Marco Polo

with wings the width of a soccer pitch where would you park them ?
meanwhile cargo throughput (imp/exp) dropped more than 6% over the same 6 month period of last year. DHL and CX have made their Hub bed at CLK - it should not be down to HK taxpayers to pay over the top to make them and our construction tycoons richer.

percysmith

I don't see the value of quarantined cars on the extended AEL. After all if you are meant to be travelling on SZN domestic flights then you've got to pick up your luggage at HKG anyway, cos you got to go through PRC customs at some point - be that at HKG (PRC officers stationed in HK akin to XRL or YVR) or SZN.

SZN will also have to handle passengers getting on the extended AEL at HK Station/KLN and Tsing Yi as well so might as well ask all those passengers to carry on their check-in luggage on board the AEL and clear PRC entrance customs at SZN (therefore ITCI at AEL stations for SZN will not be available). For convenience, see if we can co-locate HK exit customs at the SZN terminus of the extended AEL too.

In this arrangement, might as well ask transit passengers getting on the AEL at HKG to carry on their luggage also. They can't check through to PRC destinations on domestic flights - they have to do a baggage pick-up at HKG. Benefit of doing PRC immigration and customs pre-clearance at HKG (akin to US pre-clearance at YVR) is minor - the walk from HKG baggage carousel to AEL is flat (c.f. T1 --> T2/T3 connection via Airport Link in SYD).

Also I understand even at YVR, transit passengers don't remain quarantined - they must clear Canadian customs and immigration before proceeding to the US pre-clearance http://www.yvr.ca/en/navigating-YVR/...rture-one.aspx

Govt's pursued some big projects which are really trying to kiss up to both our Mainland overlords as well as property/infrastructure developers without much benefit for the HK Taxpayer - XRL and HK-Macau-Zhuhai link are the two biggest examples. This time Government can really make both our Mainland overlords and the taxpayer happy - and even the developers (MTR) gets a nice big project (tho not as big a win as they can get under third runway). Aren't win-win-win projects what governments should be looking for?

percysmith

Just a further point of note to those FTers who want the third runway for transit flights to PRC - SZN has a lot more flights to PRC destinations than HKG will ever hope to have. We have a lot more non-PRC flights. Let's try and build a workable, flat rail link rather than try to do each other's jobs.

Marco Polo

normally HK Government (NATO member - No Action Talk Only) allocates profitable Consultancy reports to friends of Government - they obviously give them the last paragraph they expect to see ' Conclusions :xxx'
and expect their consultant to somehow build a report around their expected conclusion.

As Flying Viking said earlier this venture demands an international, not pet local consultancy that will include all aspects of EIA , probablity of downturn , contingency etc for their privately owned airport of which they are the sole shareholder at the local public's expense.

i.e.everything the HK Government does not want to hear or reveal to the people who have paid for it.

The HK Govt employed at taxpayer expense ARUP to do a report on pollution - this is when the WHO already has issued a worldwide report with far superior world renowned experts 6 years earlier. They have still not acted on the ARUP results other than to have a public consultation on whether to have a public consultation on whether to leave any positive action to the incoming new CE.

Meanwhile they try to push through unpopular regressive electoral measures and more deals for the developers.

Yes Prime Minister ! only , unlike Yes Prime Minister they are pathetic.
If they ran a business with their own funds they would be bankrupt.

kaka

yes but no thanks. NRT/HND has exactly the same argument. we know if it worked out. has ICN/GMP worked out? I dont know. but as a matter of fact i do not believe there are any better options out there since the other korean ports do not have enough traffic generated for anyone else to join the gang.
is SHA/PVG working out? I seriously don't know. my guess is currently there isnt sufficient traffic between SHA and PVG to make any correlation (Like the ICN/GMP case) but when more dom-int traffic comes it would be interesting to see how would they react.

Anyway, yes, most govt does project around their hidden agenda, but before that i do not see any reason how building a link under HK to SZX can benefit hk.

percysmith

Screw the transit traffic and focus on getting HK pax like us to use SZX then.

ChrisLi

Wirelessly posted (iPhone 4: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_4 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8K2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Personally

Ex-SZX for my PVG run is a ABSOLUTE NO FOR ME

Even it is KA that flying from SZX, why on earth I am spending at least 2 hour on train / bus / whatever when I can travel with ease with HKIA. When there is a day that you can make going SZX as convenient (time-wise) as going HKIA I may take a look.

Sorry to say but i hate Shenzhen with a passion.

percysmith

Fine - put your money where your mouth is and pay higher landing fees for HKG. Make some other poor sod do SZX.

Tho what I really had in mind was to flights to third or fourth-line cities like YNT and CGQ out of HKG...I think the amount of HKG-PVG traffic means the impact per pax isn't much.

moondog

-SZX has service to ~3x as many airports in China
-SZX fares to these markets are cheaper across the board
-presumably, border control would be relatively seamless on this new train or extended AEX (due to vested interest on both sides)
-transit passengers are a minor consideration because, apart from points south, HKG is not a good connection option (to PRC airports) in the first place

Cathay Boy

While SZX do go to tons of locations, HKIA goes to enough major big cities in China to thrive (both commercial and leisure traffic), and the need for them will only grow as those cities grow. Not to mention CX can always fight for more ports to open up for CX/KA.

