Sunday, March 15, 2015

Belgrade likely to expand without partner

Belgrade Airport prepares for expansion without foreign partner

Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport is likely to expand its facilities without a concession partner and primarily stick to a development masterplan drafted in 2003. According to local media reports, the airport’s net profit, which amounted to a record 27 million euros in 2014, will supposedly go towards the construction of a third terminal building and the overhaul of its existing infrastructure. The construction work is expected to be carried out by local contractors. Earlier this week, Serbia’s Prime Minister, Aleksandar Vučić, said that existing facilities must be reconstructed and additional capacity added in order for the airport to become more functional. “Whether we will accomplish this with a foreign partner through a concession or some other form of public-private partnership, or whether we will do the job ourselves, will be decided in the next two months”, the Prime Minister said.

Belgrade Airport masterplan - click to enlarge

According to the masterplan drafted in 2003 (pictured above), the airport is to build a third terminal, second runway, hotel and rail links to the city by 2025. In line with the development proposal made over a decade ago, the airport extended its Terminal 2 apron and added additional aircraft parking positions last year. The masterplan is largely based on an earlier proposal made prior to the break-up of Yugoslavia, which was intended for completion by 2010.

The airport will also embark on a major runway refurbishment and upgrading project next year. The airport’s Acting Managing Director, Saša Vlaisavljević says, “In 2016 and 2017 we will overhaul the runway. Last time work was carried out on the runway was in 2005”. Ten years ago the European Investment Bank awarded a five million euro loan to the airport for the installation of a CAT IIIb runway/taxiway system, which allows aircraft to land safely during fog and storms. Mr. Vlaisavljević says nearby Batajnica Airport could be used as an alternative during the planned runway refurbishment. However, sources close to the airport have told EX-YU Aviation News that work on the runway could be carried out without the airport’s full closure, but would significantly limit the pace of reconstruction, which would be carried out during night time.

Recently, the French concession and construction company Vinci reaffirmed its interest to vie for a concession of Belgrade Airport. The Serbian government has announced its intention to launch a state-run company to manage up to 25 of the country’s airports, including Belgrade, by April. Plans to put the airport up for concession were first announced in December 2013, however the process has been routinely delayed ever since.

71 comments:

  1. Not sure from where do they plan to fund that entire project. They need a partner otherwise we will be reading articles about corruption with the airport's construction process in a few years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well if you have a 30 million euro yearly profit its not that hard is it? And what makes you think a "partner" wont be corrupt?

      Delete
    2. @11:03: 30 meur yearly in profit.....are you smoking something illegal?!

      Show us the audited financial report for 2014, please....

      Delete
  2. Hope they realize at least 20% of that masterplan. Nor holding my breath.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If it was me i'd ditch the second runway, its completely unnecessary. Focus on rail connection and terminal space! As they plan on refurbishing the existing runway soon, add some rapid-exit taxiways and voila, no problems for a long, long, long time. Don't forget gatwick handles close to 40 million pax with one runway.

    If for some illogical reason they are hell bent on a second runway then at-least don't make it parallel to the existing one, make it useful incase of crosswinds etc.. (not sure if this is a big issue at BEG?)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you understand that to do that without building second runway first would mean closing the airport for at least 3 months. And thats conservative estimate, apparently.

      Why do you all think that people who made plans for BEG were crazy, self harming idiots?
      Luckily they know little more than both you and me, so if they say that building a second runway and separate purpose built 3rd terminal, I would be inclined to believe them more than people on this or any other blog who have no, or minimal knowledge how airports actually work.

      Second runway in BEG's case has nothing to do with capacity, but with convenience and trying to avoid closing the whole airport for many months.

      Also, the existing terminals are nearly impossible to upgrade to what a modern airport needs.
      If you want to fly to US, you need to separate incoming and exiting passengers, which would be a nightmare to do unless you build a new terminal that will address this and baggage handling issues from the get go.

      BEG needs a new terminal in the next 10 years and second runway on that side of the airport makes sense, as per plans above.

