Auckland International Airport - Domestic Terminal Changes

Forums › Travel (planes, train, cruise) › Auckland International Airport - Domestic Terminal Changes

Technofreak

6656 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3474

Trusted

#303938 21-Mar-2023 17:26

I see there was a headline or two a few days ago about the "new domestic terminal" with AIAL telling the world how wonderful the new terminal will be.

I must admit the set up we have is pretty third world having the two terminals separated like they are now. The proposed changes seem rather expensive for what they'll achieve as the new terminal will only cater for domestic jet services, all turbo prop services will still operate out of the existing terminal.

Anyone transiting Auckland using a combination of turbo prop and jet services will have the mad dash between terminals. International travellers going to/from the regions will still have to brave the elements or stand out side and wait for the the shuttle bus.

Improved services for domestic users, hardly anything worthwhile I'd say, certainly nothing to crow about, but then in the case of AIAL I'm not surprised. Once again Auckland could learn a thing or two from Wellington.

Seems also they have made the decision to proceed before the consultation process with the airlines was complete and the airlines are pushing back. AIAL on their game again.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

11924 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3053007 21-Mar-2023 18:02

The cost is ok for what they are doing. The terminal extension is significant but the relocation of services in terminal 2 is huge as well as moving to ICS, which doesn't really work too well for turboprop operations.

It should be more straight forward than the departures processor was, that was nasty.

Comparing an ICS terminal to Wellington doesn't make sense. They are a totally different scale and complexity of operations.

allan

2073 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 899

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3053012 21-Mar-2023 18:22

What confused me was the reference to the new domestic terminal as the "domestic jet terminal" and that regional services would remain in the existing terminal. So now there will be two domestic terminals?

Technofreak

6656 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3474

Trusted

#3053022 21-Mar-2023 18:49

Handle9:

The cost is ok for what they are doing. The terminal extension is significant but the relocation of services in terminal 2 is huge as well as moving to ICS, which doesn't really work too well for turboprop operations.

It should be more straight forward than the departures processor was, that was nasty.

Comparing an ICS terminal to Wellington doesn't make sense. They are a totally different scale and complexity of operations.

There's a few people who think the cost isn't OK.

ICS or no ICS I think they have lost sight of what's required from a domestic terminal point of view. The domestic jet and turbo prop operations have to be able to work together. To split then up like they intend to do isn't providing a good experience for their domestic customer. Technology should be improving the customer experience not getting in the way of it.

I'm not sure I follow what your nasty comment about departures is getting at.

Sure there is a difference of scale between Auckland and Wellington. I still contend that if Wellington and Christchurch can do it then so can Auckland If you want to talk about scale take a look at Melbourne then come back and tell me AIAL are getting it right.

If AIAL really want to make improvements they could sort out the worse than third world experience for arriving international passengers.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Handle9

11924 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3053027 21-Mar-2023 19:20

Melbourne has a lot of challenges as well. Arrivals there are a sh*tshow at peak times.

Auckland Airport has a lot of legacy issues, a fair chunk leftover from the early 2000s when they were trying to sell off the airport. It's a complex site with a lot of very old and interconnected infrastructure, particularly at the south end of international and domestic.

Phase 3 (the international departures project completed in 2018) was one of the most difficult brownfields projects I've ever seen. The best way I've seen it described was open heart surgery in the terminal. It was in the oldest part of terminal 2 and went a long way late, which was to some extent inevitable given the complexity of the project.

This one is a bit more straightforward but bigger. There's a new energy centre required as well as relocating a ton of the electrical infrastructure. It's necessary to enable the long term plans for the site but it's expensive and complex given it's an operational airport. The only comparable to working in an operational airport is a prison given the security requirements. To give some context JFK T6 is costing US$4.2 billion for 10 gates. Fraport T3 is 3 billion euros for 24 gates. New terminal projects on operational airports are expensive.

The arrivals processor was originally (before covid) going to be expanded prior to the domestic jet terminal construction, I'm not sure why it got moved on the road map, likely due to the airlines complaining about the additional cost. Until they push the front of the terminal out it's pretty difficult to fix.

Handle9

11924 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3053049 21-Mar-2023 20:38

allan:
What confused me was the reference to the new domestic terminal as the "domestic jet terminal" and that regional services would remain in the existing terminal. So now there will be two domestic terminals?

For now. There’s still a consultation piece going on around regional operations.

It comes down to money- the airlines don’t want to pay for the costs of the jet terminal let alone regional.

allan

2073 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 899

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3053056 21-Mar-2023 21:11

Handle9:
allan:

What confused me was the reference to the new domestic terminal as the "domestic jet terminal" and that regional services would remain in the existing terminal. So now there will be two domestic terminals?

For now. There’s still a consultation piece going on around regional operations.

It comes down to money- the airlines don’t want to pay for the costs of the jet terminal let alone regional.

So for regional passengers heading for an international departure, no change then after all this then - still a walk (in the rain)...

