Originally Posted by
speedbird001
I can't possibly respond to all of the comments but thank you all. I think my point is that for an airport that is this new, the design, the maintenance and the airconditiong among other things is poor. I am not saying that the building is not air conditioned, I am pointing out that you can walk down to your gate and there are spots where it is effective and spots where it is warm. I would say a design flaw.
And yes, my comparison is to other Asian airports of equivalent size. Why not?
It is unfair to compare this to the New York City airports. We do not have the land to build a super sized terminal. With regards to LaGuardia, it handles 30 million passengers per year compared to BKK which handles 45 million passengers per year on a relatively small piece of real estate in terminals that are over 50 years old and just being renovated now.
Sorry, I have to disagree. I have never been uncomfortable in BKK because of the temperature, and IMHO it's one of the best airport designs around. Sure, you occasionally have a bus to the plane or gate, but name an another airport in the world with comparable traffic where you can comfortably walk gate to gate for any connection (domestic or international) without being jostled by crowds plus needing rail or a bus to get between terminals. As for cleanliness, I've never experienced that. Sure it's not sterile like NRT or SIN but certainly nothing to complain about. As for lounge crowding and immigration lines, as other have pointed out there are plenty of options for avoiding these problems
And yes, you can compare with the NYC airports. What do space constraints have to with the filth, surly attitudes, and constantly broken escalators and walkways despite the fact that the U.S. is an infinitely richer country than Thailand.
And not to mention the fact that for F pax, BKK probably has the best ground experience of any airport in the world.