Wikipedia

Talk:Kansai International Airport/Archive 1

< Talk:Kansai International Airport
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Joewein in topic Impact on prefecture size ranking
Archive 1

Notes

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Surely "the most expensive blunder in human history" is a little hyperbolic? --Jpatokal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpatokal (talk • contribs) 21:07, 8 November 2003 (UTC)

Codeshares

Latest comment: 18 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

(rv: codeshares are not listed in airport articles, see Wikiproject Airports) Hi. Would you show me that which part of the Wikiproject Airports you mention about? And would you suggest if there is an alternative to describe codeshares instead of reversing the article immediately? Thank you. KGF 16:20 07 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello. It is found [here]. Look at the bullet where it says "Destinations" and it says that the list should not include the secondary carrier for codeshares. It has been a consensus here that we do not list codeshares since it is redundant, and the cities that are listed here should only be the cities where the airline's actual metal fly to. Elektrik Blue 82 20:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I think you have not answered my question exactly. Which part of "Wikiproject Airport" do you mention about? As you may know, dab convention in the "Airport" wikiproject seems to be inconsistant with your premise based on the "Airlines" wikiproject convention. I think you should take proper processes such as discussing the matter on the Wikiproject Aiport's discussion page and so on, before you reverse boldly. What you did does not seem to be "productive". Thank you. KGF 02:20 08 May 2006 (UTC)

Check the link I gave you before. I repeat it here. Codeshares are not listed for the secondary carrier. Elektrik Blue 82 01:29, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I don't think "not listed" guarantees your right to reverse the article "immediately". "Not listed" means "room" for improvement through discussion. Do you agree, Mister? You may bring this matter on the discussion page of WikiProject Aiports first before reversing this specific article only. Thank you KGF 02:50 08 May 2006 (UTC)

I do not agree. You should bring this issue to the talk page of WikiProject Airports before adding the codeshare destinations of this particular airport only. Elektrik Blue 82 01:58, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

. It is your responsibility to do that because you reverse the articel based on "another WikiProject" conventions (where is your credibility? It's not just "nitpick", rather crucial). I just updated the article based on "dab" convention of WikiProject Aiports. And if you have any objections, please bring this matter on the discussion page of WikiProject Aiports first before reversing it. KGF 03:15 08 May 2006 (UTC)

Gentlemen, let's continue this discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports#Codeshares. For what it's worth, I agree with Elektrik Blue 82 — the codeshare stuff adds lots of clutter and very little information. How about just tagging the codeshared flights under the primary carrier? So instead of this:
it would look like this:
Opinions welcome. Jpatokal 04:20, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Some new images, if they're useful

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Some new external images of the airport, please feel free to use in the article, if they help:

  •  
    Main terminal
  •  
    Exterior
  •  
    main building + new runway
  •  
    main terminal plus hotels
  •  
    new runway
  •  
    View from afar

-- All the best, Nickj (t) 07:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

outlook

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It is number of domestic flights. (from these airport companies's HP)

KIX  : To 416 flights (per a week),20 airports. (Aug. 2006)

ITM  : To about 560 flights (per a week),28 airports. (Oct. 2003)

UKB (Kobe airport) has 196 flights (per a week),8 airports. (Oct. 2006).

These shows "It isn't most of domestic flights in Kansai from ITM and UKB.".

It shuld be rewrite it,I think.

galuboo 05:48, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

IAAF World Championships in Athletics will be held in Osaka in August 2007, not the World Expo. It should be checked.--219.67.22.15 15:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Hydrofoils

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Pearl Line website states in Japanese that they went out of business on April 1, 2007.

The Kansai Airport page for ferry transport (http://www.kansai-airport.or.jp/en/access/ferry/index.html) states that Kaijo Access Co. runs a high-speed ferry service to Kobe Airport, which costs 1500 yen for adults and 700 yen for children, and takes 30 minutes. To catch the ferry from KIX, first take the shuttle bus to the ferry terminal. The shuttle bus departs from stop No.12 just outside the airport passenger terminal 1st floor, and takes 6-8 minutes.

--61.46.27.12 04:44, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

KIX-NRT flights without fifth freedom rights

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I don't think the Tahiti Nui/ANZ flights between KIX and NRT should be listed, as it's not possible to board them at KIX and fly to NRT or vica versa. I've raised the issue on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports. Jpatokal 03:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Only domestic?

Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I heard quite recently that there were plans to drop the 『国際』 (International) from the airport's name. I don't know if this is just a naming issue, or if it would actually mean a drastic change in which routes the airport serves. In any case, I can no longer find the relevant Asahi Shinbun article from roughly a week ago. Sorry.. .but if anyone does know anything, please do add it here. LordAmeth (talk) 06:25, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Is it about Itami airport? I think, may be this is one you seek. Asahi.com (Japanese 07/Dec./05) galuboo (talk) 13:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

On TV, I saw this airport, here in Brazil

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I saw a TV program, here in Brazil, about the construction, of this airport.The program told that this is the most expensive airport ever.Is this true?At least compared to its capacity, this seems to be true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.9.95.248 (talk) 03:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

 "Most expensive" would be interesting, but a very hard comparason, i tihnk. Many of the largest airports have been constructed in phases, in different years, in different currencies, making direct comparison pretty hard. But, i would believe this airport was the largest expense for a new airport. Building an airport in the ocean is a majorly difficult engineering project. Anyway, i think this would be a very interesting fact to include, but we will need a reliable source for the data. Can anyone find a source? —fudoreaper (talk) 01:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Which English

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Does anyone know which variety of English this article is supposed to be using as it seems to have both. There's "story" and "favor" along with "storey" and the dates are all "day month year". Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 12:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

From my watching of this page over the past 2 or 3 years, there is no consistent theme or voice in this article. A variety of editors have been contributing, each in their own style. Actually reviewing some of the text now prompts me towards making some edits. Anyway, as a Canadian, I prefer British spelling. However, Japan usually uses US English spelling when writing in English. I don't know if there is a standard for Japan-related articles. —fudoreaper (talk) 01:48, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles) – mentions nothing about overall spelling preference. —fudoreaper (talk) 01:53, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Edit request from 116.49.108.85, 16 January 2011

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

{{edit semi-protected}} Hong Kong Airlines Cargo | Hong Kong (in cargo section) [1] [2] 116.49.108.85 (talk) 04:58, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

  Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Logan Talk Contributions 16:44, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDoYyRrH3QM
  2. ^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSuHHrLax-c&feature=related

Map of airport

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I found

WhisperToMe (talk) 03:34, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

More documents

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

For Kensetsu-to:

WhisperToMe (talk) 22:02, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from DanGov-NJITWILL, 24 November 2010

Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

{{edit semi-protected}} First of all, to introduce myself, I am an architecture student at the New Jersey Institute of Technology. I had done an assignment on the Kansai International Airport, and like most of my projects, used Wikipedia to get some sources and background information before proceeding into my primary research. When I reflected back upon the information provided in the Wikipedia site, I had realized that the construction and architectural sections were not as strong as some of my research I had done on my own. I am doing this assignment in conjunction with an English assignment at the school. These are my improvements/additions that I feel would provide more information on this topic related to my college study. I have not edited any pages before, therefore cannot edit this one because it is semi-protected, however I feel I have some possible good points of information to provide to better this article. You will find my sources at the bottom for the corresponding information.

HISTORY

During the 1980’s, Osaka, Kyoto and Kobe was a growing commercial and residential city-hub. During the 1980’s, Japan was still growing and expanding, causing much land to be developed. Through this growing expansion, the Kansai area had outgrown its older airports in the surrounding areas, and was looking to create a new facility capable of handling the need and the demand for air-travel. Not only did this development prohibit spatial expansion for an airport large enough and capable to provide for freight and passenger flights, the cities were built around residential areas making noise pollution in the evening and night hours a problem for sleeping citizens. In fact, the old airport functioning Kansai was forced to ship their cargo and freight to Tokyo where it would then be shipped out as export. This was an inefficient way to handle exports and imports as it was extra work to unload and reload from plane to ship. Due to lack of land-space in the cities, initially planners looked at the outskirts of the city near the farmlands and more open lands to propose an airport construction. Upon their initial studies, authorities felt that too much protest and trouble would be caused by this interaction as they encountered on the Narita Airport which had experienced heated protest from farmers. Planners were left with only one feasible option if they could not build in the city or on the land surrounding the city; they had to construct a water-based airport. This was beneficial because it would not need to be a time-restricted airport, and it could operate 24 hours a day because its distance would be far enough off the coast to not be a major noise pollutant.

CONSTRUCTION The geographical area surrounding Kansai is very susceptible to earthquakes of large magnitude and of dangerous typhoons in the Pacific. For example, in 1934, a typhoon hit Japan and caused a storm surge that raised waters in the Osaka region nearly 10 feet above average. Upon final design solutions, the airport authorities did receive some protest from the Osaka Bay fisherman who had made claims that the construction of the island would impact there livelihood and commerce, however the authorities offered them a sum of money that the airport authority and the fishermen agreed upon, and the project moved forward as scheduled. The design solution called for the construction of a man-made island, roughly 5 kilometers off shore of Senshu, that was 13,200 feet long (2.5 miles) x 4,000 feet long (0.75 miles) or roughly 13.1 acres that fully took in the need for the protection of the environment. At the proposed location of the island, the depth of the water was 60 feet deep, which was not technically infeasible to fill with soil. The serious issue was the soil below the bay, which was a soft clay known as alluvial clay. Obviously, structures and artificial islands can only be as stable and as strong as the sub-soils for which they are supported on. After testing the soil conditions at the sites’ location, it was found that under the bay, the alluvial clay layer went down 328 feet (100 meters) below the bottom of the bay. However, engineers were mostly concerned with the layer under the alluvial clay layer, consisting of dialluvial clay which extended roughly 1,000 feet down (305 meters). Because of these two layers of clay, nothing could have been done to support the island that far below the seabed. Normally, a sub-structure of wood, concrete or steel pilings would be driven deep enough to bear on stable “bearing” soils, however no material could have be driven nearly 1,000 feet and have a strong enough impact to support the island. Engineers of Japan had already solved building in these soil conditions, as the surrounding cities which support multi-story structures still stand today. What engineers did here and in the past was to drive pipes in the ground to a reasonable depth, and fill that pipe with sand. Upon filling with sand, the pipe would be removed. The sand provides an absorbing barrier for the clay to drain. Clay is a poor bearing soil because of its liquid content, so by limiting or controlling its liquid content with sand, it would become a stronger soil. For example, dried clay was the ancient method for brick construction until masonry block was founded. During the engineering period, it was estimated that the island would sink 19-25 feet during construction as the newly added soil weight would compress down on the existing soils due to settlement and compression of the alluvial and dialluvial clay layers. Authorities accepted the smallest estimate of 19 feet of sinking, and based the design of the airport around that estimate. The construction started in 1987 with the construction of a series of 69 steel chambers that were filled with 48,000 concrete tetrahedrons to form the perimeter seawall of the new island. During this installation, the sea-water needed to be pumped out of the area where the island was to be constructed so that the stabilization of the alluvial clay layer using the sand filled pipes could be installed. Then, the space between the perimeter seawall was filled with rocks and course gravel to avoid saturation of the earth during an earthquake. The fill dirt and rock came from three mountains which were leveled to provide enough fill for the new site. Upon careful observation in 1990, the island had an actual settlement of 27 feet, slightly over the projected 19-25 feet estimate, and the island was still sinking at a rate of roughly 1 foot per year in 1990-1991. To keep up with the settlement, authorities added another 11.5 feet of fill and a cost of $150 million. The runways were paved with asphalt, rather than concrete because of the fear of uneven settlement, which concrete would crack much easier than pavement in that scenario.

SKY GATE BRIDGE From June 1987-March 1994, at a cost of $1 billion, the 3,750 meter Sky Gate Bridge R, a double-decked trussed bridge connected the new site to land, with a 6 lane passenger roadway on the upper level and a 2 tracked railway on the lower level. The letter “R” in the name is derived from the first letter of Road, Rail and Rinku. This bridge was opened to traffic in September of 1994, and is the longest truss bridge in the world. The land end of the bridge sits in the Rinku area of Izumisano City in Osaka, while the other end is Kansai International Airport. This bridge carries the life lines to KIX, including electricity, gas, water service, telephones and all other services needed for the function of KIX. This bridge was unique because of its use of the truss design, rather than the more conventional suspension bridge design more commonly found in bridges of this span. The use of a suspension bridge in this setting would have been dangerous because of the tall towers that are needed to construct a suspension bridge. Due to arriving and departing flights, engineers and designers could not risk having the towers being an obstruction for an incoming or departing plane. Instead the truss design solution was selected because all of the supporting structure was below the road deck through the use of columns and beams.

TERMINAL BUILDING The terminal building on the site was designed by Renzo Piano, a recognizable architect. The airport terminal building was opened on September of 1994. It consisted of steel and glass construction, resembling the shape of a planes wing, or an air-foil. The building is classified as a high-tech modern structure. The challenges faced by Renzo Piano were how the structure would stand in nature’s environment, and how the structure could adapt to the sinking island for which it sits on. The island’s movement created a clever solution to the structure. The buildings columns were not attached to the base plates with more than bolts to allow the installation of steel plates to act as shims as the land settled. This solution allowed the building to be hydraulically jacked up, and allowed maintenance crews to install these steel plates to keep the building up in its original position. The design that was produced for Kansai International Airports Terminal Building had a huge “wingspan” of 700 meters from one end to the other end. It was called a wingspan purely because of the aesthetic design of the terminal building. Its undulating roof with exposed structure and light roof gave it a very modern architectural vision. The design of the building posed many problems that needed resolutions, including the strict fire codes set in law in Japan. Japan never allowed a structure this large (of an area) to be constructed in the past; so much work was based on first principles. The building’s aesthetic, practical, economical, and technical aspects combined architecture and engineering to solve all the problems faced in its design. Piano felt that the terminal building needed to refract light through it and move air through it just as passengers would transition from land to flight, and also make the visual connection between the two. The concept of flow led to the design of the interior environment being a single-macro climate, eliminating conventional duct-work and therefore lightening the weight of the building and reducing seismic effects. Air tubes installed at the base would shoot air up the inside of the undulated roof, which caused an even circulation of air for optimal comfort in the space no matter where you happened to be walking within the terminal. Some systems in places such as shops and offices have more controlled systems, but the mass of the open terminal is fed by these blown air systems. These systems are so efficient because of the pure shape of the terminal, as air swirls up and down naturally due to the curvature of the roof. The models prepared by Piano from the initial concept were unmistakably airplane wings, with no use of extra material or ornamentation, which had 41 bays for airplane connections. The swooping toroidal geometry also allowed for the control tower to have a full view of the island without obstruction from the terminal building. This shape also allowed for standardization of the buildings aluminum cladding and structure, reducing construction costs as the panels and trusses could be manufactured with the same shape throughout the building. The design also allowed for full sight of the terminal building from the inside allowing passengers to better visualize their destination points throughout the terminal. Another modern staple to the terminal building is its use of glass and understanding of natural light in the space. Not only does natural light enhance the experience as one walks through the terminal, but it also reduces energy costs during the day as artificial light is not needed in the main spaces exposed to the glass panel system.

Civil Aviation Bureau. Kansai International Airport. © 2005 Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (Dec. 14, 2008) < http://www.mlit.go.jp/koku/english/02_international/kansai.html>

Fairweather, Kate. A Timeless Architectural Vision: Kansai Airport. Arcade – Architecture and Design in the Northwest. © 2004 Arcade <http://www.arcadejournal.com/public/IssueArticle.aspx?Volume=26&Issue=1&Article=238>

Kansai Airport Terminal. Great Buildings. © 1994-2010 Kevin Matthews and Artifice, Inc. <http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/Kansai_Airport_Terminal.html>

Sky Gate Bridge R: The longest truss bridge in the world. The Worlds Greatest Japanese. © 2007-2010 <http://www.japanese-greatest.com/civil-engineering-construction/truss-bridge.html>

Watkins, Thayer. The Construction of the Kansai Airport. Applet-magic.com (Dec. 14, 2008) <http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/kansaiairport.htm>

DanGov-NJITWILL (talk) 04:35, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

  Not done: While your information hear reads as an interesting essay, I definitely don't think we want to replace the current article with that. First, there's a big difference in style and format between a school essay and an encyclopedia article. Second, a number ofthe sources that you used (specifically SJSU.edu and Japanese-greatest.com), don't meet our standards for reliable sources. Third, your version has far less references than the current article--note how many of the individual lines in the WP article are cited compared to yours. Now, having said that, it may be the case that some of the individual details you mention may be worth adding. Since you have so much, probably the best thing would be for you to wait until you are autoconfirmed (in 10 days), and then you can start to make some incremental changes. Note that you definitely should not replace the whole article with what you've written--instead, add a fact, or line, here or there. Be sure that any addition you make is carefully sourced with an inline citation. Don't remove already cited information without a clear reason that you explain in an edit summary. Alternatively, you could propose individual changes here before you are autoconfirmed, but we're not going to replace the entire article without good reason. Please post here if you have further questions. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:08, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Response to your comments:

First of all, I want to apologize for any confusions about my post; I never had any intentions of replacing the article with my "essay-like" text, rather I would like to just enhance the Wikipedia article. Also, I had no intentions of deleting any of the text currently written in the article. Sorry, I should have stated that in my introduction paragraph. I would instead like to add to the article, and work around the existing text which has already been established. My purpose for writing all of that information was to give you some basis of my knowledge on the subject to start discussions about making changes, and I feel that was successful based on your response. I will wait the 10 days, and see where I can specifically improve the article with the information presented. In the meantime, I will search for stronger references to back my text and facts. I look forward to contributing to this page.

Thank you,

DanGov-NJITWILL (talk) 18:57, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I request that the valuable information be extracted from the essay and added to the article. (Information like "dried clay was the ancient method for brick construction" should be omitted.) Also, it should be specified that 1 million sand columns were added to drain water from the alluvial clay in the existing seabed. 75.247.4.70 (talk) 06:33, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Why use "$" ?

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I am very much disturbed by the fact that when it comes to cost involved in the project, it always refer it in "$". And it does not even say which "$" they are talking about. I assume that it is US $ and I suggest that it should be written explicitly. In addition, English version of Wikipedia is not just for American readers, therefore I do not understand why they write all the costs in US $ if the article is about the domestic project of Japan. The best we could do is to write it in Yen and US $ in parthenses. What is confusing is that Yen/US dollar rate has drastically changed in the last decades and how the currecy has been converted (which rate has been used) remains overall unclear. I suggest that we delete all information of cost information from the current version, and then add in future all information explicitly in Yen. If someone feels necessary to add information in US $ for the sake of understanding (for American readers), he or she can add it in parthenses, but then use the rate of the date that is concerned.--79.242.141.208 (talk) 17:48, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Sometimes the source itself uses U.S. dollars instead of Japanese yen. To be accurate to the source we must quote the U.S. dollar figure. If you want the price in yen, you'll need to find a source that states how much it costs in yen. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Kansai International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:10, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Kansai International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:37, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

typhoon

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

wasn't the grand opening delayed 3 days due to a massive typhoon? or was this a little further in, say 6 months after opening?

i recall the news all over (tokyo) tv, but try as i may, i cannot find evidence of this anywhere online! did i imagine it?! 198.147.225.22 (talk) 23:40, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Airport diagram is incorrect

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The runway numbers were incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.218.66.24 (talk) 03:55, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:21, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Impact on prefecture size ranking

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The current version contains this unsourced claim that implies that before the airport was constructed Osaka prefecture used to smaller than Kagawa prefecture:

Completion of the artificial island increased the area of Osaka Prefecture just enough that it is no longer the smallest prefecture in Japan

This seems implausible, given that according to the Japanese version of the article the airport measures 1067 ha (10.67 km2) and Osaka prefecture (1,905.14 km2) is 28.42 km2 / 2842 ha bigger than Kagawa prefecture (1,876.72 km2). So even without the airport Osaka would have been 18 km2 larger than Kagawa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joewein (talk • contribs) 03:34, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Satellite photos

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

On the satelite photos, there appears to be construction of a second island beside the first one (I'm guessing they're part-way through filling it up). I'd guess this is for future expansion? The article should mention what's going on there. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 19:58, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

