Manuel L.

Quezon University
School of Architecture

A Proposed International & Domestic Airport

(Research Program)

Design 7
Subject

Christian Lanting
Student

18-00071
Student #:

Ar. Rodrigo Depaz

Professor:

Table of Contents
I. General Background/History

A. International
B. Domestic
C. Regional

II. Space Requirements (Domestic & Regional)

III. Related Literatures

A. International
B. Local
I. General Background
A. International Aiports

Figure 1 "Clark International Airport"

Source: https://mb.com.ph/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/clark.png

In August 1919, Hounslow Heath Aerodrome, in London, England, was the first airport to
operate scheduled international commercial services. It was closed and supplanted by Croydon Airport
in March 1920. In the United States, Douglas Municipal Airport in Arizona became the first international
airport of the Americas in 1928.

The precursors to international airports were airfields or aerodromes. In the early days of international
flights, there was limited infrastructure, "although if engine problems arose there were plenty of places
where aircraft could land". Since four-engined- land planes were unavailable for over-water operations
to international destinations, flying boats became part of the solution. At the far end of the longest
international route (which became the Kangaroo Route), on-water landing areas were found in places
such as Surabaya and in the open sea off Kupang. In Sydney, Rose Bay, New South Wales, was chosen
as the flying boat landing area.

International airports sometimes serve military as well as commercial purposes and their viability is also
affected by technological developments. Canton Island Airport, for example, in the Phoenix Islands
(Kiribati), after serving as a military airport during World War II, was used as a refuelling stop by
commercial aircraft such as Qantas which stationed ground crew there in the late 1950s. The advent in
the early 1960s of jet aircraft such as the Boeing 707 with the range to fly non-stop between Australia or
New Zealand and Hawaii, meant that a mid-Pacific stop was no longer needed and the airport was closed
to regular commercial use.
B. Domestic Airports

Figure 2 "Manila Domestic Terminal"

Source: https://9968c6ef49dc043599a5-e151928c3d69a5a4a2d07a8bf3efa90a.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/330738.jpg

A Domestic airport is an airport that handles only domestic flights—flights within the same
country. Domestic airports do not have customs and immigration facilities and so cannot handle flights
to or from a foreign airport.

These airports often have short runways sufficient to handle short or medium haul aircraft and regional
air traffic. Security check / metal detectors are used in most countries, but in many cases they were
installed decades after security checks for international flights had become commonplace.
Additionally, some airports that are named "international" are essentially domestic airports that handles
international traffic on an irregular basis. A notable example of this is Osaka International Airport (Itami
Airport) in the outskirts of Osaka, Japan. Most of these airports are located through the United States.In
the United Kingdom, an example of a domestic airport is Wick Airport, which operates frequent flights
to other Scottish airports.

Some small countries or regions do not have any public domestic airports, or even public domestic
flights, due to its size or political reasons, e.g. Belgium, Kuwait, Hungary, Lithuania, Luxembourg,
Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, and the United Arab Emirates.
C. Regional Airports

Figure 3 "Wittman Regional Airport"

Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/WittmanRegionalAirport.jpg

A regional airport is an airport serving traffic within a relatively small or lightly populated
geographical area. A regional airport usually does not have customs and immigration facilities to process
traffic between countries. In Canada regional airports usually service connections within Canada and
some flights to the United States. A few U.S. regional airports, some of which actually call themselves
international airports, may have customs and immigration facilities staffed on an as-needed basis, but the
vast majority serve domestic traffic only.

Aircraft using these airports tend to be smaller business jets, private aircraft and regional airliners of both
turboprop propelled or regional jetliner varieties. These flights usually go a shorter distance to a larger
regional hub. These airports usually have shorter runways, which exclude heavy planes with much fuel.

In European countries, regional airports are often classed as airports that do not serve the country's
capital/most major city. Examples of larger regional airports include Barcelona El Prat Airport, Spain
and Manchester Airport, England, which are both among Europe's busiest airports and are used by both
large and small planes. In countries like France, Germany, and Sweden, a regional airport is an airport
for small planes, even though they go to the national hub, just like flights from larger airports. Examples
of small regional airports include Coventry Airport and Worship Airport. In northern Norway, a country
with long distances and many short-runway airports, regional airports are those with flights to a regional
hub, not to the capital.
 II. Space Requirements

Annual Passenger Traffic Demand

Annual passenger traffic demand in comparison with those forecasted in the previous
studies is shown in Table 3.2-1.