      No airport that had been substantially upgraded recently refurbished their old infrastructure. They all build a brand new terminals. Zagreb now, Skopje, Sofia, Budapest... all with fairly simple terminals that are fit for purpose.
      If Belgrade carries on like this we will be in trouble in few years time.

      Delete
    2. @Spale: I think that you have the same knowledge of airport as the politicians in this country. There are several issues at the airport that has to be addressed, at the same time. One of them being the runway, there is NO need to shut down the airport for any works on the runway. There is a window each night of 4 hours, this is facts. During those 4 hours you can reconstruct 3 meters and subsequently you will need 100 nights for the entire runway. And of course the runway has something to do with capacity! The current state of the runway and taxiways etc are limiting what kind of aircraft can land and takeoff! Same goes for the landing and takeoff capacity depending on the load!

      Before telling that everybody on this page are idiots, you should perhaps be aware of that some actually do work on airports in the region....

      Delete
    3. Wrong. You can't work on the runway during the night because you need to go all the way to the foundation.

      Delete
    4. Complete and utterly bullshit. Trust me.

      Delete
    5. the remark at 12:48 is to the remark made at 12:36.

      Delete
    6. 3400m : 3m = 100 (nights) ???
      wtf is with your maths?

      Delete
    7. AnonymousMarch 15, 2015 at 12:08 PM

      Where did you see me claim I had some superior knowledge??? Quite on contrary.
      But what you wrote just after that tells me you know even less.
      You are talking about resurfacing. That can be done in sections over some time. But in BEG, as far as I understand people how know little bit more than me and you, are saying the whole runway is due for an overhaul. Total rebuild.
      That you can't do over night in sections. For that you need to close the airport if you haven't got a spare runway.

      Lastly, if you really want to be cleaver, read other peoples posts carefully.

      This is what I wrote: "Why do you all think that people who made plans for BEG were crazy, self harming idiots?"

      Where did I call anyone idiot??

      Now let me explain slowly ... I said that some people here THINK that plans are made bla bla bla IDIOTS.
      Therefore, its not me who is calling anyone an idiot, I am defending those planers and saying that they are probably not idiots and they probably know little bit more about these things than VAST majority here. Probably not all, not HUGE majority.

      Is that better now ;)

      Delete
    8. Just noticed something else... this talk has been on agenda since:
      http://exyuaviation.blogspot.co.uk/p/batajnica-airport-as-belgrade.html

      Well its actually long before that, but lately, that was the place people talked about this issue.

      Of course adding an extra runway would increase capacity. You don't need your expert knowledge for that. We were talking about the need to build the second runway so the airport can carry on working while first/old one car be overhauled.

      Some guys jumped on and started talk that we don't need it because there are plenty of airports around with 10-20mil pax and just one runway and BEG doesn't need it.
      Correct.
      But in Belgrade's case second runway is not necessarily built to increase capacity because there is plenty more space until its genuinely needed.
      It would be built because otherwise the whole airpot would be closed for 3 months.
      Plus, there is an issue of that 3rd terminal, which will probably end up on the other side of the airport as per those 2003 plan.

      And please don't start again with 3m a night X 100 days story, because ... well its just plain stupid.

      I can try to explain why if you really want to know, but I hope you understand.

      Delete
    9. The airport would never need to be clised "for 3 months", as was the case during previous major runway expansion and refurbishment in mid-80s and end of 90s, when the traffic was rerouted to Batajnica for a couple of weeks.
      Building a new runway for the sole purpose of having a "spare" is probably your idea of wasting money, however no-one in their right mind could justify such costs.

      Delete
    10. Nice comment Aca, building a "spare runway" is a waste of money.
      1) traffic is nowhere close to need for 2 runways
      2) Land claims and permissions would take forever and cost a lot of money
      3) Do not forget this big one: IT ALSO COSTS TO MAINTAIN THE 2ND RUNWAY which nobody mentioned till now
      4) Airport is profitable and could for sure take a loan and pay it back by itself for refurbishing T1, but not for building new runway
      5) At the end of the day tax payers will pay for it

      Delete
    11. now the big question, what would be the capital expense for the new runway 3500x60m in Serbia?
      incl. land investments if necessary?

