I wholeheartedly support the call for aerobridges at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport 2 (KLIA2). Currently, people with mobility limitations board aircrafts at the Low Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT-KLIA) using passenger boarding lift (ambulift) or have to be carried up the boarding stairs. AirAsia passengers who need to use the lift have to inform the airline 48 hours in advance failing which boarding could be denied. There is only one such lift at the LCCT-KLIA for this purpose.

The passenger boarding lift may not be available at all times. It could unavailable because it is being used for boarding at another aircraft at the same time. It could also be due to breakdown or maintenance. When this happens, disabled passengers have to be carried up the boarding stairs via the side-by-side two-person lift method. In my experience, this is not a safe way to board the plane or disembark from it. The steps of the boarding stairs are narrow and slippery. There are many things that could go wrong. The lifters may not have the skills for such lifting. They could lose their grip or lose their footing on the steps. One of them could lose strength on the way up.

I have been carried three times up and three time down like this and each time the fear of the three of us falling off the stairs overwhelmed me. There was one time when I was nearly dropped. The lifters, after hauling me up the stairs and into the aircraft, could not find a place to sit me down. They were exhausted and were fast losing their grip. Fortunately, a cabin crew quickly directed them to use the jump seat. Experiences like this are really not a good way to begin or end the journey with.

The aerobridge or passenger boarding bridge or jet bridge, is safe, convenient and comfortable to board and disembark from aircrafts. They protect passengers from the element, be it rain or shine. There is no need for passengers to huff and puff up the stairs with their luggages, children in tow or baby prams. The aerobridge makes it convenient for children and senior citizens without them having to climb up the stairs. It is a good example of universal design of facilities that benefit everyone.

The decision by Malaysia Airport Holdings Berhad (MAHB) not to install the aerobridges stemmed from AirAsia’s resistance in using them. The budget airline’s business model requires a quick 25-minute turnaround time for its aircrafts and no-frills service. Using aerobridges would purportedly increase the turnaround time and increase the airfare.

MAHB has revealed that it charges RM85 for the use of each aerobridge. Based on the full load of an Airbus A320 with 180 passengers, this translates to a mere 25 sen per passenger for an arriving and departing flight. MAHB stated that the design of the KLIA2 has provisions to accommodate the installation of aerobridges at any time when required AirAsia or other low-cost carriers (LCC).

While I support BEAT’s call for the installation of aerobridges at the KLIA2, I am of the opinion that the protest against MAHB was misdirected. True, MAHB is bending backwards by giving exemption to AirAsia for not using aerobridges. MAHB should be faulted for this but looking at the big picture, AirAsia is ultimately the source of this issue.

AirAsia and AirAsia X are the major airlines using the KLIA2. It makes no business sense for MAHB to install the 80 aerobridges at the cost of RM104 million if they are not going to be used. Each aerobridge costs RM1.3 million. It must be noted that AirAsia and AirAsia X are compelled to use aerobridges in foreign airports where no exemption is given for them not to.

BEAT has established a working relationship with AirAsia after the protest at the LCCT-KLIA in 2007. Its members conduct regular trainings for the airline’s cabin crew and ground crew in support and services for disabled passengers. BEAT also holds dialogues with the management of the airline on related issues. Therefore, BEAT should use its relationship and influence to advocate to AirAsia on the pertinent need for aerobridges at KLIA2.

In fact, I was involved in a five-day Training of Trainers for AirAsia Disability Equality Training (DET) and Disability Related Service Training (DRST) at AirAsia Academy that concluded last Friday. This five-day course was organised by BEAT under the auspices of AirAsia to equip disabled trainers from Indonesia and Thailand with the same methodology and modules for them to train AirAsia staff in their respective countries. To AirAsia’s credit, it is expanding the training for the ground crew and cabin crew in countries where it has a presence in order for disabled passengers to be better served.

On the contrary, in deciding not to use aerobridges at KLIA2, AirAsia has taken several steps backward. It is a shame that the most modern purpose-built low cost carrier terminal that costs more than RM2 billion will require passengers walk out on the tarmac and use boarding stairs. Even the Malaysian Association of Tour and Travel Agents (MATTA) and the Board of Airline Representatives were of the view that KLIA2 neeeds to have aerobridges, as reported in The Edge (Provisions made for aerobridges at KLIA2, Dewan Rakyat told – October 17, 2011).