Table 1 : Annual Passenger Traffic Forecast(in

comparison with previous studies)
2000 FS 2006 JICA 2007 FS 2011 JICA Study
CY Filipino Foreign Filipino
Total
Tourist Tourist Resident Foreig-
Filipino Total
2001 Actual Record ner
Inter-
39,268 - - 39,268 Total Domestic Total
national
Forecast Actual Record
Case
2006 240,176 - 240,176
96,000 64,000 57,000 217,000
Froecast
403,000 413,400 Actual Record
2010 198,000 111,000 84,000 393,000 245,392 437,000 10,400 447,400 572,476 - 572,476
525,000 535,400 Froecast
519,000 534,000 Low 898,000 2,000 900,000
2015 318,000 178,000 128,000 624,000 353,698 656,000 15,000 671,000 Midium 1,037,000 3,000 1,040,000
992,000 1,007,000 High 1,185,000 3,000 1,188,000
627,000 658,200 Low 1,125,000 6,000 1,131,000
2020 514,000 288,000 189,000 991,000 494,712 938,000 31,200 969,200 Midium 1,393,000 43,000 1,436,000
1,561,000 1,592,200 High 1,615,000 50,000 1,665,000
716,000 793,400 Low 1,295,000 50,000 1,345,000
2025 827,000 463,000 271,000 1,561,000 679,707 1,262,000 77,400 1,339,400 Midium 1,566,000 136,000 1,702,000
2,019,000 2,096,400 High 1,908,000 169,000 2,077,000
782,000 963,400 Low 1,343,000 137,000 1,480,000
2030 1,590,000 181,400 1,771,400 Midium 1,773,000 185,000 1,958,000
2,333,000 2,514,400 High 2,231,000 274,000 2,505,000
828,000 1,209,400 Low 1,414,000 164,000 1,578,000
2035 1,882,000 381,400 2,263,400 Midium 1,937,000 268,000 2,205,000
2,479,000 2,860,400 High 2,590,000 362,000 2,952,000
n/a n/a
Low 1,469,000 189,000 1,658,000
2040 Midium 2,117,000 324,000 2,441,000
High 2,960,000 459,000 3,419,000
n/a
Low 1,508,000 209,000 1,717,000
2045 Midium 2,285,000 380,000 2,665,000
High 3,342,000 563,000 3,905,000
 Peak-Hour Air Passengers Demand

Peak-day and peak-hour passenger traffic demands are forecasted as shown in Table
3.2-2

Table 2: Peak Hour Air Traffic Demand at New Bohol Airport (Medium Case)
CY 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Domestic Traffic
Peak-days of the year 320 days 320 days 320 days 320 days 320 days 320 days 320 days
2-way Annual Passengers 1,037,000 1,393,000 1,566,000 1,773,000 1,937,000 2,117,000 2,285,000
2-way Peek-day Passengers (1/320) 3,241 (1/320) 4,353 (1/320) 4,894 (1/320) 5,541 (1/320) 6,053 (1/320) 6,616 (1/320) 7,141
1-way Peek-day Passengers 1,620 2,177 2,447 2,770 3,027 3,308 3,570
aircract Seat L/F Pax flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger
1-way DH3 50 70% 35 4.00 140 4.00 140 4.00 140 4.00 140 4.00 140 4.00 140 4.00 140
Peak-day A320 160 70% 112 13.22 1,480 16.00 1,792 16.00 1,792 16.00 1,792 16.00 1,792 16.00 1,792 16.00 1,792
Traffic B767 260 70% 182
A330 300 70% 210 1.16 245 2.45 515 3.99 838 5.21 1,095 6.55 1,376 7.80 1,638
subtotal 17.22 1,620 21.16 2,177 22.45 2,447 23.99 2,770 25.21 3,027 26.55 3,308 27.80 3,570
aircract Seat L/F Pax flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger
2-way DH3 50 70% 35 2,560 89,600 2,560 89,600 2,560 89,600 2,560 89,600 2,560 89,600 2,560 89,600 2,560 89,600
Annual A320 160 70% 112 8,459 947,400 10,240 1,146,880 10,240 1,146,880 10,240 1,146,880 10,240 1,146,880 10,240 1,146,880 10,240 1,146,880
Traffic B767 260 70% 182
A330 300 70% 210 745 156,520 1,569 329,520 2,555 536,520 3,336 700,520 4,193 880,520 4,993 1,048,520
subtotal 11,019 1,037,000 13,545 1,393,000 14,369 1,566,000 15,355 1,773,000 16,136 1,937,000 16,993 2,117,000 17,793 2,285,000

