Suvarnabhumi

[Guest namjai]

Deplaning at 1:15 am I was processed thru immigration, collected my luggage, cleared customes and was picked up by my driver at about 1:40.

 

************************************************************

 

Leaving the other day, I arrived at the airport and found it a great improvement from the old BKK. There is only one terminal so there is no confusion as to where to get out of your taxi. Door 1 is for Thai Airlines and as the entry doors get higher they are for international flights and finally for domestic. There is a lot less confusion at this new facility and I did not see anybody who was troubled in any way. After I checked into my airline, I had time to walk around and found the environement to be very clean and attractive. As far as I could see, everything was open and looked high class. The departure tax is still TB500 and going thru passport control and security was a quick process. I did notice that (and I am not trying to be biased) people who looked to be of "middle eastern nationalities" did seem to be more scrutinized than Southeast Asians and caucasion looking farangs.

[Gaybutton]

Thank you for that report. We've had several posts about arriving at Suvarnabhumi, but I think this is the first post I've seen about departures. It seems as if they have the major problems worked out and everything is going smoothly now.

[Guest Boxer]

Thank you for that report. We've had several posts about arriving at Suvarnabhumi, but I think this is the first post I've seen about departures. It seems as if they have the major problems worked out and everything is going smoothly now.

 

I agree Gaybutton as i have just done a weekend in and out to Hong Kong from SA and found none of the moans I have read so far on many Forums. It was easy and a joy but dont like the grey it is a bit depressing and the walks are a bit far.

[Guest fountainhall]

I have now been in and out at the new airport twice. I agree about the grey, but remember Hong Kong? It was exactly the same and it took several years to brighten it all up. I find the worst features of Suvarnabhumi are -

 

1. Arriving at the terminal building, the lack of signposting before you reach the drop-off point. Apart from a THAI billboard, there's no information about which door serves which airlines until you actually reach the terminal and then the signs are so small they're almost impossible to read. This could be rectified easily and cheaply.

 

2. Really dreadful signage within the terminal. The video monitor information in both departure and arrival halls is far too small, and the use of colour makes reading even more difficult. After immigration, fixed signage re gates and lounges is mostly at chest or face height - far too low for any crowded environment. Surely someone must have realised it should be minimum 3 or 4 metres up from the ground?

 

3. Lack of moving walkways after immigration at departure level. Passengers are forced to walk a very, very long distance to gates, presumably to encourage shopping. The distance is longer than Heathrow Terminal 4 which at least has moving walkways near the extremities. Yes, I know Don Muang was almost the same, but . . .!

 

Departing last Sunday at around 10am, the immigration queue took over 20 minutes, longer than I have ever experienced at Don Muang. Against that, however, on both occasions the time taken for immigration on entry and baggage collection was considerably faster than Don Muang. No doubt, there will be continuous improvment and we'll all get used to it.

[Bob]

A couple of weeks ago, I posted in another thread my experience (most excellent) during my first flight into the new airport.

 

However, I flew there on a loaded 747 from Chiangmai this past Monday and the boneheads had to bus the passengers to the terminal (geez.....with a new spacious airport and a large scheduled flight from the 2nd largest city in the country, you'd think they could have found a chute somewhere). And they bussed us to the south side of the terminal more than half way toward the international side! Then, I had to hike back to the east end and go through security again to connect with my flight to Udon Thani. Thankfully, I had 2 hours between flights so had no trouble making the connecting domestic flight on time.

 

The facility, in my view, is wonderful. But it would be helpful if they learned to use it efficiently.

 

 

P.S. Not that other airports don't suck occasionally. On a trip to Kuala Lumpur last weekend, the plane (arriving and leaving) parks out on the tarmac about a half a mile from the terminal. They must be short of busses because they walk everybody to and from the plane [i'd estimate it was clearly over 100 degrees (fahrenheit) out on that lovely tarmac.]