Instead of taking AirAsia to task over this matter, BEAT has chosen to demonise MAHB instead. The root cause of this issue is glaringly not pointed out. There was little mention of AirAsia in the two protests. Why is BEAT playing tai chi here? Why is BEAT not grabbing the bull by the horns? Why is BEAT beating around the bush? Why has BEAT failed to advocate effectively to AirAsia on the need for aerobridges? These are questions begging answers.

Related posts:

1. Of KLIA2 Aerobridges And The Disability Movement In Malaysia
2. AirAsia to provide disabled-friendly facilities: The Star – August 4, 2007
3. The Star – July 15, 2007: Disabled protest against AirAsia’s ‘discriminatory’ practices
4. Easier for disabled to fly AirAsia soon: The Star – August 5, 2007
5. BEAT At AirAsia Academy

Do disabled people need aerobridges to board planes at the KLIA2? Christine Lee, whelchair user and co-ordinator of the Barrier-Free Environment and Accessible Transport Group (BEAT) thinks it is needed and was quoted by Bernama as saying:

“The MAHB decision not to include aerobridges is a step backward and taken in the wrong direction,” she told reporters at a gathering attended by some 30 people with various disabilities to express their displeasure over this matter, here today.

“If underdeveloped countries can have aerobridges at their airports, why is Malaysia, which is a step away from developed nation status, regressing to third world infrastructure and service provision,” said Lee of the Barrier-free Environment and Accessible Transport (BEAT).

She added that aerobridges should and must be made a universal feature in all airport designs and developments.

(Disabled Community Pushes For Aerobridges At KLIA2 – August 20, 2011)

However, Anthony Thanasayan who is also a wheelchair user and Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya (MBPJ) councillor opines otherwise as reported in The Star:

He said he personally did not think it necessary for the aerobridges to be installed as ambulifts could cater for the disabled.

“What’s wrong with using ambulifts? Able-bodied passengers don’t need the aerobridges,” he said, adding that he was more concerned with the toilet and ramp designs at the new low-cost carrier terminal.

(Disabled group insists on aerobridge at new KLIA2 terminal – August 21, 2011)

Who should Malaysia Airports, and for that matter, the government and all other infrastructure providers, listen to? One party says we need aerobridges which is not only a convenience for disabled people but also to senior citizens, pregnant women, children and adults with prams. On the other hand, the other party says that ambulifts are sufficient.

Anthony was further reported to have argued against the use of aerobridge in Free Malaysia Today:

Thanasayan, a disabled himself felt that aerobridges were too expensive a commitment.

He suggested instead the use of the portable ambulifts in airports.

“The ambulift is more suitable as it is portable.

“Having an aerobridge will increase cost for passengers by 20%.

“It is unfair to shift the cost to able-bodied passengers.

“I have been carried up into planes in the US because the smaller airports does not have aerobridges and ambulifts,” said Thanasayan, who is the president of Petpositiev and an activist for the disabled community.

(‘Inconsiderate’ MAHB, Air Asia slammed – August 20, 2011)

This disagreement cannot come at a worse time, especially when the public and private sectors are beginning to warm up to the concept of right of access to the built-environment for disabled people. This right is recognized in the Persons with Disabilities Act 2008 and clearly stated in Clause 26 (Access to public facilities, amenities and services and buildings) and Clause 27 (Access to public transport facilities).

Access for disabled persons should not be exclusive, meaning, as far as possible, we do not advocate for special or separate facilities. This is where universal design comes in. This concept promotes that the built-environment and products are made accessible and usable to both non-disabled people and disabled people.

The importance that the Malaysian government accords to universal design is reflected in the formation of the Universal Design and Built Environment Committee (Jawatankuasa Reka Bentuk Sejagat Dan Alam Bina) under the National Council for Persons with Disabilities (Majlis Kebangsaan Bagi Orang Kurang Upaya).

The National Council was constituted under Clause 3 of the Persons with Disabilities Act 2008 and is chaired by the Minister of Women, Family and Community Development. Unfortunately, the same National Council did not make the effort to ensure that the facilities at KLIA2 are inclusive and universally usable.

Aerobridges are a good example of universal design. It provides convenience to all categories of passengers boarding and disembarking from aircrafts irrespective of weather. Wheelchair users can go right to the boarding door before transferring to a boarding chair to get into the plane. Likewise, senior citizens and non-disabled adult passengers with children, prams and luggages in tow can walk right up to the boarding door without having to heave kids and luggages up the boarding stairs.