PHF 1.51/ (2-way peak-day movements) + 0.115 15.9% 15.1% 14.9% 14.6% 14.5% 14.3% 14.2%

aircract Seat L/F Pax flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger
1-way DH3 50 80% 40 0.64 25 0.60 24 0.59 24 0.59 23 0.58 23 0.57 23 0.57 23
Peak-hour A320 160 80% 128 2.10 269 2.41 309 2.38 304 2.34 300 2.32 297 2.29 294 2.27 291
Traffic B767 260 80% 208
A330 300 80% 240 0.18 42 0.36 87 0.58 140 0.76 181 0.94 226 1.11 266
subtotal 2.73 294 3.19 375 3.34 416 3.51 464 3.65 501 3.81 542 3.95 580
International Traffic
Peak-days of the year 7 days 80 days 158 days 191 days 207 days 218 days 228 days
2-way Annual Passengers 3,000 43,000 136,000 185,000 268,000 324,000 380,000
2-way Peek-day Passengers 416 539 861 970 1,297 1,483 1,665
1-way Peek-day Passengers 208 270 431 485 649 742 833
Seat L/F Pax flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger
1-way A320 160 65% 104 0.59 62 2.14 223 2.66 277 3.53 367 3.72 387 3.85 400
Peak-day B767 charter 260 80% 208 1.00 208 1.00 208 1.00 208 1.00 208 1.00 208 1.00 208 1.00 208
Traffic A330 300 65% 195 0.38 74 0.75 147 1.15 225
subtotal 1.00 208 1.59 270 3.14 431 3.66 485 4.91 649 5.47 742 6.00 833
Seat L/F Pax flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger
2-way A320 160 65% 104 330 34,320 1,196 124,384 1,608 167,232 2,226 231,504 2,480 257,920 2,650 275,600
Annual B767charter 260 80% 208 16 3,328 40 8,320 58 12,064 84 17,472 104 21,632 126 26,208 148 30,784
Traffic A330 300 65% 195 76 14,820 208 40,560 380 74,100
subtotal 16 3,328 370 42,640 1,254 136,448 1,692 184,704 2,406 267,956 2,814 324,688 3,178 380,484

PHF according to Simulated International Flight Schedule one(1) A320 one(1) A320 one(1) A320 one(1) A320 one(1) A330 one(1) A330 one(1) A330

Seat L/F Pax flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger flights passenger
1-way A320 160 80% 128 1.00 128 1.00 128 1.00 128 1.00 128
Peak-hour B767charter 260 80% 208
Traffic A330 300 80% 240 1.00 240 1.00 240 1.00 240
subtotal 1.00 128 1.00 128 1.00 128 1.00 128 1.00 240 1.00 240 1.00 240
Cargo Traffic
Peak-day Volumes (MT) 25.7 33.5 37.3 41.9 45.5 49.4 53.1
 Fleet Plan of Major Domestic Airlines in the Philippines

Short-term fleet plans of the four (4) major domestic airlines are summarized in Table 3.2-
3.

Table 3 : Short-term Fleet Plan of major domestic Airlines in the Philippines

Philippine Airlines Air Cebu Zest
Aircraft
(PAL) Philippines Pacific Air Airways
type seats in 2011 in 2015 in 2011 in 2015 in 2011 in 2015 in 2011 in 2015
B747 400 5 0
B777 370 2 15
A340 264 4 0
A330 302 8 8
A320 150-180 13 27 6 23 15 27 5 9
A319 140-156 4 4 14 14 1 1
ATR72 72 8 8
MA60 56 3 5
DH3 56 3 3
DH4 76 5 5
Total 36 54 14 31 37 49 9 15
Plan to later Expects delivery of Formerly named
Sister company of
replace the A330 thirty (30) A321 as Asian Spirit
Philippine Airlines
Remarks and A340 with from 2017 to 2021
B787 or A350 Hub at Manila, Hub at
Hub at Manila Kalibo and Clark
Hub at Manila Cebu and Clark
Source: JICA Study Team

Philippine Airlines (PAL), the legacy national flag carrier, plans to increase from now up
to 2015 the number of A320’s from 13 to 27 and that of B777’s from 2 to 15. PAL also
plans to phase out the B747’s and A340’s and replace them with A330’s to B787’s or
A350’s.

Air Philippines, a LCC established in 1996 by PAL as its sister company, plans to increase
from now up to 2015 the number of A320’s from 6 to 23, and maintain the current 3 DH3’s
and 5 DH 4’s (of Bombardier).

Cebu Pacific Air, a LCC established in 1996, plans to increase from now up to 2015 the
number of A320’s from 15 to 27, and lately announced to introduce thirty (30) A321’s
progressively from 2017 to 2021. Cebu Pacific Air now operates frequent regional
international flights to Japan, South Korea, China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore,
Thailand, Malaysia and Brunei. In 2010 Cebu Pacific Air carried the most numbers of
passengers (international and domestic total) in the Philippines.
Runway Length

Design Aircraft

The design aircraft is normally defined as an aircraft either with:

(i) the maximum seating capacity;

(ii) the maximum dimension of fuselage (wing span and length); and

(iii) the longest runway length required.