      Delete
    12. I'll for now only copy my yesterday's comment, will come back on this topic later-on.

      AэrologicMarch 15, 2015 at 2:15 AM
      The best and probably cheapest thing to do would be to actually displace the CAT I ILS and extend the runway 30 at BEG as of now to 4000m, so that once a section is closed, the airport can still be perfectly functional and will never be left with less than 2250m of operational runway which is the minimum for A320/737 families of jets (taking into account the safety standards and margins) which make up 90% of current traffic. That way we can bypass all the Batajnica-related investments and adjacent organizational challenges while although not a second - which is anyway not needed, Belgrade will get a 4000m long refurbished runway capable of handling absolutely any type of aircraft at MTOW what should also upgrade BEG's ICAO airport status.

      Delete
    13. Here are some pics from BEG today:

      https://pp.vk.me/c623119/v623119496/24afe/_4olYDxNsZk.jpg

      https://pp.vk.me/c623119/v623119496/24b08/BP0Uzf0CRU4.jpg

      https://pp.vk.me/c623119/v623119496/24b12/2UZosM5wWhA.jpg

      https://pp.vk.me/c623119/v623119496/24b1c/DFdwd_uQiMY.jpg

      https://pp.vk.me/c623119/v623119496/24b26/aXgppYiyz3Y.jpg

      Delete
    14. sorry, but these pics are shot miles from planes, with mobile phone camera and are bad

      Delete
    15. Oh, you're not obliged to see them and i can't care less of your impressions. Few of them are of a 3264x2448 resolution, if you don't know to use the zoom that's even less of my problem.

      Delete
    16. PS: You should try getting closer and i'll be glad to help with the translation once you'll be escorted by police, since you're apparently not familiar with the area. FYI the area is the place near the yesterday's crash and trust me, at 100m you don't want to get any closer than that. Anyway, back to the topic.

      Delete
    17. Aэrologic
      Ne svidjaju se gospodinu slike zato sto je ASL na njima
      Ideja vam je dobra samo da nece biti kratka pista od 2250m za TK Kargo .
      INN-NS

      Delete
    18. Dear INN-NS, TK Cargo along with some medium to long-range flights will have to be suspended during that time or re-routed to Batajnica (such as FlyDubai for example).

      Delete
  4. Jedini razlog sto aerodrom nece ici pod koncesiju je taj sto u slucaju novog vlasnika,Air Serbia vise ne bi mogla besplatno da koristi usluge Aerodroma.
    Ne mogu da verujem koji bezobrazluk,naplacujes aerodromske takse kroz cenu karte,a javno priznajes da nista od tog novca ne prebacujes maticnom aerodromu.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tuzno je videti ljude kao sta si ti da pisu ovako neosnovane tvrdnje I lazi. Bilo bi lepse kada bi postavi barem jedan pozitivan komentar I malo istine.

      Delete
    2. Hot Lane, tužno je da ne vidiš u kakvoj državi živiš!

      Delete
  5. This is ju so typical for this country, no logic, no analysis, no comprehension of whats needed, nothing....just another crazy idea because it sounds good to the people....

    I can put my head out there, there is NO NEED for a 2nd runway. Even if the traffic increases to 8 million passengers. There will be NO foreign partner, the reason is simple - there are huge land issues surrounding the airport which prevents any normal expansion of the infrastructure. I personally know a woman who bought land there 5 years ago at 200.000, she has NO intention selling below 4 million euro. NO foreign investor is ready to take on such a crazy legislation, just look at IKEA. No foreign investor is ready to take on Airports of Serbia, BEG is a enough problems, they do not need Nis, Morava and the rest. 27 million in profit?, please show me that audited and final P/L accounts? Submitted to the Belgrade Stock Exchange.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. +1, you analysed situation realistically and this 2 points are so correct: 1) Our politicians like to show magnificent projects to people ( some people unfortunately believe them) without any plan or financial stability 2) I don't know why,but in Serbia to get sorted with land claims and licencees would take forever and cost a lot of money ( unless we are talking about big and famous beograd na vodi)

      Delete
    2. As for the 2nd runway it would be a nice addition to the airport, but at the same time we are talking about Serbia, so I will stay neutral about it for now.