To answer Anthony’s question of “What’s wrong with using ambulifts?” My answer is that there is absolutely nothing wrong in using ambulifts for boarding in airports that do not have boarding bridges. However, in the case of KLIA2, it is built from the ground up and “provisions have been made in the design of the terminals at the new low cost carrier terminal, the KLIA2, to accommodate the installation of aerobridges, if required at any time by AirAsia group or other low cost carriers (LCCs).” (The Star – New LCT designed to enable installation of aerobridges – July 15, 2011). So why not install the aerobridges for the convenience and safety of everyone?

Acording the a statement by Malaysia Airports dated July 15, 2011 with the heading No Aerobridges At KLIA2 To Cater For AirAsia’s Rquirement, it was mentioned that aerobridges are mandatory for airlines in other countries in the region. A calculation of the cost per passenger for the usage was also furnished.

Airports in other countries in the region make it mandatory for airlines to use aerobridges where provided, in order to enhance passenger convenience, safety and security. Should the airlines choose not to use aerobridges, they then have to park the aircraft in a remote position and bus the passengers to the terminal. AirAsia had explained that they use aerobridges at these other countries as they are compelled to adhere to the regulatory requirements at these airports, as no exemptions are given.

Based on AirAsia’s decision not to use aerobridges at klia2, the terminal for LCCs, even during inclement weather or for long haul operations, the terminal is being constructed without the installation of aerobridges and instead ramps will be provided. As AirAsia and AirAsiaX would be the major airlines at klia2, it may not be worthwhile to incur the cost if the aerobridges are not going to be used. However provision has been made in the design of the terminal to accommodate the installation of aerobridges, if so required at any time, by AirAsia group or any other LCCs. Discussions will be held with other LCCs as well on their requirements.

The current charge to the airline for the use of the aerobridge is RM85.00 per usage. Based on a full A320 aircraft carrying 180 passengers for both arriving and departing flights, the cost of using the aerobridge works out to be less than 25 sen per passenger. This makes Malaysia Airports’ charge for the aerobridge the lowest in the region.

Malaysia Airports has continually received numerous feedbacks from the public requesting that all airlines be required to use aerobridges in order to avoid inconvenience to passengers. Tan Sri Bashir added, “As such, we will continue to engage AirAsia and AirAsiaX, as well as other airlines to look into the possibility of further aligning their operations to the needs of passengers.”

If other countries are already imposing the mandatory use of aerobridges, why are we arguing against it here? It is a matter of regulatory requirements at those airports and airlines have no choice but to comply. The costs are passed down to passengers in the form of airport tax and passengers using those airports have no issue with it.

In the case of aerobridge charges at KLIA2, is 25 sen per passenger an excessive amount for a measure of convenience and safety, irrespective of whether one is a disabled person or not? I find it very surprising for Anthony to say that it is unfair for non-disabled passengers to bear the cost of providing such facilities to disabled passengers in Malaysia. Each and every passenger in the countries where aerobridge is mandatory has to pay for the usage and it is not due to providing for the needs of disabled passengers but by the force of regulation.

Malaysia have similar regulations as stated by the Malaysia Airports statement. Why then is it so different in Malaysia that disabled people are singled out and blamed should such charges be imposed? It is a regulatory requirement and has nothing to do with whether the facilities are for disabled passengers or otherwise. Therefore, the issue of passing on the cost to non-disabled passengers is untenable and without basis.

What is disappointing is that exemption is given to AirAsia and other low-cost carriers that are currently operating at KLIA-LCCT and will be operating at KLIA2 to not use aerobridges. This is at the expense of security, convenience and safety of passengers in addition to imposing a great inconvenience to disabled passengers who have to depend on ambulifts for boarding failing which we have to be bodily carried up the narrow boarding stairs. This is dangerous in many aspects, for the passenger and the crews carrying the passenger.

Malaysia Airports further stated that ramps will be provided in place of aerobridges. It was not elaborated what kind of ramps these were and whether wheelchair users can independently ascend these ramps. One point I have to wholeheartedly agree with Christine is that Malaysia is very close to becoming a developed nation but has unfortunately regressed to becoming third world again by this act of not using aerobridges, especially for a modern airport such as the KLIA2 that is being built at a cost of RM2bil and will become operational by the fourth quarter of 2012.

The issue of aerobridges is not limited only to KLIA2. It involves all major airports in the country where low-cost carriers fly to, like Penang and Kota Kinabalu. Malaysia Airports must seriously consider the views of all stakeholders in this matter as it involves the comfort, convenience and safety of passengers using the airports under its management.