The current generation of aircraft with large fuselage however does not necessarilyrequire
a longer runway length, owing to its improved body structure and engine performance.
Hence, the design aircraft is examined among probable future aircraft mix according to its
manufacturer’s specifications.

In relation to a probable future aircraft mix for the operations at the new Bohol Airport, the
following should be noted:

a) At the existing Tagbilaran Airport, the types of aircraft being used by the 4
majorairlines are A319 and A320, which are categorized as small jet (SJ; seating
capacity varies from 140 to 180), the majority of which are of the latest models.

b) B747 of PAL is mainly used for international routes and some used for domestic
routes (e.g. for Davao and Cebu). PAL, however, plans to phase out B747’s by
2015, as is the trend worldwide due to its high fuel consumption, thus this
aircrafttype is eliminated from the fleet planning for the new Bohol Airport.

c) B777 or A340 of PAL are exclusively used for long-range international routes, thus
are not considered as a predominantly-used aircraft at the new Bohol Airport.

d) A330 is long used by PAL with a good performance (low fuel consumption and
requiring a shorter runway length). PAL intends to replace their A330 by A350,
B787 or B777. Dimensions, weights and required runway lengths of those
aircraftof this new generation are similar to A330, therefore A330 is assumed as
the predominantly-used aircraft. However, the fuselage length of B777-300
(73.86 m)is considered as a critical dimension that is applied in the setting-up of
building lines (to secure separation distance from taxiways required in the
foreseeable future).

e) Since LCC’s normally operate a single type of aircraft for their reason of easy
maintenance with common spare parts availability, the A320 is assumed to be
predominantly utilized in the Philippines. Cebu Pacific intends to add in their
medium-term plan the A321 which is the advanced model and has the most
criticaldimension among A320’s family. Thus, the dimension of the A321-200 (7
m longer and 1 m wider than the A320) is considered as the critical-sized SJ in the
conceptual design of aircraft parking apron.

f) B737-800 (or -900) is a new Boeing version of SJ, equivalent to the Airbus 320
 series, is gaining worldwide popularity for the use for regional international flights.
This type of aircraft is now being operated by many foreign airlines in neighboring
countries thus is considered to be occasionally operated at the new Bohol Airport.

g) B767’s (MJ; 260 seats) are predominantly used for regional flight services by
major foreign airlines in neighboring countries, thus is considered to be
occasionally operated at the new Bohol Airport, but on a chartered base.

3.1.2. Runway Length Requirement

Meanwhile, the required runway length is studied for each type of the above named
aircraft, in consideration of the following assumption:

a) Distance from Bohol to Manila is 620 km, and that to Seoul, Tokyo or Beijing is
almost the same, e.g. approximately 3,100 km, as shown in the Figure 3.3-1.
Forthe computation of the takeoff runway required, the critical distance is thus
assumed to be 3,100 km.

Figure 4 "Distance to Regional Cities from Bohol"

b) Reference temperature (average in the hottest month) at the new Bohol

Airport isassumed to be the same as at Tagbilaran Airport, which is 34º C.

c) When taking off on a day of bad weather, a tropical depression of up to 980 hPa is
 considered to be safe, which is equivalent to the airport elevation of 1,000 feet
(above mean sea level).

Following the above consideration, the runway length required for the above named
aircraft, and design aircraft is selected among those tabulated in Table 3.3-1.

