bus to airplane for a 45 min flight to Phom Penh. I was beginning to think they will take me there by bus instead of airplane.

 

I experienced the same thing at BKK last year on TG when flying to PNH. The bus ride was insane all the way out to the cargo/freight terminal

[DivineMadman]

I think it may be a bit premature to ding them for a lack of people movers based on the concept video that they used in the competition.  Or hypothetical guesses on whether we'll be stuck using buses in the future, for that matter.  I expect it will have all the usual conveniences.  I also expect, somewhat optimistically, that this time they will get the number of bathrooms right the first time, and avoid all the retro-fitting that spoiled the opening of dear Swampy.

 

As we all know, currently Suvarnabhumi ("Terminal 1") sits atop the cross-bar of an "H", with the runways the uprights on either side.  The site for the new terminal is along the inside right side of that "H".  I think this dictates that the terminal can only have gates on one side.  The alternative would be either moving one of the runways or putting the new terminal at some distance from Terminal 1, which, even if practical, would no doubt raise all sorts of other complaints.  

 

The design is quite controversial - for two reasons.  First of all, it actually didn't win the competition.  The first winner was subsequently disqualified for failure to provide some required part of the proposal.  (I can't recall what.)  On top of that, there are a bunch of people complaining that the design is too Japanese and/or derivative of the work of a Japanese architect.

 

It's wood cladding over steel and concrete.

 

I saw another report that said 30 months, which gets us to 2021 at the earliest

 

Personally, I like the design, but I fall into the camp that says it doesn't seem to fit with Bangkok or interact in any reasonable way with Terminal 1.  Somewhere in the mountains or Bhutan/Sikkim seems a more natural fit for me.

[DivineMadman]

Just to flog this particular horse once more, note that a new "mid-field" concourse is currently being built that connects to the existing terminal by an under-the-tarmac people mover.  

[PeterRS]

As we all know, currently Suvarnabhumi ("Terminal 1") sits atop the cross-bar of an "H", with the runways the uprights on either side.  The site for the new terminal is along the inside right side of that "H".  I think this dictates that the terminal can only have gates on one side.  The alternative would be either moving one of the runways or putting the new terminal at some distance from Terminal 1, which, even if practical, would no doubt raise all sorts of other complaints. 

 

 

Space between runways is always inevitably limited but I just can not agree with that analysis. Any terminal that permits aircraft parking gates only on one long side is a disaster for passengers. Looking again at the photos, it seems that there may be gates also at one end which makes a bit more sense. 

 

But suggesting there is no room between the runways for a new terminal with plane access to gates on both of its long sides is just not true. There is tons of room between the runways to fit an oblong shaped terminal with plane gates on both of the long sides. After all, terminal 1 is plenty wide enough to have to have gates on the outside and the inside of both long arms of the H. 

 

 

As this drawing of the existing terminal shows, 4 of the concourse areas permit plane gates on both sides - B, C E and F. The other three are only one side access. Now take the distance between the end of B to the end of F.  That sits between the two runways and still has room for taxiways beyond each. So that width is definitely available further south. 

 

The problem is it would probably have to be further away from the main Terminal. Has no-one ever heard of Terminal trains like they have in Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Taipei, Hong Kong, Tokyo and goodness knows how many other airports?

 

Better still, why not copy Osaka's Kansai airport with a Terminal plum in the middle between the rrunways. This would require two buildings but turn the buildings in the diagram through 90 degrees and there will still be plenty of room between the runways at BKK.

 

[Guest]

1  The existing airport has not been open that long, so I would hope they had considered space for expansion.

 

2  Heathrow has built several terminals, mainly with direct access to the planes.   Terminal 2 & 5 manage it with an underpass from the main building to the 2 satellite terminals.

 

3  There is supposed to be a new runway planned, so they could build the terminal between the existing runways and the new one. 

[DivineMadman]

In the unlikely event that it helps people un-bind their nickers, here is a concept photo of the mid-field concourse that I mentioned above, that is already under construction.  This is supposed to help get the airport to 60 million capacity.

 

 

Terminal 2 is intended to take capacity to 85 million.  A relatively modest increase.  It needs a long "front side" with roads for pick up and drop off, because in addition to adding gates it is also - and just as importantly - adding check-in lanes and all that jazz.   I think that it's probably placed where it is and designed the way it is to make as efficient use as possible of the existing infrastructure.  

 

But what do I know.  Not much.

[reader]

Both the mid-field and the new terminal are needed to make BKK competitive with Singapore for supremacy in the race for SE Asia international hub title.

 

But unless the frequency and capacity of the Air Link train is expanded, the best airport terminals pale if you can't move passengers quickly and efficiently in and out of the site.  And that can only be accomplished by improved rapid transit links.

[PeterRS]

In the unlikely event that it helps people un-bind their nickers, here is a concept photo of the mid-field concourse that I mentioned above, that is already under construction.  This is supposed to help get the airport to 60 million capacity.

 

That concept photo is virtually identical to Osaka's Kansai. So what are that video and photos posted earlier? They are nothing like the concept photo. Is there a third terminal being built?