At the same time, disabled advocates should take a step back to see what damage the aerobridge debacle has done to the disability movement in Malaysia. I am very concerned with the disunity displayed when confronted by major issues such as this. It is as if the head knows not what the tail is doing. If we cannot speak in one voice convincingly, no one will ever take us seriously again.

Engaging in one-upsmanship where disability issues are concerned benefits no one. In the end, the disabled community as a whole loses and suffers the consequences of disabled advocates cancelling each other out with contradictory statements.

I sincerely urge Christine and Anthony, as leaders of the respective groups, to come together to trash out the differences and come out with a common statement in this issue for the sake of all disabled people in Malaysia. Please take to heart the very apt Malay proverb: Bersatu teguh, bercerai roboh (United we stand, divided we fall).

Related posts:

1. BEAT, AirAsia, MAHB and Aerobridges at KLIA2
2. The Star – July 17, 2007: Order to Malaysia Airports and AirAsia: Ease movement of the disabled
3. The Star – July 15, 2007: Disabled protest against AirAsia’s ‘discriminatory’ practices
4. Bernama – July 16, 2007: Govt Orders AirAsia, Malaysia Airports To Facilitate Disabled
5. NST – July 16, 2007: ‘Now everyone can fly’, except the disabled

Photo by Wuan.

The government has given the greenlight for another Low-Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) to be jointly developed under a private finance initiative between conglomerate Sime Darby Bhd and AirAsia. The proposed airport currently dubbed the KLIA East would be built on a 2,800ha plot of land in Labu which is between Nilai and Bandar Enstek.

The Star reported in AirAsia: We can give better deals with own airport that the airline’s budget fares will go even lower with at least a 15% reduction in prices when the airline’s proposed low-cost terminal opens in Labu, Negri Sembilan, in February 2011. That is good news for travellers who are always on the lookout for the best deals in air fares to stretch their ringgit even further.

However, my concerns are more than cheaper air fares. Will the new terminal be built according to the principles of universal design? Will disabled people have unimpeded access to all public areas in the terminal? Will wheelchair users still need to board the aircraft via an ambulift? If we have to and when one is unavailable will there be a safer and more convenient method of boarding other than to physically carry us up to the aircraft? Will this better deal include a waiver of the RM12 fee for using wheelchairs provided by the airline? Really, can AirAsia give a better deal to all its passengers irrespective of whether they are disabled people or otherwise with its own airport?

The Star Online
Sunday December 21, 2008
AirAsia: We can give better deals with own airport
By LESTER KONG

KUALA LUMPUR: AirAsia’s budget fares will go even lower with at least a 15% reduction in prices when the airline’s proposed low-cost terminal opens in Labu, Negri Sembilan, in February 2011.

A senior AirAsia official said the airline’s plan was always to look for a cheaper venue to lower costs as it was paying about RM100mil in airport fees yearly to Malaysia Airports Bhd.

“We have been looking for another place for a long time, whether it was to buy or build a new airport,” he told The Star yesterday.

The official said the current terminal in Sepang was only a temporary measure as it could comfortably handle only 10 million passengers yearly.

“By March next year, it would reach 15 million. AirAsia needs an airport that can handle more than 15 million by 2011,” he said.

The Cabinet on Friday gave the greenlight for the new RM1.6bil airport to be developed under a private finance initiative between conglomerate Sime Darby Bhd and AirAsia on a 2,800ha plot in Labu, which is between Nilai and Bandar Enstek.

The new terminal will be large enough to handle some 15 million passengers yearly and will feature a wider array of shops as part of an integrated city in Labu, comprising five townships and facilities for education, health, sports, high technology and entertainment.

Closer to the nation’s capital than the current low-cost carrier terminal, a 7km link to the North-South Expressway was also slated to be built, along with an Express Rail Link to KL International Airport.

“We will provide shuttles between the main terminal and LCCT. The road and rail links between KLIA and the new LCCT would also be privately financed,” he said.

The AirAsia official said the cost of operating the new airport would be lowered by incorporating advanced technology and it being run privately.

“The airport will be built entirely by us. The latest technology and better retail facilities will mean more money. More money will mean lower airport tax and fares.”

Asked if MAB would be involved in the deal, the official said MAB was not involved in the project but did not discount the possibility that it would be made a shareholder.