Required Runway Length by ICAO Category of Aircraft

Size SJ MJ LJ
ICAO code code C code D code E
No Description
Aircraft Type A320 B737 A321 B767 A330 B777 B787
-200 -800 -200 -300 -300 -200 -300 -8
Turbo Engine CFM56 CFM56 CF6 CF6 GE GE GE
1 Wing Span m 34.10 35.79 35.48 47.57 60.30 60.93 60.93 60.12
Fuselarge Length m 37.57 38.02 44.50 54.94 63.69 63.73 73.86 56.72
1 class 180 184 220 290 335 418 500 375
2 Seating Capacity 2 classes 150 160 185 261 303 375 451 286
3 classes - - - 253 305 368 224
lb 166,449 174,200 191,802 350,000 467,380 535,000 632,500 502,500
3 Max Takeoff Weight
kg 75,500 79,016 87,000 158,758 212,000 242,630 286,900 227,930
lb 142,198 146,301 166,449 300,000 390,218 445,000 524,000 380,000
4 Max Landing Weight
kg 64,500 66,361 75,500 136,078 177,000 201,800 237,680 172,365
lb 133,380 138,300 157,630 278,000 368,172 420,000 495,000 355,000
5 Max Zero Fuel Weight
kg 60,500 62,732 71,500 126,099 167,000 190,470 224,530 161,025
lb 90,927 91,300 103,300 189,750 264,182 299,550 353,800 N/A
6 Operating Empty Weight
kg 41,244 41,413 46,856 86,069 119,831 135,850 160,530 N/A
lb 42,452 47,000 54,331 88,250 103,990 120,450 141,200 N/A
7 Max Structural Payload
kg 19,256 21,319 24,644 40,230 47,169 54,620 64,000 N/A
litter 23,667 26,022 23,700 63,216 97,530 117,300 169,210 126,903
Maximum Usable
8 lb 40,959 46,063 41,015 119,890 168,788 207,700 299,490 224,638
(0.785 kg/l)
kg 18,579 20,894 18,604 50,753 76,561 94,240 135,880 101,894
litter/km 3.10 3.39 4.80 7.01 6.62 7.92 7.78 N/A
9 consumption per km lb/km 5.36 5.86 8.31 12.13 11.46 13.71 13.47 N/A
kg/km 2.43 2.66 3.77 5.50 5.20 6.22 6.11 N/A
consumption for litter 1,919 2,101 2,978 4,344 4,107 4,913 4,826 N/A
10 TAG-MNL flight lb 3,321 3,636 5,153 7,518 7,108 8,502 8,352 N/A
(620km) kg 1,507 1,649 2,337 3,410 3,224 3,856 3,788 N/A
Fuel
consumption for litter 9,596 10,504 14,888 21,720 20,535 24,563 24,129 N/A
11 TAG-NRT flight lb 16,607 18,179 25,765 37,589 35,539 42,510 41,758 N/A
(3,100 km) kg 7,533 8,246 11,687 17,050 16,120 19,282 18,941 N/A
litter 750 750 750 3,200 3,700 3,700 3,700 N/A
for Takeoff,
12 lb 1,298 1,298 1,298 5,538 6,403 6,403 6,403 N/A
Diversion, Holding
kg 589 589 589 2,512 2,905 2,905 2,905 N/A
litter 10,346 11,254 15,638 24,920 24,235 28,263 27,829 N/A
total for TAG-NRT
13 lb 17,905 19,477 27,063 43,127 41,942 48,913 48,161 N/A
flight (3,100 km)
kg 8,122 8,835 12,276 19,562 19,025 22,187 21,846 N/A
Takeoff Weight for TAG- lb 151,285 157,778 184,694 321,568 410,114 468,827 543,165 N/A
14
NRT flight (3,100 km) kg 68,622 71,567 83,776 145,861 186,025 212,657 246,376 N/A
Takeoff Elevation at 15ºC 1,524 1,859 1,829 1,905 1,798 1,707 2,316 N/A
15 Runway sea level; or 30 ºC 1,646 1,920 1,920 2,012 1,875 1,813 2,423 N/A
Length 1013 hPa 34 ºC 1,679 1,936 1,944 2,041 1,896 1,841 2,452 N/A
Required for Elevation at 15ºC 1,585 1,920 1,951 1,981 1,860 1,767 2,438 N/A
16 TAG-NRT 1000 feet; 30 ºC 1,707 2,027 2,042 2,073 1,951 1,859 2,560 N/A
(3,100 km) or 980 hPa 34 ºC 1,740 2,056 2,066 2,098 1,975 1,884 2,593 N/A
Landing
17 Runway at sea level 1013hPa 1,463 2,042 1,661 1,737 1,737 1,768 2,134 N/A
Length at 1000 feet 980hPa 1,508 2,072 1,707 1,798 1,768 1,829 2,180 N/A

Source: JICA Study Team

The table shows that, in case of the critical conditions (i.e. temperature of 34 ºC with a
tropical depression of 980 hPa) the critical aircraft requiring the longest runway length is
 the B777-300.

At any rate, the eventual runway length required for the new Bohol Airport is 2,500 m
as was envisaged in the previous study (2007 FS).

In view of the above notes, a comparison of design aircraft in each category of

ICAOcode is shown in Table 3.3-2.

Table 3.3-2 Comparison of Design Aircraft

Size SJ MJ LJ
Condition
ICAO code C D E
Aircraft A320-200 B737-800 A321-200 B767-300 A330-300 B777-300
Airline PAL/Cebu JAL Cebu Asiana/JAL PAL PAL
Wing Span 34.10 35.79 35.48 47.57 60.30 60.93
Length 37.57 38.02 44.50 54.94 63.69 73.86
Normal
160 185 200 260 300
Seats
Maximum
19 ton 21 ton 25 ton 40 ton 47 ton 64 ton
Payload
Takeoff to Narita 69 ton 72 ton 84 ton 146 ton 186 ton 246 ton
Weight Maximum 76 ton 79 ton 87 ton 159 ton 212 ton 287 ton
Usage scheduled future future charter scheduled future
to Narita 1680 m 1940 m 1950 m 2050 m 1900 m 2460 m
Runway
with
Length
tropical 1750 m 2060 m 2070 m 2100 m 1980 m 2600 m
(34 C)
depression
not critical, critical for critical for Critical
Critical longest in longest in
but most takeoff takeoff size, and
or Not Code C Code E
frequent runway runway frequent
For Design ○ ○ ◎
Source: JICA Study Team

It should be considered that possibly the B747-400 (wing span of 64.92 m, and length of
70.67 m) shall occasionally be used, although it is in the process of retiring.