      Delete
  6. @11:22 više puta smo na temu, pa hajde još jednom. Država se na taj način kompenzuje sa Etihadom, dakle kroz usluge a ne gotov novac. Naravno, to neće trajati u nedogled nego do 2016.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I notice that in the masterplan they plan to have car traffic go under the taxiway which is kind of cool. Would be a dream if they build this but not holding my breath. The 10 year time-frame does look realistic though.

    ReplyDelete
  8. What a load of bull...
    State is ths owner of the land proposed for the expansion project, i.e. Terminal 3, new runway, etc on that side, so there is nobody to compensate for that land on the other side of the current terminal and behind the museum and NIS.

    ReplyDelete
  9. tako se radujem novoj pisti pa makar imali i 10 mil putnika godisnje. zelim da nam glavni aerodrom bude velik i da ima dovoljno prostora za funkcionisanje i kretnju aviona. ko zna, mozda se air china, british, air france, klm, sas, qantas, singapore, delta, us airways i jos mnoge druge u narednih 10 godina odluce da lete za beg. sto bi to bilo cudno? pa i u usa i u aus, can zivi po preko 50.000 srba, ako ne i vise, iz tih zemalja bi leteli samo sirokotrupci, pa gde smestiti sve te avione? potreban je prostor, ako beg pocne da zaradjuje u narednim godinama po 50 mil evra godisnje, koliko je potrebno novca da se napravi, asfaltira pista i postave svi instrumenti na nju? pa nisu u pitanju milijarde evra, vec milioni. radujem se i podzemnoj zeleznici, jer je nonsens da u 21 veku nemamo direktni rail link od centra do aerodroma. itd itd.. a ako cemo o tome da getvik ima 40 mil putnika sa jednom pistom, ima i oher 70 mil sa 8 pista!!! mislim ako cemo da se poredimo sa uk, mozemo i sa usa.. 2 piste su uvek dobro dosle. gotovo svi glavni gradovi u evropi imaju po dve i vise pol-sletnih staza..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Slazem se. I kao prvo i osnovno, Gatwick ima dve piste, a ne jednu. Covek koji je to napisao totalno nije upucen..

      Delete
    2. Verovatno je mislio na Stansted koji ima jednu pistu i 18m putnika godisnje.

      Delete
    3. Rail link to big Usa airports?

      Delete
    4. Blue Line - CTA

      Delete
  10. Uocavam jedan potencijalno veliki problem za Air Serbiju zbog beogradskog aerodroma.
    Novi terminal u ZAG sa kapacitetom od 5.5 miliona putnika godisnje se otvara krajem 2016. Tada se otprilike zavrsava period kada je OU ogranicena sto se tice prosirenja. ZAG ce imati kapcitet od 7.5 miliona putnika godisnje ako se ne zatvori trenutno postojeci terminal. To ce omoguciti Croatiji da se dobro prosiri, dok ce ASL morati da ceka dok se BEG prosiri, jer ce vvec ove godine preci kapacitete.
    I tako ce, kako je ove dve godine koje je izgubila OU dok se ASL sirila, ASL izgubiti oko 2 godine dok BEG dobije kapacitet od bar 8 miliona putnika godisnje, dok ce se OU siriti. Ali dobra stvar po ASL je to sto bi rekonstrukcija BEGa bila zavrsena do 2018., kada bi verovatno imao kapacitet odo 8-12 miliona putnika, a bas tada ASLu stizu novi A320neo.
    Smatram da bi trebalo sagraditi drugu pistu, kao i treci terminal koji bi koristila samo Air Serbia koji bi mogao da ima kapacitet od 5-10 mioliona putnika, ali to su vec stvari koje bi nazalost bile ostvarene tek u periodu posle 2020. godine
    U svakom slucaju, to sto ce BEG ove godine preci kapacitete je poprilicno lose u pogledu toga sto posle toga ASL nece vise moci da se siri neko vreme. A ako cemo 2-3 godine cekati da bi videli samo malo prosiren Terminal 1, onda je to poprilicno zalosno.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Boze odakle tebi ovi brojevi? Sve stavke koje si ovde izneo su neistina. Zagreb se nece ni priblizno siriti na 5.5 miliona putnika do 2025.