According to him, the proposal was brought up by Sime Darby in the first place as they wanted an airport in the centre of a large development project – to turn the area into an Asean community hub.

Related posts:

1. Bernama – July 16, 2007: Govt Orders AirAsia, Malaysia Airports To Facilitate Disabled
2. NST – July 17, 2007: Minister wants AirAsia to settle wheelchair issue
3. The Electric New Paper – July 19, 2007: 40 stage airport protest against AirAsia
4. AirAsia – Aisle Chair In Every Aircraft
5. NST – July 16, 2007: ‘Now everyone can fly’, except the disabled

Like Katja, I find this “only window seats for disabled people policy” discriminatory, especially when the seats are not on an exit row. I applaud Avraham Rabby for his courage and conviction in standing up against such unfair practices. If only the disability rights advocates in the Barrier Free Environment and Accessible Transport Group (BEAT) in Malaysia have the same courage to stand up against similar discriminatory practices instead of trying to shut me up when I revealed my bad experience with AirAsia.

Related posts:

1. AirAsia – Now Everyone Can Fly – Betulkah?
2. AirAsia Still Practices Discrimination Against Disabled People
3. Discrimination Against Disabled Airlines Passengers
4. Airline Slammed on Deaf Policy: The Associated Press – April 11, 2008
5. Tiger Airways deaf to discrimination claims: Herald Sun – April 11,2008

While the ambulifts will ease one of the problems faced by disabled people flying with the airline, the cabin is still generally inaccessible, especially the toilets. No mention was made on whether all the aircrafts are equipped with aisle chairs as promised by Dato’ Fernandes. If not, BEAT must pursue this matter to ensure that disabled people will not face problems when they need to move around in the aircraft or use the toilet. The other matters that need to be looked into are indemnity forms, the RM12 charge for using the wheelchairs at the airport and proper handling of disabled persons and their wheelchairs. I believe some of those issues have been resolved. BEAT and AirAsia should come out and announce it publicly to prevent confusion and inconsistent imposition of policies by the airline’s staff.

Having said that, I would like to remind BEAT, especially Christine Lee and V. Murugeswaran who are leading the group, not to forget the purpose why the group was formed. Its main purpose was to advocate for accessible public transport which has been given scant attention of late. While they openly applaud the launching of the ambulifts, they seemed to have disregarded the fact that disabled people still do not have access to public transport to take them to the airport. What is the point of advocating for accessible air travel when disabled people cannot get to the airport? Not every disabled person can drive, afford to own a car or transfer into taxis.

BEAT should seriously consider reinitiating negotiations with RapidKL and related government ministries to ensure that the 100 RapidKL buses already fitted with ramps allow wheelchair users to use them. It is ironic that these buses with the wheelchair logos affixed to its exterior do not take wheelchair users at the moment because BEAT has refused to endorse the buses due to safety considerations. The ramps and wheelchair locking mechanisms were deemed unsuitable and non-functional. As far as I know, BEAT has not pursued this with RapidKL but prefer to concentrate most of its effort on AirAsia.

Disabled people like everyone else need access to public transport, namely buses and trains, for education, employment, medical appointments, social and religious functions, among others. While I agree that disabled people need to have access to air travel, BEAT should judiciously use its limited resources to advocate for an issue that will benefit the most people, not one that only a handful will be using. In my opinion, there must be a sense of priority and the priority now is public transport and not air travel.

Consider the following facts.
100 out of RapidKL’s 1000 buses are accessible = 10%
2 out of AirAsia’s 55 destinations are accessibe = 3.6%
The mode of transport that disabled people need to use more often

While BEAT has been generous with its applause for AirAsia, it has been very critical of RapidKL’s efforts to the extent of refusing to endorse the 100 buses. It simply does not make any sense. We have here 100 buses that will benefit all wheelchair users in the Klang Valley but BEAT prefers to ignore that fact and openly throw its support for AirAsia’s 2 ambulifts. BEAT’s logic in refusing to endorse those buses was because the ramps were too short and may cause wheelchairs to tip backwards. During discussions with RapidKL, the bus operator has informed BEAT that wheelchair users are only allowed to board the buses with the assistance of the bus drivers. That should reduce the risk of wheelchairs tipping backwards.

