Jump to content

Manila Airport Fiasco


Recommended Posts

lazydays

Mark,

Sorry to hear of your major hassle and extra expense.

I have never flown into Manila and have no desire to,even less now.

 

I always go via Singapore,then on to Davao City,or via Cebu.

Never encountered any problems,yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 30
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Markham

    9

  • Alan S

    5

  • SkyMan

    3

  • JohnFromTexas

    3

SkyMan

The KLM aircrew who spoke with us are hoping the airline will seek to shift its operations to Cebu.

 

 

Mark

Woooohooooo!!! :thumbs_up::thumbs_up::thumbs_up: 3 thumbs up!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Markham

Mark,

Sorry to hear of your major hassle and extra expense.

I have never flown into Manila and have no desire to,even less now.

 

I always go via Singapore,then on to Davao City,or via Cebu.

Never encountered any problems,yet.

It depends entirely what kind of ticket you buy. Currently I get a ticket valid for 12 months and KLM works out to be cheapest by far. If I were to buy a one-way, or restricted round-trip (21 days), either Cathay Pacific or Singapore Airlines would be cheaper. Either way, I would still fly from my local airport (Cardiff) with KLM to Amsterdam and take an international flight from there in preference to schlepping-up the M4 to Heathrow or Gatwick. I do have to return to the UK for one last time, probably after Christmas, but will buy a one-way back, probably via Hong Kong.

 

The KLM aircrew who spoke with us are hoping the airline will seek to shift its operations to Cebu.

 

 

Mark

Woooohooooo!!! :thumbs_up::thumbs_up::thumbs_up: 3 thumbs up!

Apparently KLM has been mooting a Cebu service for a while now. Certainly the OFW traffic would justify that as all its flights to Manila are over-subscribed. Indeed the last couple of times I've flown with them, there hasn't been one spare seat anywhere on the aircraft - even on their new stretched 777s they use a couple of days a week (that aircraft carries more passengers than the 747s they use to Hong Kong and Japan).

 

If KLM does introduce a direct flight between Amsterdam and Cebu, it would be the fastest route for anyone living in the New York and Washington areas.

 

 

 

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites
lazydays

Mark,

Sorry to hear of your major hassle and extra expense.

I have never flown into Manila and have no desire to,even less now.

 

I always go via Singapore,then on to Davao City,or via Cebu.

Never encountered any problems,yet.

It depends entirely what kind of ticket you buy. Currently I get a ticket valid for 12 months and KLM works out to be cheapest by far. If I were to buy a one-way, or restricted round-trip (21 days), either Cathay Pacific or Singapore Airlines would be cheaper. Either way, I would still fly from my local airport (Cardiff) with KLM to Amsterdam and take an international flight from there in preference to schlepping-up the M4 to Heathrow or Gatwick. I do have to return to the UK for one last time, probably after Christmas, but will buy a one-way back, probably via Hong Kong.

 

The KLM aircrew who spoke with us are hoping the airline will seek to shift its operations to Cebu.

 

 

Mark

Woooohooooo!!! thumbs_up.gifthumbs_up.gifthumbs_up.gif 3 thumbs up!

Apparently KLM has been mooting a Cebu service for a while now. Certainly the OFW traffic would justify that as all its flights to Manila are over-subscribed. Indeed the last couple of times I've flown with them, there hasn't been one spare seat anywhere on the aircraft - even on their new stretched 777s they use a couple of days a week (that aircraft carries more passengers than the 747s they use to Hong Kong and Japan).

 

If KLM does introduce a direct flight between Amsterdam and Cebu, it would be the fastest route for anyone living in the New York and Washington areas.

 

 

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah,i prefer to fly from nearest local Airport (MAN) maybe not the cheapest route,but eliminates hassle for me.

Use to be non stop to Singapore,but now via Munich,thats ok though,only 1hr in transit at SG instead of the previous 3 hrs.

Downside,tickets only valid for 6 months with Singair.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyMan

Been thinking about this ILS being out and wondering if there isn't more to it. I sometimes look for the devious I guess.

 

Suppose there is money to fix the ILS but this incident was allowed to happen in order to get a handout to fix/replace it from some other country? And then suppose maybe it isn't broke at all and they just turned it off for the same reason? Hmmmmmmm?