SZX is cheaper for now. But, as transit route I'm already paying very little (JFK-HKG and JFK-HKG-PVG are not that much different in prices). That is the whole point of the argument anyway: not HKIA vs. SZX, but HKIA ON ITS OWN is growing very fast, despite all the limitations that China enforces on them (limiting ports, etc.)

Sorry moondog, but if you are honest about China you know for a fact that border patrol will NOT be seamless, it's not in China government's DNA to provide efficiency. (See the latest requirement for IDs to purchase High Speed Rail tickets...)

HKIA thrives as transit hub because of combination of reasons. Great Service provided by CX/KA being one. Many foreigners rather fly south to HKIA and then onward to their final destinations in China (myself included) although there are more convenient routes. Many Chinese immigrants rather fly CX to HKIA and then onward for the same reasons. I do not see HKIA getting any less busier, and in fact, while cargo traffic may recline a little, pax traffic has grow at a very healthy pace. Despite all the limitations you have posted.

Again, this thread isn't about HKG vs. SZX, but HKIA is growing very healthy and will run out of capacity if the government don't act now.

Marco Polo

moondog is right - far more options out of SZX

Meanwhile
Runway means more noise, poll reveals
Green group took readings on roofs and found noise levels similar to a busy roadLo Wei Jul 18, 2011
www.scmp.com

The severe noise pollution caused by aircraft flying throughout the night across north Lantau and the New Territories will get worse if a third runway is built, say concerned residents.
The average noise level of planes passing over Ma Wan, Sham Tseng and Tsuen Wan between 11pm and 3am throughout the week hit about 70 decibels, similar to the level of a busy road, according to a survey conducted by Green Sense last week. The readings were taken on the roofs of residential buildings.
..............
"With the present noise problem unresolved, it is unreasonable to construct a third runway and expand the noise pollution affected area," said Jan Lai Ming-chuen, vice-president of Green Sense.
As the proposed third runway would be built in Chek Lap Kok north, it was expected that Tsuen Wan and Tuen Mun residents would also have to bear with loud aircraft noise, said Professor Chan King-ming, director of the Chinese University of Hong Kong's environmental sciences programme. He suggested the government expand existing runways instead. Residents of Ma Wan complained that aircraft noise had become more severe,................
"How can you sleep peacefully with noise like a busy road next to you?" said .................
In 1999, a year after the Hong Kong International Airport started operation, there was only one case of aircraft noise above 80 decibels recorded at night over Ma Wan throughout the year. In 2007, the number of cases had jumped to more than 300, said Lam, citing Civil Aviation ................
Ma Wan was not included in the area affected by aircraft noise "beyond acceptable level", according to the Airport Authority. However, the assessment was made in 1998.
The Airport Authority said last night it had a noise ceiling for the airport and so far the levels were below that standard..................

Cathay Boy

Yes, let's dump the noise problem to Shenzhen, their residents don't mind seeing a sharp increase in sound decibels caused by a massive expansion plan and tons of flight increases....

Again, SZX can have all the options in the world that wouldn't matter to HKIA. The argument has always been HKIA is DOING GREAT ON ITS OWN and will CONTINUE to do great if another runway is build. Amount of people coming into Hong Kong has increase, using HKIA as transit hub has increased, many people rather fly CX/KA than any Chinese/Taiwanese airlines can offer. The ease of use, the efficiency, the friendliness, and ability to speak in English, etc. are all allures for pax to choose HKG over against other airports.

Making an one-on-one comparison between HKG and SZX aren't fair to neither airport.

CX HK

It appears that Hong Kong officials reached an agreement with Shenzhen and Macau, according to the SCMP (subscription only):
http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/SCMP...ng+Kong&s=News

Marco Polo

CX HK quotes from an SCMP article (today) above but omits these salient sections:
The Civil Aviation Department said officials from Hong Kong, Shenzhen and Macau had finally reached a consensus on relaxing airspace boundaries after three years of talks.
No formal agreement has yet been signed, ..................
Without such an agreement, it would be impossible to fully utilise the HK$136.2 billion runway - a fact pointed out by the Airport Authority in its technical report.
It states that "to fully realise the potential capacity gain of a third runway, the Pearl River Delta airspace will need to be redesigned to be able to provide ... a northern circuit at the Hong Kong International Airport, long final approach tracks and independent arrival procedures".
While this will be welcomed by airports and carriers in the region, some critics have warned that without a clearly-written commitment, such a "consensus" may not materialise - as past experience has shown. Albert Lai Kwong-tak, of the Professional Commons - a community group that has campaigned against major infrastructure projects - said: "When Hong Kong bought a stake in the Zhuhai airport back in 2006 it was alleged that the mainland airspace will be rationalised. It never happened." ........................................ Academics have also repeatedly questioned if the region's congested airspace could accommodate the traffic growth generated by a third runway. A person familiar with the situation said the Civil Aviation Administration of China has agreed "in principle" to obscure the airspace boundary that divides Hong Kong and Shenzhen by 2020. .....................................Peter Lok Kung-nam, former director-general of civil aviation, said such measures would help boost airport capacity. But he asked: "Have they signed any memorandum yet? If not, these solutions could still very much be a plain concept, and any decision that is made on the [third runway] project based on `promises' is shaky."

CX HK

My bad - I wasn't sure on how much I could copy and paste without violating copyrights or anything, so I just took the first few paragraphs. Thanks for the clarification and better quote.