Therefore, the following dimensions are considered for the purpose of the airfield design:

a) Critical Wingspan of Design Aircraft: 65 m (for B747-400 as maximum size

ofCode E);

b) Critical Length of Design Aircraft: 74 m (for B777-300 as maximum size

ofCode E);

c) Runway Length: eventually 2,500-m.

However, the runway length for Phase 1 development is planned to be 2,000 m, on the
assumption that initially the airport would accommodate mainly domestic flight
operations, and possibly accommodate international flights during off-peak hours
operated only by domestic carriers (e.g. A321 of Cebu Pacific or A330 of PAL
atmaximum).
Space is needed for each of the following functions ...

 Service functions

 Ticket sales

 Rest rooms

 Waiting/resting

 Baggage check/claim

 Security

 Flight info.

 Boarding/deplaning

 mail/light cargo

 corridors, elevators, escalators, etc.

 passenger convenience

 newsstand/gift shops

 rest rooms

 restaurant

 car rental

 air carrier operations

 communications center

 ground and air crew ready rooms

 operations rooms

 airport operations/maintenance (may be in separate buildings)

 air traffic control

 ground traffic control

 airport administration

 maintenance

 fire protection

 utilities

 cafeterias
 The airport will be requiring improvements that will largely be focused on the interior of the
domestic terminal. The changes will ease growth pressures on the domestic terminal building and mean
faster and more efficient travel journeys for passengers.
It will provide passengers with improved gate access, larger gate lounges, baggage collection and toilets;
as well as faster security screening, a new regional lounge and two new air-bridges.
Also will improve the domestic terminal’s ability to cater for the increasing number of larger aircraft and
will reduce the congestion currently experienced in several parts of the terminal. It will also ensure that
we can efficiently and effectively process passengers while a long term solution is worked on for the
domestic terminal.
We will be working hard to ensure that while the upgrade is being undertaken there is minimal disruption
to the travelling public.

This improvements will include:

• Regional area
• Extended and expanded regional gate lounge area
• Relocated Koru valet area
• Realigned baggage reclaim belt and improved and quicker bag delivery
• Toilets
o All toilets throughout the terminal will be improved from small additions to complete refurbishment and
expansion in some areas as required
• Baggage Reclaim
o Baggage belt extended
o Area significantly expanded to provide additional passenger waiting space
• Aviation Security
o Area expanded to provide more space
o Realignment of security screening machines
o Revised passenger queuing and increased pedestrian access between security screening and retail area
• Jetstar baggage reclaim
o New baggage belt with better access and faster drop off
• New gate Lounge
o A new gate lounge will join existing lounges 29 and 30 to Jetstar lounges 20 and 21 and will be
accessed with a new escalator from ground floor
o New arrivals door at Jetstar end for first floor gates, providing an additional arrivals / exit option for
passengers
o Expanded walkway to lounge outside
o Additional gates served by air bridges which all have facilities for ground boarding through rear doors
• Western Annex corridor to gate lounges
o Increased space in security screening area
o New escalator to the new gate lounge area
o Rebuilt corridor under new gate lounge above
• Apron
o All planes are moved south to create more space for ground servicing
o Access roads improved
o New apron lighting
o Improved baggage drop off arrangements
• Retail
o Additional retail outlets at regional end
o Additional retail outlets first floor airside
• Creating a dedicated transport hub for taxi and shuttle pick up at the Western forecourt (currently
Jetstar)
• Directing commercial and public vehicles to separate forecourts, each accessed via one-way
networks
• Installing covered canopies in the public drop-off area
III. Related Literatures

A. International
1. South Wing Expansion – Athens International Airport

Figure 5 “AIA Façade”

Summary:
AIA begun its operation in 2001 replacing the favored “Helliniko” Airport designed
by Eero Saarinen. Dedicated to commercial air transport, the main terminal’s building
enlargement of its footprint to the South, would add approx. 98m to a 354m overall façade and
would provide sufficient space for the Extra Schengen operational areas as well as additional
concession and back of house space. The client requested to replicate the original architectural
design, while upgrading the materials and construction systems technology. The project was the
first attempt to extend the terminal beyond its original envelope. This was regarded as an
opportunity to re-assess the building’s façade and morphology and set a new architectural
discourse, upgrading the design of the entire complex.
 Figure 6 "AIA Perspective View"

Massing the new volume, the element of the tower is re-introduced in the design, extended and
elongated. The corner of the volume is shaped into a steep angular edge, creating a strong introduction
from the curbside and a breathing space between the airside and landside terminal wings. The crisp
ending to the building’s composition manipulates its perspective view, enhancing the impression of the
façade’s length.