Link to post
Share on other sites
A_Simple_Man

Been thinking about this ILS being out and wondering if there isn't more to it. I sometimes look for the devious I guess.

 

Suppose there is money to fix the ILS but this incident was allowed to happen in order to get a handout to fix/replace it from some other country? And then suppose maybe it isn't broke at all and they just turned it off for the same reason? Hmmmmmmm?

 

You ARE getting cynical. . . . but I like the way you think. . . I'm still smiling at the thought of some conniving bastard figuring out a devious way to get a bribe. . . if they only put HALF that much thought into legitimate concerns.

Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnFromTexas

If KLM does a direct flight to amsterdam then I am going KLM every time I fly with a long layover :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Markham

Been thinking about this ILS being out and wondering if there isn't more to it. I sometimes look for the devious I guess.

 

Suppose there is money to fix the ILS but this incident was allowed to happen in order to get a handout to fix/replace it from some other country? And then suppose maybe it isn't broke at all and they just turned it off for the same reason? Hmmmmmmm?

 

Well the fact that certain in Government circles want to move all Manila's international flights to Clark did go through my mind as we sat on the taxiway, miles from the apron and terminal building.

 

Let's consider such a proposal logically. Manila's international terminal has around 8 jetways whilst there are only two at Clark neither of which are ideally suited to large wide-bodied jets. The peak hours for international flights is from around 7am until around midday: that's when most of the inbound flights from Europe, China, the US (via Guam) and the Persian Gulf arrive and depart. Manila, with all its jetways, can handle that but Clark couldn't as well as handling its existing Tiger Airways and Cebu Pacific flights. This would mean international carriers retiming flights and that may not be so easy - indeed some carriers may decide to discontinue services to Luzon completely and try to get slots at Davao or Cebu.

 

Airlines have to optimise the usage of their aircraft - they only make money when they're airborne. Take the KLM plane, for example, that flies from Manila to Amsterdam: 90 minutes after it arrives in Amsterdam, it makes a round-trip to New York. And before it leaves for Manila, it's made a round-trip to Washington, arrives in Amsterdam in the very early morning and has a 6-hour service period before becoming the Manila flight. (You can check this yourself using flightradar24.com)

 

Then there's the problem of connecting flights (especially with PAL), meaning expensive taxi journeys between Clark and NAIA adding to travel time, cost and stress.

 

If NAIA management think they'll get hand-outs from the airlines - or other countries - to fix their VOR and ILS system, they had better reconsider: they won't! The airlines won't because they already pay a considerable amount for navigation and landing fees and, in the wake of the Terminal 3 fiasco, I can't see foreign governments queuing-up to hand them more cash, can you?

 

 

 

 

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites
Alan S

This wasnt long ago:

 

President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo formally opened the new expanded passenger terminal of the Diosdado Macapagal International Airport here that will increase passenger handling capacity to an additional 600,000 a year.

 

Asia's first airport service for VIPs, celebrities to rise in Clark

 

CLARK FREEPORT ZONE---President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo Saturday laid the time capsule that signals the start of the work on VIP Jet services Inc. an ultra-modern facility for prominent personalities and their private aircraft preferring to have privacy during airport arrival at the Diosdado Macapagal International Airport here. The exclusive facility is the first of its kind in Asia and is ran by the same family that owns the VIP center in the Van Nuys, California. This facility is expected to turn the DMIA an aircraft hub for small or regional jets for very prominent people who do not want to go through the airport hassles.The President was delighted when told by Dean Cambe Sr., owner of America-based VIP Jet Services Inc. that it was only during her administration that the company was finally able to get the required permits for its Philippine operations. "I hope Madam President that the incoming administration will share your vision and passion to get foreign investors."

 

==============================

 

Anyone who thinks that 600,000 celebrities are going to fly into the Philippines each year, is dreaming.

So, what is the purpose?

Link to post
Share on other sites
KennyF

there are only two (runways) at Clark neither of which are ideally suited to large wide-bodied jets.

 

Check out "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diosdado_Macapagal_International_Airport#Runways"

 

 

"The two parallel runways of DMIA are capable of Space Shuttle landings."

