Integrating Terminals 1 and 2 may not be practical

I REFER to Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad’s (MAHB) plan to integrate Kuala Lumpur International Airport’s (KLIA) Terminals 1 and 2.

Terminal 1 is a normal facility while Terminal 2 is a low-cost carrier terminal (LCCT). Integrating normal passenger terminals with LCCTs can lead to increased passenger volume, resulting in potential service disruptions, long queues of passengers, and delays due to diverse service expectations and operational complexities for airlines and staff.

Airlines could also face challenges maintaining their brand image when their services are grouped with LCCs that offer a different service model.

Having worked closely with the civil aviation industry in the Asia-Pacific region and Europe for 32 years, I would not be wrong in saying that effective integration requires significant coordination between airlines and airport authorities to ensure a smooth flow of passengers and service.

As for operational complexity, managing two distinct service models within one terminal can be very challenging, particularly when it concerns staffing and resource allocation.

Terminal 1 was built with a passenger handling capacity of 25 million but is operating beyond its designed capacity. Meanwhile, Terminal 2 with a capacity of 45 million is operating under capacity.

Furthermore, there has been no physical expansion of Terminal 1 since KLIA opened for operations on June 28, 1998.

In my view, Terminal 2 should continue to operate as a dedicated LCCT and Terminal 1 functions as normal.

WILLIAM DENNIS

Subang Jaya