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

Technofreak

6656 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3474

Trusted

#3053060 21-Mar-2023 21:39

allan:

So for regional passengers heading for an international departure, no change then after all this then - still a walk (in the rain)...

As well as international arrivals going to a regional destination.

However, wait there's more. Many domestic regional passengers get to have the same great experience. I really don't think AIAL properly understand their market. They're letting fancy ideas get in the way of providing their bread and butter service.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Handle9

11924 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3053079 22-Mar-2023 00:17

Fancy ideas like standard 3 baggage screening? Regulatory compliance isn't usually a fancy idea but each to their own I guess.

empacher48

376 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 283

#3053134 22-Mar-2023 08:34

I’m still waiting for the Northern runway to start.

We are already flying a minimum clean speed from abeam Nelson, northbound, most times of the day.

Hey we were only promised all this stuff as part of the “airport of the future” in 1992. I’m guessing 30 years plus for this to be rolled out with 3 attempts to get it started is to be expected for every infrastructure project in this country.

afe66

3181 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1678

Lifetime subscriber

#3053259 22-Mar-2023 12:54

I prefer the current arrangement one domestic and one international. Has a simplicity.

If you don't want to walk from one to the take bus. I find the walk between the two quite refreshing after being stuck in metal tube for hours.

I envision some complications if flying from overseas not being exactly sure what type of aircraft you are flying on domestically and confusion about domestic
jet vrs domestic non jet terminals...

Technofreak

6656 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3474

Trusted

#3053920 23-Mar-2023 21:51

Handle9:

Fancy ideas like standard 3 baggage screening? Regulatory compliance isn't usually a fancy idea but each to their own I guess.

I very much doubt regulatory compliance is a significant driver for the changes or the costs that are being objected to.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

Handle9

11924 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3053925 23-Mar-2023 22:00

Technofreak:

Handle9:

Fancy ideas like standard 3 baggage screening? Regulatory compliance isn't usually a fancy idea but each to their own I guess.

I very much doubt regulatory compliance is a significant driver for the changes or the costs that are being objected to.

How do you propose to retrofit a standard 3 compliant baggage system into their existing footprint?

Technofreak

6656 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3474

Trusted

#3053927 23-Mar-2023 22:13

empacher48:

I’m still waiting for the Northern runway to start.

We are already flying a minimum clean speed from abeam Nelson, northbound, most times of the day.

Hey we were only promised all this stuff as part of the “airport of the future” in 1992. I’m guessing 30 years plus for this to be rolled out with 3 attempts to get it started is to be expected for every infrastructure project in this country.

Yep, you and pretty well everyone else who operates in and out of Auckland. Delays and vectors on arrival for turbo props, plus delays at the holding points in getting airborne at many times of the day.

I remember seeing a diorama situated in the International terminal, not far from where Jean Battens Vega Gull used to hang, back in the mid to late 1980's, which showed their plans for two runways. That's getting on for 40 years ago.

They made a start on the new runway just before the GFC and then stopped, blaming the GFC. I later heard they only made a start to meet some obligations around the way the land was acquired or consented, they never intended to complete it at that time.

I thought the original idea was for the northern (shorter) runway to service the domestic terminal which was to be on the northern side of the International terminal. Looks like that's no longer happening.

There was a school of though that the after affects of Covid would permanently reduce the demand for airline travel but I saw some statistics the other day that show demand is growing stronger then ever. That new runway needs to be a priority.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Technofreak

6656 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3474

Trusted

#3053930 23-Mar-2023 22:19

Handle9:

Technofreak:

I very much doubt regulatory compliance is a significant driver for the changes or the costs that are being objected to.

How do you propose to retrofit a standard 3 compliant baggage system into their existing footprint?

If you read what I wrote I didn't say there wasn't any need for change. What I said was I very much doubt regulatory compliance was the driver for the changes or costs that were being objected to.

As far as I know the airlines have agreed there needs to be change they just don't see a need for all the changes and costs some of which they see as being excessive. in other words changes to accommodate regulatory compliance could be achieved without excessive cost.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

Handle9

11924 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3053933 23-Mar-2023 22:31

Technofreak:

Handle9:

How do you propose to retrofit a standard 3 compliant baggage system into their existing footprint?

If you read what I wrote I didn't say there wasn't any need for change. What I said was I very much doubt regulatory compliance was the driver for the changes or costs that were being objected to.

As far as I know the airlines have agreed there needs to be change they just don't see a need for all the changes and costs some of which they see as being excessive. in other words changes to accommodate regulatory compliance could be achieved without excessive cost.

So how do you see that happening given the physical and infrastructure constraints they currently have? What's being proposed isn't incredibly expensive by international standards.

They have to replace the baggage system to meet the traceability requirements of standard 3. That's the tipping point and a logical step for an integrated terminal. They either do it properly and deal with the airlines being grumpy or they get stuck with something substandard for the next 30 years.

The airlines would complain if the airport spent $20 on a new terminal and then in the same breath would complain that the passenger experience was substandard. That's just how it goes.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4