Figure 7 “AIA Site Plan”

Figure 8 “AIA Elevation”

Figure 9 “AIA Floor Plan”

2. Te Hono – New Plymouth Airport Terminal

Figure 10 “New Plymouth Airport Exterior Perspective”

Summary:
The storied history of the site was as important as other design drivers - such as the challenging
environmental conditions and the need to accommodate future regional growth. Te Hono, which means
“to connect”, is located on ancestral land confiscated from iwi (tribe) in the 1960s. Sixty years later, the
architecture of the terminal puts mana whenua (territorial rights) at its heart.

The roofline of the terminal is inspired by this origin story as one form appears to step up from a
landscaped mound (Rongo-ue-roa) to meet the second descending roof form (Tamarau). The form also
highlights the radial formation and fractal patterning of the feathers on a bird’s wing and is a deliberate
attempt to contrast the strength of parallel design drivers.

Orienting the spine of the building to reflect an ancestral journey from the mountain to the Waiongana
river mouth was a further way to acknowledge history but also useful for wayfinding, creating a natural,
easily negotiated connection from parking lot through departure area to the plane. On a clear day, Maunga
Taranaki (Mt Taranaki) can be seen from the concourse giving visitors to the region a Taranaki-specific
experience. Manaakitanga – the Māori concept of hospitality – underpins practical aspects of the design
too. The faceted curved forms of the building at the entrance and airside ‘embrace’ travellers, to shelter
them from the elements.
 Figure 11 “NP Interior Perspective”

Within the concourse, a 70-metre tukutuku (ornamental lattice panel) is a bold backdrop to
operations, hospitality and retail. Rongo-ue-roa (terrestrial being) is represented in scarlet of the local
hebe that is endemic to the site and Tamarau, the celestial being, is depicted in vibrant yellow. The
stitches of the tukutuku, represented by ‘crosses and plus signs’, feature on the panel itself but also in
subtle ways throughout the building. They signify togetherness and connection and speak to the ongoing
regenerative relationship between Puketapu hapū, the New Plymouth Airport Company and the New
Plymouth District Council.

Figure 12 “NP Site Plan”

Figure 13 “NP Elevation”

Figure 14 “NP Floor Plan”

3. Nelson Airport Terminal

Figure 15 “Nelson Airport Façade”

Summary:
The Nelson Airport Terminal is a new large span timber building overlooking the runway, with a
stunning backdrop of Tasman Bay and the Western Ranges in Nelson, New Zealand. The requirement for
a new terminal building arose out of the reality that the existing 1975 building no longer met building
code requirements or functioned efficiently with the ever-increasing passenger numbers travelling
through Nelson.

The brief was for an airport that operated efficiently, both as a transportation hub and a safe and viable
business, but also, aspirationally, one that reflected uniqueness to Nelson, connection to the landscape
within the building, and extensive use of local materials. Two main strategies have been chosen to deliver
on the expectation for an environmentally sustainable design; natural ventilation and the use of a mass
timber structure coupled with a resilient seismic structural solution.
 Figure 16 “Nelson Airport Bird’s eye view”

Along the north façade, chevron-shaped external canopies have multiple benefits; they act as
large chambers discharging warm air drawn in from the solar chimneys below, whilst also providing solar
shading to the interior and reducing the extent of glazing to the north façade. In contrast to the simplicity
of the plan and facade, the roof is highly complex and visually striking; folding across the length of the
building in a constant, rhythmical pattern which references the surrounding mountain ranges. Internally
the timber structure forming the roof is most captivating with natural warmth, texture, and scale that is an
invitation to linger.

Figure 17 “Nelson Airport Siteplan”

Figure 18 “Nelson Airport Floor Plan”

Figure 19 “Nelson Airport Elevation”

B. Local

1. Mactan Cebu International Airport

Figure 20 “Mactan Cebu International Airport”

Summary:

Mactan-Cebu International Airport (MCIA) is the second largest airport in the Philippines. To
meet traffic demands a new Terminal 2 for international traffic is planned to supplement the existing
Terminal 1, which will be converted to Domestic use when T2 completes. Hong Kong-based architect,
Integrated Design Associates, was invited to design the new terminal. The expanded facility is expected
to transform MCIA from a city airport to a world-class international hub, as the main gateway to the
central Philippine region.