      Delete
    2. T1 moze biti gotov u roku 12 Meseci ako krenu u septembru Ove godine

      Delete
    3. Sta znaci T1 moze biti gotov za 12 meseci??? Kakvi to radovi mogu biti gotovi za 12 meseci? Farbanje i novi prozori? Renoviranje starih A gejtova? Kompletno rusenje postojeceg T1 i pravljenje potpuno novog T1 na istom mestu za 12 meseci?

      Delete
    4. Renoviranje:
      Prosiriti gejtove i menjati airbridges!
      Ofarbati i menjati prozore!
      Wc,lift,hodnik,restoran,check in itd!
      Traje maximum 12 meseci!

      Delete
  11. @12:59: The existing terminal in ZAG will be closed and used for cargo when the new terminal opens.

    And I agree with the above, there is no need for a 2nd runway in BEG, the existing just has to be utilized properly. And coming back to one of the Masterplans done in 2003 must be a new record in stupidity. The entire world of air traffic has changed dramatically in just 10 years and our politicians are looking at a plan made up more then 10 years ago....brilliant, just bloody brilliant.

    Building infrastructure for 10 - 12 million pax i BEG is unrealistic when the industry numbers says that an increase of 5% is a realistic figure. What BEG has done since ASL took over JAT is remarkable, but nobody can seriously believe in an infinite growth by the same numbers.

    ReplyDelete
  12. OT: A major blow to Belgrade and Air Serbia, Air China starting Budapest from May 1st. What made them think it's better than all the feed they would have got from Belgrade (including Budapest), probably ask our politicians.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That was already discussed yesterday.

      Delete
    2. Where was it discussed?

      Delete
    3. Yesterday's topic, the Adria one.

      Delete
    4. ^ I didnt post the OT but it needs further discussion for sure. This is a big big big blow to Belgrade airport since those flights are via Minsk and some guy clearly explained that BEG as a better choice yet Minsk was choose as the second stop.

      Also big blow to our good old friend INN-NS who insulted us for not believing that ASL or AirChina will start BEG in March. The bot is being quite now I see. Actually he will probably respond with some lame comeback like " it will start by the end of the year".

      Delete
    5. Posada ce za nekoliko mesece najverovatnije krenuti na obuke za A330 .
      Ne znam sto me nazivate botom
      A nisam komentarisao zato sto sam bio zauzet.
      INN-NS

      Delete
    6. I posted that news yesterday after finding it while reading some reports on Xinhua.net, forgot to sign myself. I was also in a bit of shock since it is really a slap to Serbia, especially taking into account that we can still see the billboards of the "Belgrade meeting" on the roads leading to Surchin -airport. The news is even more so surprising that they decided to route it via Minsk, which certainly doesn't add to the commercial appeal for the Hungary-bound pax. This raises a number of questions:

      - On what feed the route is going to rely, or do they think they have more reasons to stay than Hainan did to leave in 2012 i.e relying on O&D purely?
      - The Minsk stop on the way to Europe, how is it gonna compete with the one-stops offered via the Gulf?
      - 4 weekly vs. almost as direct options daily via the Gulf with agressive carriers offering a high-level of service?
      - What was the appeal of launching BUD while they could have served the entire region through a code-share with Air Serbia via Belgrade, possibly daily? (for those who doubt on the number of Chinese people traveling from Belgrade, it's enough to walk around the airport around noon and visit the Aeroflot check-in counter - same goes for TK)
      - Why, while recently being in negotiations with Air Serbia and on the visit to Belgrade, did the Chinese decide to launch Budapest without any possibility of codeshare from there, instead of, in the worst case launching PEK-BUD-BEG-PEK and last but not least - adding the indeed underserved Minsk to the mix of the already strange soup?