[Guest fountainhall]

I assume you must have been on Air Asia which lands at the newish no frills KL terminal and walking is the rule for everyone. I don't think they have any air bridges there - only at the main terminal (in my view one of the loveliest anywhere). Re Suvarnabhumi, it's clear that the facility is already reaching capacity at certain times of the day and I assume international flights take precedence at the air bridge gates. But you're right - if a fully loaded 747 can't get an air bridge at such a huge new airport, something's badly wrong with its operation.

[Guest mauRICE]

I assume you must have been on Air Asia which lands at the newish no frills KL terminal and walking is the rule for everyone. I don't think they have any air bridges there - only at the main terminal (in my view one of the loveliest anywhere).

 

Yup, that would be KLIA's new terminal for budget airlines. You pay less, you don't get the frills. Singapore is building one too.

 

Incidentally, Nok Air flies non-stop from Chiang Mai to Udon Thani on Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays and returns on the same days. No need to change flights in Bangkok.

[Gaybutton]

On a trip to Kuala Lumpur last weekend, the plane (arriving and leaving) parks out on the tarmac about a half a mile from the terminal. They must be short of busses because they walk everybody to and from the plane [i'd estimate it was clearly over 100 degrees (fahrenheit) out on that lovely tarmac.]

 

What do if your flight arrives when it's raining? Also, what do they do to get people from the terminal building out to the plane for departing flights?

 

In my opinion, one of the most impressive and well designed airports in the world is Singapore's Changi International Airport. It's too bad Suvarnabhumi did not use the same people to design the airport. Based on everything I'm seeing on this thread, and I have not been to Suvarnabhumi yet, it sounds very poorly designed. I would have thought that a brand new airport, literally forty years in the making, an airport hoped to be the new major Asian hub, would have been designed so that it would be a pleasure to use. Instead it seems like it ended up being yet another semi disaster. Even if you don't mind the long walks, when I see people writing that there are not enough bathrooms, no convenient restaurants, not enough gates so that people still end up on a bus at a parking tarmac, and the bus takes you to areas inconvenient for connecting flights, etc, etc, etc, then I'm not exactly impressed with the design.

 

It's hard to believe that competent, modern airport architects and designers would have failed to anticipate these problems, but there it is and we're all stuck with it. One thing is for sure . . . from now on, whenever I take a flight that originates in Thailand, I'm going to check to see if there's a way to get where I'm trying to go by departing from U-Tapao.

[Guest mauRICE]

Budget terminals may not be convenient for you and I but that's what you get when you use a cheap airline that pays lower licensing fees to an airport authority for take offs and landings. Remember, the savings are supposedly passed on to us. I believe they do provide buses to and from the terminal in the event of rain as they are then no longer a frill but a necessity. Similarly, transport to the terminal is provided for disabled passengers.

 

At the moment, Singapore's Changi assigns budget airlines their most far-flung landing and departure bays until their budget terminal is ready. You've got quite a bit of a walk from your arrival point to the main immigration and baggage claim areas.

 

Singapore's Changi is certainly functional and efficient but, call it a personal bias, I think KLIA is far more appealing aesthetically. You might have noticed that many of the frontline staff at the Singapore airport are Malay or Indian despite the country having an overwhelming Chinese majority. This is not by accident. The great PR machinery that is the Singapore Government wants visitors to be greeted with genuine smiles when they first arrive in the city state.

[Guest fountainhall]

I agree with mauRICE's view re KLIA being the most aesthetically pleasing. Hong Kong is rapidly improving in the 'looks' stakes since they started brightening it up. It certainly is hugely efficient, although whoever approved an open-area Macdonald's in the arrivals area should be shot - it stinks of french fries! Changi feels more intimate, perhaps because of the carpeting (is there any anywhere at Suvarnabhumi?) and most of the ceilings are quite low. No doubt the new budget terminal will be much more like KL's - very simple and basic.

 

On the subject of lack of carpeting, I find Suvarnabhumi feels like a huge prison cage - those metallic walkways and stairs, high ceilings, stark white lights above metal grilles, very loud ambient noise levels . . .