 

And...

"SIA Engineering Company (SIAEC) will pour an initial US$1 billion (P45 billion) investment to set up a world-class aircraft maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) facility at DMIA."

 

"The facility will occupy a 10-hectare property at the DMIA which would be the center of repair, maintenance and overhaul of various wide- and narrow-bodied aircraft, such as the Airbus A380, currently the world's largest aircraft"

 

I don't think the runways would be the problem but rather the infrastructure. Lets face it, Kai Tak had only one runway in the end.

 

But I don't thing the support services would keep up with a massive increase in passengers.

 

KinAC

Link to post
Share on other sites
Alan S

I believe that Clark (before they picked a name that most people couldnt pronounce) was the 2nd largest US base in the world, behind Edwards.

 

But, as Kenny said, the infrastructure can barely cope with the present traffic, let alone any major increase.

 

There were proposals to update it, give it a new terminal and infrastructure, much like the new Hong Kong airport, plus a new high speed rail link to Manila. I was a part, very small part, of the team who were working on it. ( No guesses for the reasons it didnt proceed!)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Markham

there are only two (runways) at Clark neither of which are ideally suited to large wide-bodied jets.

 

Check out "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diosdado_Macapagal_International_Airport#Runways"

 

 

"The two parallel runways of DMIA are capable of Space Shuttle landings."

 

And...

"SIA Engineering Company (SIAEC) will pour an initial US$1 billion (P45 billion) investment to set up a world-class aircraft maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) facility at DMIA."

 

"The facility will occupy a 10-hectare property at the DMIA which would be the center of repair, maintenance and overhaul of various wide- and narrow-bodied aircraft, such as the Airbus A380, currently the world's largest aircraft"

 

I don't think the runways would be the problem but rather the infrastructure. Lets face it, Kai Tak had only one runway in the end.

 

But I don't thing the support services would keep up with a massive increase in passengers.

 

KinAC

 

Kenny, my bad - I meant jetways, not runways! Yes there are two parallel runways at Clark but there doesn't appear to be sufficient taxiways to allow both to be used simultaneously - not that air traffic is ever likely to be that heavy as to justify it!

 

 

 

 

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites
Markham

I believe that Clark (before they picked a name that most people couldnt pronounce) was the 2nd largest US base in the world, behind Edwards.

But, as Kenny said, the infrastructure can barely cope with the present traffic, let alone any major increase.

 

There were proposals to update it, give it a new terminal and infrastructure, much like the new Hong Kong airport, plus a new high speed rail link to Manila. I was a part, very small part, of the team who were working on it. ( No guesses for the reasons it didnt proceed!)

 

On what metric - land area, length of runway(s), number of people employed there or the musings of a pro-American Filipino politician of the era? I rather think some of the former USAF bases in England, such as Newbury, would more than rival Clark in terms of size and infrastructure.

 

I think it was me who said that the present infrastructure wouldn't be able to cope with an increase in traffic stick_poke.gif.

 

It would be quite safe to assume that the Germans won't be rushing to tender for any future infrastructure contract there and I rather think the same could be set for the rest of Europe.

 

 

 

Mark

Edited by Markham
Link to post
Share on other sites
Alan S

Mark,

Clark ... is 550 sq km, almost the size of Singapore. Virtually a state-within-a-state, it has 2,700 buildings, a 2 x 3,200 meter runway, and is manned by 8,000 military, 800 civilians, 12,000 deoendents, and 18,000 Filipino employees. It injects $115 million into the local economy annually. (From: Philippines Handbook- 1991)

For the record, the US govt was paying $962m for 2 years, but the RP Govt wanted

Link to post
Share on other sites
Markham

Mark,

Clark ... is 550 sq km, almost the size of Singapore. Virtually a state-within-a-state, it has 2,700 buildings, a 2 x 3,200 meter runway, and is manned by 8,000 military, 800 civilians, 12,000 deoendents, and 18,000 Filipino employees. It injects $115 million into the local economy annually. (From: Philippines Handbook- 1991)

For the record, the US govt was paying $962m for 2 years, but the RP Govt wanted

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..