      http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-03/15/c_134066752.htm

      One has to look at the wider context and at the comments in the article itself. The move is clearly political and part of the Russian-Chinese agenda to expand their economic (but not limited to) influence to Eastern countries of the EU, previous members of the COMECOM. The other possibility being that the Serbian side has angered the Chinese politicians and all whie "turning to the East" is popular in Hungary, in Serbia there is only one side where the country is allowed to "turn to", politicians repeating as perrots of their "strategic EU orientation", reminds almost of brainwashing. I doubt cargo is the reason as well, since Budapest is already overserved by cargo companies to Asia, that can ship good in bigger amounts and at a higher frequency.

      The possibility remains that Air Serbia or the Serbian part for that matter, wishes to launch Beijing or Shanghai of their own, what would ultimately be even better and still remains a high probability - a higher one than the flights to the US if you ask me. Therefore, while definitely being a slap, it may not be that big as it seems neither the promise of the things to follow. A failure of flights to Chine will certainly be a failure of both Air Serbia' leadership and of the Vuchich cabinet, besides obvious indirect economic penalties. Let's wait and see.

      Delete
    7. Minsk Budapest does not seem obvious, but Air China Munich Athens routing is also not an obvious choice. Shanghai remains underserved from the region.

      Delete
    8. Serbians prefer the taste of hummus over soy sauce thanks to Mubadala.

      Delete
    9. No one prefers crappy taste of humor

      Delete
    10. ^^^ @INN

      JU crew are not going soon for A330 training. I dont believe even the process for taking on the A330 has begun. Training for the A330 will be quick with the crew being A320 qualified.

      Delete
    11. No idea what equipment will be used so just wondering if Minsk could be a technical stop?

      Delete
    12. no technical stop, the distance to BUD is no problem for the 330-200

      Delete
  13. Tuzno je koliko su ljudi ljubomorni na BEG sto ce mozda imati 2 pistu i Terminal 3.
    INN-NS

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ljubomorni na BEG? Ako je itko ljubomoran na nekoga i samo priželjkuje tuđi neuspjeh to si ti INN-NS ....i daj više prestani se prosipati sa tom pričom o A330.

      Delete
    2. Da posade bi trebali za nekoliko meseci da idu na obuku za 330.
      Vidi se koliko vam je samo zao sto ce ASL imati A330.
      INN-NS

      Delete
    3. Decko ne k.... vec se dokazalo da si lak na jeziku... evo ga Mart mesec a od tvog A330 ni traga ni glasa. Aj cuti malo, idi skijaj po tom Innsbrucku... smaras bre dete vise

      Delete
  14. OMG Mr. Ex Yu Av, after reading the first sentence of today's post you scared the bejesus out of me! Airport going at it alone, for realz? But then I had a relaxing "проверено - мин њет!" moment in the last paragraph when you confirmed that Vinci is still in the game.

    Okay then, no need for a chill pill, this is hopefully just posturing to negotiate better terms with Vinci. Airport's a great asset and the real leverage, and when you have that leverage you know you have an upper hand in the negotiations. But don't let that power trip distract you from the fact that Scott Wilson Master Plan is excessive and slightly obsolete. Tone down expectations a bit, show respect for other side's interests and make a deal!

    ReplyDelete
  15. The master plan when (sorry to do this) compared to Zagreb looks to be a multi billion euro project.

    Some people have mentioned land issues but usually governments have the right to acquire land laws at market price for major projects like this to stop people trying to over inflate prices.

    Belgrade airport needs foreign investment very similar to the other airports in the region or we will be reading stories of the new Belgrade terminal for years to come.

