Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Destinations > Asia > Hong Kong and Macau
Reload this Page >

Bridge from Terminal 1 to North Satellite Concourse

Bridge from Terminal 1 to North Satellite Concourse

Old May 5, 17, 1:48 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Programs: AC*E50K, CX Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 276
Bridge from Terminal 1 to North Satellite Concourse

I'm not kidding. This may become reality in a few years.

The Airport Authority (the “Authority”) is planning to construct an elevated passenger corridor in the form of a bridge spanning over the existing taxilane between the North Satellite Concourse (NSC) and Terminal 1 (T1) (i.e. the Works). The new elevated passenger corridor will accommodate retail facilities, moving walkways, lifts and escalators. The Works will be carried out in a live airport operating environment with minimum disruption to airport operation. The Works will be procured under a design and construct contract (the Contract).
https://www.hongkongairport.com/eng/...tion-to-tender
ailiton is offline  
Old May 6, 17, 12:56 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: HKG/AMM/LED/LHR
Programs: RJ Emerald
Posts: 2,088
I like this idea, a bridge (like the one in LGW) would make it much easier to get to the NSC and would also probably reduce the congestion on the tarmac (not sure if the latter problem actually exists).

Given that this is HK, rest assured they will fit that bridge with plenty of food/shopping outlets to recover the investment quicker. Just look how many outlets does the MTR manage to fit in the corridors of some busy stations.
Rami Tamimi is offline  
Old May 6, 17, 1:33 am
  #3  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 10,384
Another stupidity.

This could be avoided when the Airport Authority re-configure the APM for roundtrip purpose.

Also - this will be costly as most gates between North Satellite and the Main Building are designed for wide-body jets.
garykung is offline  
Old May 7, 17, 10:57 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: BA Silver, JGC Sapphire, OZ Diamond, AF Silver, CX GR, Marriott SL
Posts: 3,590
Originally Posted by garykung View Post
Another stupidity.

This could be avoided when the Airport Authority re-configure the APM for roundtrip purpose.

Also - this will be costly as most gates between North Satellite and the Main Building are designed for wide-body jets.
NO. North Sat. Terminal is designed for Narrowbody. Mid-field and Main Terminal is designed for Wide Body.
ChrisLi is offline  
Old May 7, 17, 11:25 pm
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 10,384
Originally Posted by ChrisLi View Post
NO. North Sat. Terminal is designed for Narrowbody. Mid-field and Main Terminal is designed for Wide Body.
Maybe my wording leading to your confusion.

The issue I raised is related Taxilane B7 and B9 with associated gates E15, E16, E17, E18, E19 and N20, N22, N24, N26, N28.

E15 has been frequently used by A388. So if HKG wants to build a bridge connecting Main Building with North Sat., the bridge's clearance will have to accommodate A388.

A388's height is 24m. So to be safe, the bridge has to be, at the minimum, 30m.

Guess how much does it cost to build a bridge like this, as well as every accessory?

BTW - moving A388 to other parking gates will NOT resolve the issue as those gates are also used by B777s as well, which their height is about 19m.
garykung is offline  
Old May 8, 17, 4:15 am
  #6  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: HKG
Programs: Priority Club Plat
Posts: 12,311
Who cares about cost? You think the Airport Authority or the Government or the DAB legislators do?

Anyways, a proposed pedestrian bridge in West Kowloon will cost HK$3.5b or about US$450m. 69m in length, 7m wide. Using Google Earth, I measure the distance between the North Satellite Concourse and T1 to be about 265m. You do the maths.
rkkwan is offline  
Old May 8, 17, 8:19 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: Marco Polo
Posts: 546
Very interesting proposal, and for the first time a decision that I'm not a fan of. As Gary has pointed out, the T1 gates near and around the proposed bridge location are generally utilized by either 777, A350 or A380 aircraft which have quite a high vertical clearance around 24-25M. I know that the AA, DAB and government generally aren't concerned with price, but I don't understand what they would be getting in return, the investment doesn't make sense IMO. Traffic to/from the NSC is relatively small in the grand scheme of daily operations and to use the argument that by alleviating the bus transfer it would ease congestion on the tarmac is simply false. Tarmac congestion is much more related to ATC delays on departure and runway saturation. It will be very interesting to see how this progresses, I hope they come to their senses on this one.
KrazyTrain18 is offline  
Old May 8, 17, 12:18 pm
  #8  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Programs: AC*E50K, CX Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 276
Some airports have similar bridges (Gatwick, KLIA2...). I don't see the construction of such to be a problem. As a passenger, I would much prefer walking over a bridge then taking the stupid bus.
ailiton is offline  
Old May 8, 17, 3:06 pm
  #9  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Programs: AC*E50K, CX Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 276
I just heard that they are going to modify N22 into a narrow body gate and the bridge will start from there.
ailiton is offline  
Old May 8, 17, 4:05 pm
  #10  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 10,384
Originally Posted by ailiton View Post
Some airports have similar bridges (Gatwick, KLIA2...). I don't see the construction of such to be a problem. As a passenger, I would much prefer walking over a bridge then taking the stupid bus.
No one has ever said the construction is a problem. Instead, it is all about the costs.

As a passenger, I agree with you that I would much prefer walking over a bridge then taking the stupid bus. However, when there is no significance in time saving, I would not mind taking a bus ride to ease on my ticket price.

Oh...I seem to forget to mention who will pay for the bridge, right?

Think 3rd runway.
garykung is offline  
Old May 13, 17, 4:08 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Some hole
Posts: 2,783
Just going to cause more turbulence landing on 25R.
maortega15 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread