Airport Operations
Assignment
“Two hubs in Asia, Hong Kong & Singapore”
Assessed against the following learning outcomes:
- Critically assess the consequences of physical design and capacity limitations for an airport. Chek Lap Kok.
- Critically assess the characteristics of Singapore Changi (SIN) and Hong Kong Chek Lap Kok(HKG) and the competition between the two airports.
- Critically assess the role of each airport in Singapore and Hong Kong.
- Anticipate the potential development in the future of both airports.
The following issues must be taken into account:
- Airfields.
- Terminals.
- Access.
- Management model.
- Revenues and Expenditures.
- Population.
- Economy.
- Airlines.
- Air services.
Word count: 4,000 words (excluding appendices).
Marking criteria.
The student must show a good knowledge and understanding of the air transport industry from the airports perspective. This exercise will be conducted using two cities and their airports, Hong Kong (Chek Lap Kok) and Singapore (Changi).
Question 1: 25%.
Question 2: 25%.
Question 3: 20%.
Question 4: 30%.
The students should deliver their personal analysis supported by data at least about the following aspects:
- Airport facilities and design of Chek Lap Kok airport.
- Airlines operating from HKG & SIN.
- Destinations served from both airports.
- Access from the catchment area.
- Connectivity at the airports.
- Strengths and weaknesses of both airports.
- Hong Kong and Singapore as destinations and connecting points in the air transport industry.
The following elements will be assessed:
- A clear understanding and complete analysis of the topic (given the length/scope of the assignment).
- Originality of ideas and expression.
- Appropriate evidence of reading and research.
|
10
|
Outstanding
|
- Original ideas well developed, relevant, and thoroughly supported
- Analysis complete
- Ideas and expressions original
- Evidence of reading and research apparent (where appropriate)
- Perceptive insights
- Text interesting
|
|
9
|
Excellent
|
- Topic coverage complete
- Appropriate elements achieved to a high degree
- Many ideas and expressions original
- Some evidence of research (where appropriate)
- Text interesting and shows promise
|
|
8
|
Very good
|
- Topic coverage mainly complete
- Most elements completed well
|
|
7
|
Good
|
- Topic coverage nearly complete—minor omissions only
- Analysis weak in places
|
|
6
|
Satisfactory
|
- Topic coverage basic
- Evidence of some analysis
|
|
5
|
Sufficient—improvement needed
|
- Topic coverage just adequate
- Other elements present at a basic level
- Minor omissions in some elements
|
|
4
|
Insufficient—remediation suggested
|
- Topic coverage inadequate
- Analysis lacking
- Text uninteresting
- Omissions in several elements
|
|
3
|
Unsatisfactory—remedial work needed
|
- Intent of the writing difficult to understand
- Omissions in most elements
|
|
2
|
- Text unfocussed and confusing
- Major omissions in all elements
|
|
1
|
- Off-topic
- Complete lack of audience awareness
- Text unfocussed and confusing
|
The organization of the document should include a clear thesis statement, a variety of effective transitions to make the writing ‘flow’, appropriate and logical structure both within the assignment as a whole and within the paragraph. Good main ideas should be at the paragraph level. An introduction, development and conclusion structure should be used.
The spelling must be correct and consistent in usage. Punctuation, correct, consistent and with appropriate variety