[DivineMadman]

the mid-field concourse in the photo is not considered a separate "terminal."  It's just an extension of the current beloved Swampy.  Lots and lots of airports have a similar midfield concourse.  (HKG, ICN, etc.)

 

The video and the other photos are for the new terminal - Terminal 2, with its own check-in lanes, immigration, etc.  It is I believe the only new "terminal" planned. 

[vinapu]

 

But unless the frequency and capacity of the Air Link train is expanded, the best airport terminals pale if you can't move passengers quickly and efficiently in and out of the site.  And that can only be accomplished by improved rapid transit links.

Perhaps it's time to resurrect non-stop express train to Makkasan  and Phaya Thai with more frequency but NOT at price of 3 times of regular train like before. Infrastructure exists , only pricing was non-sensical.

[reader]

Perhaps it's time to resurrect non-stop express train to Makkasan  and Phaya Thai with more frequency but NOT at price of 3 times of regular train like before. Infrastructure exists , only pricing was non-sensical.

 

+1

[PeterRS]

I may be behind the times here, is terminal 2 going to be just Thai airways or other international airlines as well?

 

I am very much behind the times - and thanks DivineMadman for clarifying the difference between the Terminal 1 extension and Terminal 2.

 

Terminal 2 seems so small it surely is impossible to be for the country major carrier? Can you imagine all the flights departing in the morning and the late evening. There are not nearly enough gates. Besides, TG will normally be in the same terminal as other Star Alliance carriers. That is totally impossible in that little terminal. Maybe it is mainly to be for airlines with smaller aircraft like Bangkok Airways.

 

I am still curious about passengers getting from the main terminal to the extension. I assume there will have to be at least one underground train as at most international airports.

[DivineMadman]

I am very much behind the times - and thanks DivineMadman for clarifying the difference between the Terminal 1 extension and Terminal 2.

 

Terminal 2 seems so small it surely is impossible to be for the country major carrier? Can you imagine all the flights departing in the morning and the late evening. There are not nearly enough gates. Besides, TG will normally be in the same terminal as other Star Alliance carriers. That is totally impossible in that little terminal. Maybe it is mainly to be for airlines with smaller aircraft like Bangkok Airways.

 

I am still curious about passengers getting from the main terminal to the extension. I assume there will have to be at least one underground train as at most international airports.

yes, happily there is an automated people mover underground planned to connect the mid-field concourse extension to the main terminal.

 

There is also planned to be some sort of automated people mover between the new terminal and "Terminal 1",  Reports I read said it would also allow passengers to connect to the Airport Rail Link (or some such ambiguous wording), so I don't know if the plan is to extend the Airport Rail Link to Terminal 2 or have a separate people mover between the two terminals.  I am betting against an extension of the ARL.

 

Particularly in tough budgetary times, public works would probably be like condoms, permit reasonable anticipated growth plans but still a bit tight.  Hence, I think, the modest size of the new terminal (which from a planning perspective has to be viewed along with expansion of U-Tapao and DMK).

 

Not that JFK should be considered a model of anything - except perhaps what not to do - a quick look suggests that at JFK Terminal 1 has 11 gates & Terminal 7 has 12 (by way of comparison).  So with luck perhaps some carriers or groups of carriers will make it work.  I'll be thrilled if Cathay moves there.  

[PeterRS]

BKK is a pretty lousy airport if only because of the distances that have to be travelled on foot. People movers are all very well except that most people have little clue how to use them. One side should be for those happy to stand and look at the scenery. The other for people who want to move.

 

BKK has a lot of people movers. If you arrive on an A380 or with a couple of other planes in the same Aisle, there is inevitably a scrum of people who quite happily clog the people movers so that walking becomes totally impossible. If your seat is at the back of the plane and you want to try and get nearer the front of the Immigration queue, mostly you have to forget the people movers and just plain run.

 

The Chinese are often to blame for this, but not exclusively so. I have seen many a western couple stand on both sides of a people mover totally unaware that others may wish to pass them. So if BKK is going to depend on yet more people movers rather than some form of more automated transport to get passengers from the main Terminal to that long terminal extension, I can see a great many really frustrated passengers. God forbid they use lifts up and down as at Heathrow Terminal 5. Anyone used to Chinese ideas of queuing will be in for massive frustration. 

 

The other issue is check-in times. To get to the new extension and then along it to wherever your gate might be will add I guess at least 20 - 30 minutes. A look at the queues for some airlines check in desks and it is obvious that vast numbers of passengers still do not get boarding passes in advance. Plus the queues at some airlines bag drop counters can also be very long. Find yourself behind one couple with a couple of connecting flights and a problem with their ticket and it is as bad as normal check in. With those upstairs Security lines often clogged at rush hours and the same at the Immigration desks downstairs, I can see a lot of people being very late arriving for their flights.

[PeterRS]

Terminal 7 has 12 (by way of comparison).  So with luck perhaps some carriers or groups of carriers will make it work.  I'll be thrilled if Cathay moves there.  

I thought Cathay had moved to Terminal 8. This has 29 gates with an extension concourse rather like the one being built at BKK. But it shares the terminal with other OneWorld carriers. No idea if that means occasionally having to use a bus.