That would be the second runway, which is mentioned (briefly) in the last paragraph of the article. Jpatokal 02:38, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I figured. The new island looks to be larger that the old one - so maybe it will be the most expensive blunder in human history  :) -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 02:48, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Being an engineer who last passed through KIX yesterday, I'll have to file the current airport in the same category as the Pyramids: it's insanely cool even if it is a completely pointless waste of money. The second runway, on the other hand, is just stupid. Jpatokal 08:33, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Why is so? -- Taku 16:26, Apr 6, 2004 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I don't understand your question. If you mean my "most expensive blunder" comment, I'm just making a joke based on the comment at the top. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 16:30, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Sorry I was asking why people say the construction of the second run-way would be such expensive or it is waste of money. The sinking problem makes an off-shore airport this much hard and expensive or is there any other factor? I am not engineer so the conversation was interesting. Perhaps we could mention more detail about how the construction of this airport differs in terms of engineers and the profitability of the airport also. That would be very interesting to the readers. -- Taku 16:43, Apr 6, 2004 (UTC)
Well, I expect it's so expensive because they have to build the whole island from scratch. Worse, because Osaka is in an earthquake zone they have to build the island from rock or concrete. Other artificial islands (in other places) are built with trash or with material recovered from dredging operations - but these materials exhibit liquifaction during earthquakes, which means buildings would immediately sink or fall over. San Francisco airport, which also wants to expand its runways further into the bay, and is also located in an earthquake zone, has similar problems. So this makes KIX expensive to build, and (as the article says) means KIX needs to have expensive landing charges to try to recover the building cost. So airlines stay away (or go to the Kobe airport the article mentions). I don't envy the airport planners, however, as infrastructure planning is so very difficult to get right. You never know for sure that you'll need a new airport until it's too late. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:00, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
And the reason why building a second runway is stupid is that the current single runway allows 160,000 takeoffs/landings per year, which is much more than current utilization (~129,000), and the utilization will decrease when Kobe Airport opens next year. So the 2nd runway is basically not needed in the foreseeable future, and building it "just in case" is pretty damn expensive. Jpatokal 23:54, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
That single bridge scares me. All it takes is for a "lucky" quake to loosen just one little part, or for some bozo in a tanker to prang one pillar, and the whole airport becomes useless for months. Someone miscalculated the tides on the River Clyde a while ago and consequently clunked the Erskine Bridge with an oil platform, rendering it unsafe for weeks (and that was just a scrape). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:25, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I would imagine that, in the absence of a bridge, they could just use the airport's ferry terminal to hydrofoil passengers to and from the airport. But you're right: there are a lot of design considerations that were sort of ignored in the construction of KIX. Sekicho 04:48, Apr 13, 2004 (UTC)
I see. I will try to reflect this in the article. -- Taku 17:22, Apr 6, 2004 (UTC)

30 billion dollars to build the new runway, or 30 billion yen? 30 billion dollars seems tremendously large, as that is 3 times larger than the cost of the entire Kobe Airport. --Golbez 01:05, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[1] says 1.56 trillion yen for the 2nd phase alone, approx. $15 billion US at current rates. So $30 billion sounds like a reasonable estimate of the total... and yes, it is tremendously large! Kobe's size and shallow location are more reasonable. Jpatokal 03:23, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

"Kankuu" ("in the Kansai dialect") appears to be a contraction of the full name. Aren't we then saying this contraction is not used by other dialect speakers? As given the pronounciation does not appear to be dialectal, and it could be that usage of the term reflects regional rather than dialectal difference. But this is probably academic :) A-giau 08:11, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I have always heard that Kankû is a Kansai-ben term. It's used in some official contexts (such as the JR Kankû-kaisoku train to the airport) but it's a word you would only hear around Osaka. Whether or not this is technically part of the dialect I can't say, because I'm not a linguist, but I have always heard the term cited as an example of Kansai-ben (see e.g. Palter and Horiuchi, Kinki Japanese, ISBN 0804820171). People from outside Osaka say Kansai-kûkô. Sekicho 13:05, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)
If it is indeed used only by speakers fo that dialect, then it would, by definition, be part of that dialect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nik42 (talk • contribs) 08:00, 21 March 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kansai_International_Airport/Archive_1&oldid=1194730684"