How dangerous can that be compared to carrying a disabled person up or down the flight of narrow plane stairs? Having been carried up not once but six times up such stairs, twice with Malaysia Airlines in 1999 when it was still flying into Subang International Airport and 4 times with AirAsia in 2007, I can attest to the recurring fear of being dropped or the ground crews slipping on the steps each time I was carried. The AirAsia ground crews, and Malaysia Airlines at that time, were neither properly trained in doing the two-man carry nor observed safety procedures when performing this task. Who will be held responsible should any mishap occur while being carried up or down the stairs?

News report stated that 40 disabled people attended the launching of the ambulift. The leaders of BEAT should ask themselves how many of those 40 disabled people fly frequently and which mode of transport they need most. Were they able to use public transport to get to the airport? If not, why? Bread and butter issues of disabled people should be resolved first before anything else. That should be the priority. When disabled people cannot even get into public buses to move around conveniently around Kuala Lumpur, why is BEAT committing so much of its limited resources into advocating for accessibility in air travel?

BERNAMA
April 12, 2008 16:58 PM

Airasia Provides Ambulift Facility For Disabled Passengers

SEPANG, April 12 (Bernama) — To provide accessibility for disabled passengers, AirAsia Bhd has placed an ambulift at the low cost carrier terminal (LCCT) here and another in Kota Kinabalu.

Group chief executive officer Datuk Tony Fernandes said Saturday the facility will provide better mobility and comfort for the airline’s disabled passengers.

Previously, disabled passengers were physically carried by AirAsia’s ground staff to board the aircraft, Fernandes told reporters after the launch of the facility at the LCCT here.

According to him, installation of the facility at the two airports cost RM1.3 million, including training for the staff.

The airline is discussing with the Kuching Airport authority to place an ambulift there.

It is also looking at placing ambulifts in other airports such as Penang, Jakarta and Bangkok.

Up to four disabled passengers are allowed on a flight, and two of them can be quadriplegics.

AirAsia, said Fernandes, is in talks with Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd to provide free aerobridge use for disabled passengers at airports that do not have ambulifts.

– BERNAMA

The Star Online
Sunday April 13, 2008
Ambulift launched at LCCT

AirAsia launches ambulift for disabled passengers

SEPANG: AirAsia launched its first ambulift at the Low Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) here to allow disabled passengers to board the aircraft instead of being physically carried into the plane by AirAsia workers.

The airline bought two ambulifts, one to be placed at LCCT and another one at Kota Kinabalu airport.

Ambulift is a lift that is attached to the back of a van to lift passengers from the aircraft to the ground so they do not have to use the steps.
Disabled-friendly move: An AirAsia flight attendant posing with disabled people in front of the new ambulift at the LCCT at the KL International Airport on Saturday.

Nine months ago, members of the Barrier-Free Environment and Accessible Transport Group (BEAT) representing the disabled community gathered at the LCCT to protest the carrier’s “discriminatory” policy and demanded disabled-friendly services by AirAsia.

They asked the airline to provide an ambulift to allow disabled passengers to board the aircraft instead of being physically carried into the plane by AirAsia workers.

Former Transport Minister Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy then ordered Malaysia Airports Berhad and AirAsia to solve the problem.

AirAsia chief executive officer Datuk Tony Fernandez said providing the ambulift was only one part of their initiatives to be disabled-friendly.

He said they were also in talks with Malaysia Airports to provide free aerobridge usage at airports that do not have ambulifts and give staff hands-on training by engaging those from the disabled community.

“We will also enhance our services and accessibility where possible and we hope to set the example for other LCCTs and airlines to work towards an improved environment for our disabled friends,” he said.

However, he hoped Malaysia Airports would improve airport facilities and provide level walkways and designated car parks.

Fernandez also said that the AirAsia’s A320 aircraft could only take a maximum of four disabled guests per flight and two of the seats could accommodate quadriplegic flyers.

BEAT coordinator Christina Lee welcomed AirAsia’s move to introduce disability equality training for the cabin crew and staff.

“This will give them a better understanding of “disability” issues as well as tips on how to relate to and assist disabled passengers,” she said.

AirAsia’s Press Release:
Greater Comfort and Accessibility for AirAsia Disabled Friends

Related posts:

1. AirAsia to provide disabled-friendly facilities: The Star – August 4, 2007
2. AirAsia – Dato’ Tony Fernandes Announces Measures To Resolve Problems Faced By Disabled Passengers
3. Easier for disabled to fly AirAsia soon: The Star – August 5, 2007
4. Bernama – July 16, 2007: Govt Orders AirAsia, Malaysia Airports To Facilitate Disabled
5. NST – July 16, 2007: ‘Now everyone can fly’, except the disabled