    ReplyDelete
  16. - New pavement on RWY, yes please
    - New pavement on TWY, oh please god
    - High speed exit ways, please good (sick and tired slowing down to 10 KTS to turn)

    - Closing down RWY for 3 months??!?!???
    Let's take MMX airport for example. RWY 2400m, completely refurnished in 2014 in 2 weeks, closed down for 1 day only! And this airport serves 767 on daily basis. And it has CATIIIb also. Flying there during reconstruction was a pleasure, hundreds of trucks and machinery working on 1/3 of RWY 24/7, like ants. they work on one end you use remaining 2/3's.

    C'mon ASL pilots, A320 can land and take off from 1600m, not pleasant but done on daily basis. Show your heroism a bit, not only for gusty wind landings ;)

    ReplyDelete
  17. @8.16 pista je u svojoj istoriji obnavljana 3,4 puta. Ističu joj svi resursi. Potrebno je obnoviti donje slojeve, fundament, sto nije moguće uraditi za dve nedelje.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Potrebno je obnoviti donje slojeve, fundament, sto nije moguće uraditi za dve nedelje."
      Nije uopste tacno, radjeni su fundamenti i sredinom 80-ih, ako se ne varam radio je Trudbenik i sve je odradjeno za 3 nedelje. Radilo se po 24h i saobracaj je bio preusmeren na Batajnicu, ali se sve odradilo po planu. A moralo je bude radjeno jer je poceo QF da leti sa B742, JAT sa stalnim DC-10, onda je dolazio i CAAC sa B747, a nosivost piste na udarnim povrsinama pri sletanju je blvec bila marginalna, s obzirom da je pista gradjena pocetkom 60-ih kada nije ni bilo takvih aviona. Dakle, sve se moze kad se hoce (i kad se posao poveri profesionalcima).

      Delete
    2. Aco, pisti ističu svi resursi. No verovatno si ti u pravu. Oni to ne znaju.. mozda pročitaju ovde pa im uštediš i vreme i lovu.

      Delete
  18. On je ekspert kao i Purger i drugi geniji na ovom blogu.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Samo su dva komentara reagovala na preveliki kapacitet originalnog plana prikazanog uz tekst. Taj plan ima ukupno oko 45-50 mostova (airbridges) sto je u istoj klasi kao trenutno u Minhenu sa nekih 40 miliona putnika godisnje. Svi drugi koji nisu primetili koliko je taj plan megalomanski i nenormalno preuvelican (cak i za 2025 godinu) treba da prodaju pamet nekom drugom.

      Delete
    2. I ti si sekspert samo je treci veliki (ugaoni) terminal obavezan ostali sateliti se mogu doradjivati. Ja mislim recimo da pistu treba graditi paralelno sa iste strane sa postojecom samo sa novim pristupima za obe piste i trecim terminalom.

      Delete
    3. Nema ostalih satelita kao sto kazes - postoji samo jedan satelit, 2.18 po tom planu. Zgrada 2.10 na koju si mozda mislio da je satelit je planirana kao postanski centar, a ako si mislio na 5.02, to je kargo centar. Dakle samo jedan satelit po originalnom planu.

      Broj gejtova sa mostovima na tom planu za postojece terminale T1 I T2 je 15, iako je realno sadasnje stanje na aerodromu 16. Kada se prebroje avioni uz zgradu 2.17 koja je novi Terminal 3, njih ima jos 15 i svi bi imali mostove (airbridges). To znaci da bi sa dodatnim T3 (bez satelita) aerodrom imao 16 postojecih + 15 novih na T3 = 31 most sto je megalomanski za 2025 i pored rasta od recimo 10% godisnje.

      Delete

Before posting a comment be mindful of other participants and readers. EX-YU Aviation News does not tolerate insults, excessive swearing, racist, homophobic or any other chauvinist remarks or provocative posts with the intention of creating further arguments. Such comments will be deleted as soon as possible. The opinions expressed by those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of EX-YU Aviation News. Thank you for your cooperation.