The new Terminal 2 is designed for 4 million passengers per annum (MPPA) at the initial phase of
development, and is anticipated to grow to 8 mppa within the next 10 years. The modular design allows
the terminal to expand incrementally, a basic building block configured for optimum adaptability to meet
future change.
 Figure 21 “MCIA Interior Perspective”

Cebu is an internationally well-known holiday destination. The new Terminal 2, as the gateway to
tourist resorts in the region, is designed to echo a resort-like feel while function as a transport
interchange. Its concept is contextual. Like a tropical grand indigenous house in The Philippines, the
terminal has a high pitch roof and low eaves to fend off solar heat and glare. The uppermost structure is
lightweight to withstand seismic activity and its form is well braced against typhoons. The superstructure
is made from sustainable material and capable to be built by local craftsmen. The building exudes
simplicity and warmth to stand it apart from the institutional coldness typified by many airports.

Figure 22: “MCIA Site Plan”

 Figure 23 “MCIA Floor Plan”

Figure 24 “MCIA Section & Elevation”

2. Clark International Airport

Figure 25 “Clark International Airport Façade”

Summary :

The design of the terminal’s façade reflects the wavy silhouette of Mount Arayat, Mount Pinatubo
and Sierra Madre mountain range. The tallest arch is 20m high and the structure is flanged with 12m and
16m high arches. The remaining arches are 12m tall.

The terminal offers views of the Sacobia mountain ranges towards its west and Mt. Arayat towards its
east. It is connected to the Manila-Clark Railway Station, with the travel time between Metro Manila and
the airport now cut to less than 60 minutes.

Spread across 110,000m², the new terminal will have the capacity to accommodate eight million
passengers annually, increasing the total airport capacity to 12.2 million. It features 18 passenger
boarding bridges, 3,881 parking spaces and 20 bus parking spaces. An event space has been created
within the building and is installed with lanterns and art installations. The terminal has a four-storey
building comprising domestic and international remote gates, baggage reclaim halls, VIP, as well as
meeters and greeters space in level one.
 Figure 26 “ Clark International Airport Site Plan”

3. Zamboanga International Airport

Figure 27 “Zamboanga International Airport”

Summary:
The airport started off as Moret Field, an American airfield that was constructed from a rather poor
Japanese airfield just north of Zamboanga. Construction was started by Philippine Commonwealth troops
just after American forces landed at the present location on March 15, 1945. It was improved by a U.S.
Army airfield construction unit using considerable Filipino labor. When completed, the single runway
was about 4,500 feet long aligned SW to NE. There were two adjacent taxiways along both sides of the
runway with revetment areas. At the peak of operations in 1945, there were about 300 aircraft flying from
the airfield. The vast majority were United States Marine Corps aircraft from Marine Aircraft Group 24
which were supporting U.S. Army & Philippine Army infantry operations on Mindanao but also ranging
down the Sulu area as far as Borneo.

Subsequent improvements increased its capacity to hold flights. The airport used to service nearby
international destinations in the past, such as Labuan and Sandakan in Malaysia via Philippine Airlines
and Kota Kinabalu by Malaysia Airlines; these international services were eventually cut. The Philippine
Airlines, in particular, cut its services during the 1997 Asian financial crisis, when it was struggling to
keep afloat.

On December 10, 2004, South Phoenix Airways announced their international flights to Sandakan and
Kota Kinabalu in Malaysia, but it was eventually cut due to poor load of passengers. Likewise, Asian
Spirit commenced service to Sandakan on May 2, 2007, restarting Zamboanga's international operations.
The Zamboanga-Sandakan route and other international routes are expected to grow with the signing of a
BIMP-EAGA open skies agreement, notably with Indonesia's Sriwijaya Air planning to fly the
Zamboanga-Sandakan route.

Zamboanga International Airport, along with all other international airports in the Philippines, was placed
under the control of the Manila International Airport Authority under Executive Order No. 341, signed by
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo on August 4, 2004. The changes in management were slated to take
effect in June 2007,

Due to the US-RP Agreement, the US Air force used the airport while the Balikatan exercises were held
in the city. The biggest aircraft to land in Zamboanga International Airport is the Russian Antonov An-
124-100 Ruslan made to deliver pickup trucks for the American training mission here in Zamboanga.
North American Airlines Boeing 757-200s were chartered to transport American soldiers from Guam to
Zamboanga. Boeing C-17 Globemaster IIIs flying from Okinawa come to Zamboanga every now and
then. Gemini Air Cargo's DC-10 was once in Zamboanga Airport for delivery of the materials needed for
the US Air Force training.

There were plans to transfer the airport to a 104-hectare lot located between Barangays Talabaan and
Taluksangay, possibly making it the largest airport in Mindanao[better source needed] and about 12.75
km (7.92 mi) from Zamboanga City. The plan was suspended due to lack of funding. However, it was
supported by the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry with the purpose of converting the
current property to a business district.[9] In September 2014, Rehabilitation of the dilapidated 1,800 m
(5,900 ft) portion of the runway of the airport will be carried.